Gary² and the Chipster: the bullying! the lying! Options

[Piperdown]

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=158758673

Cliffb reverted as "sockpuppet of banned user". Nevermind that a quick wikipedia review of Cliffb's editing reveals no such thing.

Samiharris is out of control.

Good thing tag teamer Gary...er...um...Mantanmoreland is there to revert, so "samiharris" doesn't get a 3RR.

[Somey]

I can see how the Chipster shouldn't be seen as a "leftist" in the sense of traditional economic class-division issues. But identity politics isn't completely unrelated to the class struggle, either - due mostly to one of the more peculiar aspects of American politics.

That is to say, one thing we've failed to note so far is that Chippy does seem concerned with the increased power of the Religious Right in the USA, who he refers to as "Christers," which he seems to think is a less connotative and offensive term than "fundamentalists." (Not sure I agree...) This is certainly a good example of identity politics, but one can't deny that these "Christers" are largely responsible for keeping the conservatives/Republicans, and therefore corporate, interests in power, simply by voting for them.

So, at the risk of seeming to defend him, he might still have some affinity for non-ruling class folks, but realizes that (at least in the US) religion is spoiling the equation. Those same people are voting against their economic and social interests because their religious leaders are telling them they'll go straight to Hell if they don't, and they're believing it. If any credence can be given to that idea, then it could be said that he's operating under the assumption that the "Christers" have to be led away from the extreme/Christian right before any progress can be made on redressing the deepening economic class imbalances that plague Western society in general, blah blah blah.

I'm not sure that excuses his tendency to bash other leftists for being "conspiracy nuts" (or whatever) under the slightest pretense, though. Also, the "Christers" might not be needed in future for voting purposes, what with the Diebold Corporation now having so much control over US elections.

[guy]

the Religious Right in the USA, who he refers to as "Christers," which he seems to think is a less connotative and offensive term than "fundamentalists." (Not sure I agree...)

No, it's a ridiculous term. And of course the relationship between religion and politics in the USA is quite complex. The evangelicals and Baptists tend to be solidly right-wing and the Methodists solidly left-wing (with a few notable exceptions of course). Episcopalians (roughly the same as Anglican or Church of England) used to be the WASP establishment, but lately they've gone overboard on feminism and support for gays, to the point where conservative Anglicans such as those in Nigeria are threatening to throw them out of the communion. Catholics are all over the place, and there are ethnic issues (Irish, Polish and Mexican Catholics each have their viewpoints).

[GlassBeadGame]

the Religious Right in the USA, who he refers to as "Christers," which he seems to think is a less connotative and offensive term than "fundamentalists." (Not sure I agree...)

No, it's a ridiculous term. And of course the relationship between religion and politics in the USA is quite complex. The evangelicals and Baptists tend to be solidly right-wing and the Methodists solidly left-wing (with a few notable exceptions of course). Episcopalians (roughly the same as Anglican or Church of England) used to be the WASP establishment, but lately they've gone overboard on feminism and support for gays, to the point where conservative Anglicans such as those in Nigeria are threatening to throw them out of the communion. Catholics are all over the place, and there are ethnic issues (Irish, Polish and Mexican Catholics each have their viewpoints).

Funny how people often don't appreciate the endearing little terms their adversaries come up with to fairly describe them.

In American Methodist are evenly split between those who accept the concept of social gospel (United Methodists) and very conservative Christians (Southern Methodist.) I believe the rift goes back to the issue of the abolition of slavery debate before the American Civil War. Anyways, I was taught that Methodist were Baptists, who by the grace and direct intervention of God, had been taught to read.