Because they are fundamentalists, certain factions . . . oppose preaching a social gospel that attempts to make a relation between Biblical teachings and social problems. Thus they are often critical of the favored liberal social legislation of the National Council of Churches. . . .
The above paragraph is taken from a section about the John Birch Society in the book, The Far Right by Donald Janson, 1963.
Nearly 50 years later Glenn Beck's rants sound eerily identical to this right-wing extremist group. Goose-stepping along with the JBS, this fountain of lies and distortions "has suggested any church promoting 'social justice' or 'economic justice' was using code words for Nazism and communism."
I beg you look for the words social justice or economic justice on your church Web site," he said. "If you find it, run as fast as you can. Social justice and economic justice, they are code words. ... Am I advising people to leave their church? Yes! If they're going to Jeremiah Wright's church, yes!
If you have a priest that is pushing social justice, go find another parish," he said. "Go alert your bishop and tell them, 'Excuse me, are you down with this whole social justice thing?' If it's my church, I'm alerting the church authorities: 'Excuse me, what's this social justice thing?' And if they say, 'Yeah, we're all in on this social justice thing,' I am in the wrong place.
Later, Beck held up a picture of a swastika and one of a hammer and sickle, declaring again that "social justice" has the same philosophy as the Nazis and communists and that the phrase is a code word for both.
A small group of churches and religious leaders are speaking out against this poor excuse for a human being. Hopefully there will be a louder outcry as congregations gather to worship this weekend.
The strongest voice against Beck so far has been that of the Rev. Jim Wallis, CEO and president of Sojourners and an evangelical leader.
When Glenn Beck is asking Christians to leave their churches, the Catholic Church, the black churches, Hispanic, evangelical, to leave all our churches, I'm saying it's time for Christians to leave the Glenn Beck show," he said. "This offends Christians. This is salt, something at the heart of their faith. It's something many of us have spent our lives trying to do, to practice.
Urging a boycott of Fox and requesting an invitation to appear on Beck's show for a little friendly chit-chat, Wallis said, "What do you say about Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., what do you say about Desmond Tutu, about Mother Teresa, what do you say to the reverends and rabbis who gave their lives to social justice because that is their faith?"
The Rev. Canon Peg Chemberlin, president of the National Council of Churches of Christ USA, commented:
It's very disturbing," she added. "He's speaking on behalf of his political views and trying to take out of the biblical text the things that are going to oppose his political views. This is primarily a political motivation. ... It's not that Christians haven't been Nazis and socialists, but we're not talking about political parties here. We're talking about 2,000-year-old gospel.
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, of which he and his family are members, "suggested Beck's comments did not necessarily represent its position." In a kind of wet noodly way, the church issued a statement that read, "Public figures who are members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints represent their own views and do not speak for the church."
I am all for freedom of speech. I'll practice it and protect others' right to do so, even Glen Beck.
ReplyDeleteI'm also a big believer in truisms like "give 'em enough rope and they'll hang themselves"...
And also "you reap what you sow"...
And "what goes around, comes around"...
And "Not what goes into the mouth defiles a man; but what comes out of the mouth, this defiles a man.”
Matthew 15:11
People on the right are going to have to choose whether to stand up for what they believe in or become tainted by the poison spewed by those they support.
Excellent research. Can you give me a page citation for the first quote? You've got a HuffPo column cooking in my head.
ReplyDeleteThis is the comment I posted over at Leslie's blog on this subject:
ReplyDelete"Give a fool enough rope, and eventually he'll hang himself.
Beck's popularity and his rise in the galaxy of FOX's loud-mouths have gone to his head. Like a drunk who needs more and more alcohol to get high, Beck needs more and more outrageous controversy to keep his audience.
People don't watch this self-identified rodeo clown for information, they watch him to be entertained and to have their feelings of victimhood and paranoia validated.
Beck, apparently, knows nothing about Christianity, even though he was raised a Catholic, and he knows even less about his adopted Mormon faith, since that organization has rejected his crazy-ass rants about social justice and economic justice.
Beck is essentially stupid. Clever? Of course, like a carney barker is clever to get people to give up their money to see what's under the tent.
But he's shown again and again his appalling lack of anything that comes close to intelligence.
I have to say, though, that I enjoyed watching him get pwnd by Massa. LOL!"
Yes it takes an ass to bring down another ass, so Massa and Beck are just so compatible that Beck saw himself that day...in Massa, it really was funny.
ReplyDeleteI am always amused to see religious factions opposing other religious factions, because I wonder if they realize that they are all psychotic to believe the God story in the first place...look at Sarah Palin...she and her priest prays to her God for protection from witchcraft...devils in their heads...and they are preparing for that Armageddon psycho thing...so Glenn's psychosis does not surprise me...they all deliriously believe this same stuff...religion is fantasy...in my opinion of course.
ReplyDeleteMatt: I wrote a paper on the JBS way, way back in 1964 and this is my quote. When Maddow did those episodes on the JBS I threatened to rewrite it. The similarities between then and now are uncanny. Have started but it's 5000 words and needs a lot of body tucks. It's actually quite interesting, she says modestly, but like most college kids I did a lot of padding to meet the count.
ReplyDeleteRocky: We are all aware that this guy is stupid as hell and has some serious mental health issues. He's whipping himself up into such a fury that I think it's just a matter of time before he shoves himself off the cliff.
Some seem to think he's flirting with sedition. Since he can't control his mouth I wouldn't be surprised to see him cross that thin line. I hope I get to watch it.
Forgot the links to the other sources - will add asap.
ReplyDelete"Social Justice" in the abstract, like "Economic Justice" sounds great and I am all for it.
ReplyDeleteHow do we practice it?
Do we "render unto caesar that which belongs to caesar?"
Do we "Sell all we have and give it to the poor?"
Or do we pass laws?
Beck's point, I presume, is that these phrases are dog whistles. Is your point to beat up Glenn, or is it to attack those who oppose these noble ideals?
As Justice Brennan might phrase it, maybe you can't define it, but you know it when you see it.
I need more specifics. As Socrates would insist, define your terms.
Beck's rants are eerily reminiscent of what could be found on the pages of Der Stürmer.
ReplyDeleteWatching Glenn Beck get Massa-cred last week reminded me of this dialogue from the The Producers (1968):
ReplyDeleteLady - [during the Springtime for Hitler performance] Will you please, shut up!
Franz Liebkind - You shut up! You are the audience! I am the author! I OUTRANK you!
"How do we practice it?"
ReplyDeleteWell not in a way that fits into one of your three or four word bumper stickers. Am I to describe some utopia while standing on one foot? I can't do that with quantum mechanics or lots of other very real things.
Sorry, if that's your way of saying truth and justice are too abstract to deal with and that government cannot foster a just society, I'm not biting. To cite a recent cliche, you're making the perfect the enemy of the good, or so it sounds.
No, there's no utopia possible with human animals and that's precisely why we have laws to prevent the more egregious nastiness innate to us. Yes, we pass laws against slavery, child exploitation, fraud and the long list of nasty things some people will do if they can get away with it and no - there is no invisible hand or invisible man who will do it for us. That's been proved every day since we started calling ourselves human.
No, we're not picking on poor little Beck for any reason other than what he says. He's a liar and his lies are harmful to my country. Is there something wrong with opposing him and exposing him as a money grubbing bigoted charlatan?
Silver, just to add to Captain's comment, social justice also means that, as a society, we make sure that while a CEO can buy his second* home, his employees can afford decent lives too, as well as taking their kids to a dentist and sending them to good schools. It's not an utopia. It is doable, we see it done in other countries on this planet. And yes, it does require passing laws that ensure more humane and dignified life for all.
ReplyDeleteMore on Jim Wallis vs. Glenn Beck on the matters of social justice here.
*I'm purposefully utopian in my modesty.
We all have Freedom of Speech, which gives Beck a right to say whatever he wants; however, that doesn’t mean he can scream “fire” in a crowded movie theater. I’ve always maintained that he’s an “entertainer” first and foremost, but I’m sure I’m in the minority of his “followers”—and I use THAT term lightly on my end. As with all media, talk-show hosts, etc., they will and do most anything for ratings, and that to me is inexcusable. But how, as the public, do we get our “media” to be responsible—to report facts rather than skewed opinion? And how do we get the “average” American to realize that people, such as Beck, are “showmen”?
ReplyDeleteBeck is a follower of the pseudo-gospel of GOP Supply-side Jesus: war, hate, greed, etc.
ReplyDeleteThat leaves no room for social justice.
Capt Fogg and Elizabeth,
ReplyDeleteI never used the word "utopia," you did.
I believe in social justice, and I also believe that our constitution fosters it, when politicians are not using it as a doormat.
I have lived in the Middle East and Latin America, so I've seen firsthand human rights abuses and social injustice.
Even in Europe, if you are born a floor sweeper's son, you are probably doomed to be a floor sweeper. Look at how they treat their immigrants (I actually had friends who were from Africa, and you should have heard their stories of how they were treated in France.)
There is no more upwardly mobile society than the United States.
I am still waiting for someone to answer my question. What specifically constitutes social justice? Do we have it now? If not, how do we institute it?
I think there is a responsibility that goes with being a TV/radio "entertainer," which is debatable in Beck's case. He is neither a comdedian nor a satarist but more of a propagandist for a particular cause or set of beliefs.
ReplyDeleteSadly, far too many people take his words as gospel.
For a thousand years - yes, I'm that old - I have been misquoting the quote "fire in a crowded theatre." A friend kindly sent me a link to a recent NY Times piece correcting millions of readers, including judges. It should be "falsely" crying . . . I think Beck has been guilty of this time and time again.
Ahh, the media - one of my favorite subjects. The problem starts at the top and goes down to the city desk, copy editors (if there are any), and reporters. The publishers march to the drum of advertisors, even more so today as they're fighting to stay afloat, and they are a corporation.
Copy editors write misleading headlines that are negative and deliberately slanted to raise concerns and even fears of the public. When a reader gets to the third paragraph, they learn that what was implied isn't true at all.
TV and radio is just as guilty, if not more so. They will spend days promoting a "hot" investigatve story which ends up being nothing, and in some cases, causing harm because of its alarmist approach.
Reporters are lazy. They go for the action, the sensationalism and the superficiality of the moment rather than the substance. One example: Tea Party signs reading "Say no to the death panels." Did any of the media point out that this was a falacy? All too few and so the myth was perpetuated. There are many, many more examples but I think I'll leave them for my blog.
The final item I'd like to point out is something not visible to the public. That's the research staff. I used to manage a department with 22 staff members. A reporter did not dare cover a story without first doing background research.
In general, libraries are the adopted children and news outlets are no exception. Once the Internet became "user friendly" they claimed they could do their own research. Kind of hard to do when covering a murder trial. It would take them 3 hours to search for something on the Net that I could find in 30 minutes on a professional database - while searching 80 sources that went back for 20 years all at one time.
So, in the interest of cutting costs and because reporters think they are first class researchers (not), research departments have been cut back to practically zero and, in many cases, done away with altogether. Results? inaccuracies and shallowness.
tnlib said...
ReplyDeleteI think there is a responsibility that goes with being a TV/radio "entertainer," which is debatable in Beck's case. He is neither a comdedian nor a satarist but more of a propagandist for a particular cause or set of beliefs.
I remember the show where Beck told his viewers that FEMA was setting up concentration camps. And here's the reaction from a site called "Veterans Today, Military Veterans and Foreign Affairs Journal:"
"It’s going to be very interesting if indeed Glenn Beck airs the story on FEMA CONCENTRATION CAMPS IN AMERICA. If he does I’m sure the story will be watered down to some extent. Why? We all know the MAINSTEAM MEDIA is controlled by UNSEEN FORCES way beyond their control."
Beck had to deny that story because it was a lie. But that didn't stop him from featuring the lie on his show.
Why does anyone listen to him? Some may argue that he's brought up some legitimate issues--but so what. Even a stopped clock is correct twice a day.
He has shown that he is willing to mislead his audience for the sake of maintaining his standing in the ratings.
I've called him an entertainer, but Leslie is correct, he's not even good at that. He's a propagandist and a danger to our democracy.
The sorry truth is that the "UNSEEN" forces the veterans group was paranoid about may very well be the people who issue Beck's paychecks.
I would not call Beck a propagandist, comedian, entertainer, satirist, or anything else. For me, the best terms are ‘imposter,’ ‘phony,’ ‘fraudster’ and ‘huckster.’
ReplyDeleteAccording to his bio, the man is a recovering alcoholic, a former drug addict, and a college dropout after taking ONE class. Yet, Fox News, in its equally infinite stupidity, raises this man to pundit status and gives him a public platform to expostulate on subjects he knows absolutely nothing about.
Would you hire this man to perform emergency surgery on you? Would you want this man to fly the airplane that carries your family? Then why the hell would anyone rely on Beck for opinions of economics, politics, and theology!
Glenn Beck is symptomatic of an imposter culture that trades on forged currency.
Silver, nobody says you used the word utopia.
ReplyDeleteThere is no more upwardly mobile society than the United States.
This is debatable (although you are entitled to your own opinion).
For the record, I'm a product of a socialist society -- you know, one of those with free (i.e., taxpayers' funded) health care and education for all, and I can tell you that the upward mobility in the US is overly mythologized and certainly overrated in comparison to that seen in socialist countries.
It's strange to say, IMO, that there is no more upwardly mobile society than the US, when you consider the fact that so many Americans cannot afford basic health care or higher education. These people, if they survive at all, are doomed to linger in a permanent underclass limbo -- which, btw, grows larger every day as our middle class disappears.
What specifically constitutes social justice?
To start with, equal opportunities for a safe, dignified life and social advancement (an access to free health care and respectable education is imperative in it).
Do we have it now?
Certainly not in the US.
If not, how do we institute it?
Through passing laws that would ensure equal opportunities for a safe, dignified life and social advancement for all and not only those who can afford it. This, however, would require an (honest) admission that the for-profit set-up, so championed by the free-marketeers, does not work well in some (many?) areas of our life (again, health care and education first and foremost come to mind).
Silverfiddle – Even in Europe, if you are born a floor sweeper's son, you are probably doomed to be a floor sweeper. Look at how they treat their immigrants (I actually had friends who were from Africa, and you should have heard their stories of how they were treated in France.)
ReplyDeleteAs an American expat who lived in London in the 1980s and Paris in the 1990s (and traveled virtually all EU countries during my years abroad), I have witnessed substantial social changes in Europe. Liberalization of London’s financial markets, also known as the ‘Big Bang,’ leveled the traditional class structure of the UK. East Londoners, especially, became highly paid traders when financial markets moved to the Docklands.
I should remind you that the current President of France, Nicolas Sarkozy, is of mixed national and ethnic ancestry; his father emigrated from Hungary, and his mother is of Ottoman-Jewish descent. In France, there is a saying: “We have no prejudices as long as you become French.” With respect to the North African émigrés who live in the Parisian suburbs known as Banlieue, the reason why there is high unemployment and ethic unrest among them is because these populations refuse to assimilate.
Silverfiddle, please don’t over-generalize or jump to conclusions without having at least some first-hand knowledge.
I have plenty of first-hand knowledge, thank you.
ReplyDeleteEurope pays a very high taxation rate (almost twice ours) to pay for their social safety net, and they are also in debt, as we are. The northern countries pay for much of this with north sea crude revenue. Add in that they pay practically nothing for their defense since we're picking up that tab, and you see how distorted the picture becomes.
Free health care? How do you propose to pay for that? Nothing's free.
For the record, upwardly mobile means people do not stagnate in their income percentile or their "social" tier.
We are an egalitarian society, Europe less so.
Silver, c'mon, everyone knows that free health care is not free, but paid for with the citizens' taxes. Let's not rediscover the wheel (unless you want to troll/waste time). Similarly, everyone here knows what upward mobility means. So what's your point, really?
ReplyDeleteWe are an egalitarian society, Europe less so.
You wouldn't happen to have any proof of that, would you?
BTW, pretty much every study I have seen on the subject so far confirms that the social mobility in the US is lower than that in Europe. I'd be interested in seeing your evidence to the contrary -- because surely you have it, right? You wouldn't just make these assertions based on wishful thinking, I'm sure.
ReplyDeleteFor example, this from the 2006 study Understanding Mobility in America via Center for American Progress:
By international standards, the United States has an unusually low level of intergenerational mobility: our parents’ income is highly predictive of our incomes as adults. Intergenerational mobility in the United States is lower than in France, Germany, Sweden, Canada, Finland, Norway and Denmark. Among high-income countries for which comparable estimates are available, only the United Kingdom had a lower rate of mobility than the United States.
There is more in the similar vein in this paper, as well as pretty much in each and every study done in this area.
One of the most comprehensive works on the subject, if not the most comprehensive, is a 2009 book by Wilkinson and Pickett, The Spirit Level (highly recommended; but be warned -- if you believe that the US is superior to other countries in social mobility, social equality and other measures of societal [and not only] health, prepare to be disabused of your belief. In fact, the US tends to stay on the bottom of these stats -- a finding that took even the authors by surprise).
Silverfiddle - I have lived in the Middle East and Latin America ...
ReplyDeleteBut what 'first-hand knowledge' do you have of Europe? You come here, make unsupported assertions without citations or references, and seem to engage in argument with no purpose in mind. What is your point exactly?
If your intention is to bother and annoy, just go away.
The fact that income disparity has been growing steadily should make people aware that social mobility is shrinking apace.
ReplyDeleteOf course downward mobility is quite visible with the formerly comfortable retirees I see now bagging groceries, fellow yacht club members returning to work, if they can, and of course, middle class families living in their cars and some in the woods.
That old "We're number one" refrain is looking rather shabby these days and it's obvious to everyone but conservative denialists that it isn't true at all.
they can't afford to stop cheering and boasting however since admitting that our pathological fear of collective responsibility - indeed of any word containing collective or social or even practical shakes their card house.
Elizabeth, the University of Pittsburg Law Review published a similar report "The Myth of Upward Mobility" that bears out what you have already stated.
ReplyDeleteAncedotally, as a jailhouse nurse I saw many examples of this in that, at any given time, we would have parents, children and cousins incarcerated at the same time. Often for different offenses.
The whole inner city environment does little to foster upward mobility.
As luck would have it, a report on American social immobility just came out. Read on:
ReplyDeleteIs America the "land of opportunity"? Not so much.
A new report from the Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD) finds that social mobility between generations is dramatically lower in the U.S. than in many other developed countries.
So if you want your children to climb the socioeconomic ladder higher than you did, move to Canada.
The report finds the U.S. ranking well below Denmark, Australia, Norway, Finland, Canada, Sweden, Germany and Spain in terms of how freely citizens move up or down the social ladder. Only in Italy and Great Britain is the intensity of the relationship between individual and parental earnings even greater.
For instance, according to the OECD, 47 percent of the economic advantage that high-earning fathers in the United States have over low-earning fathers is transmitted to their sons, compare to, say, 17 percent in Australia and 19 percent in Canada.
Recent economic events may be increasing social mobility in the U.S. -- but only of the downward variety. Harvard Professor Elizabeth Warren, for example, argues that America's middle class had been eroding for 30 years even before the massive blows caused by the financial crisis. And with unemployment currently at astronomical levels, if there are no jobs for young people leaving school, the result could be long-term underemployment and, effectively, a lost generation.
According to the OECD report, the main cause of social immobility is educational opportunity. It turns out that America's public school system, rather than lifting children up, is instead holding them down.
For more, follow the link.