Post 120--Secular Missionaries of Democracy

Promises, Promises!

Well, here I go breaking the promise I long ago promised I would not break! Once you’re into a promise-breaking mode, you may as well go at it, right?   And here’s one more: I will no longer pretend I can write blogs or anything else without both making and then breaking promises I just made. I’m simply going to make one whenever the need arises without any guilt feeling.  Making promises is definitely an inescapable part of the human condition; breaking promises is not far from that one!

Secular Missionaries

In the second to the last paragraph of Post 119 I noted that Western nations export their wild electioneering campaigns to non-Western nations. The term “export” in this context is really a secular term for “missionizing.”  Yes, Western nations and their people, secular as they tend to be and as disapproving most of them are of missionaries, are themselves missionaries in the sense that they seek to convince the peoples of other regions to adopt their democratic ways of electing their governments. Secularists are missionaries, short and simple, though they do not recognize it and will vehemently deny it when confronted with it. This denial is based on the fact that they are blind to their own faith or worldview.

Secular Democratic Imposition

I have met a young lady hardly beyond her mid-twenties, who was commissioned by the US Government to teach democratic ways to African politicians. Though she was sweet enough, I was shocked to think that such an inexperienced person would have the gall to travel all over Africa to recommend, among other things, the “art” of political campaigning. I was shocked even more by the fact that she was actually commissioned to do so by the sophisticated US Government! What brazen imposition! What a brazen superiority complex—a youthful American teaching African leaders the ways of American political campaigns?  Please reread some of the paragraphs of Post 119. Would you even think about exporting those ways? And please remember, much of the same holds true for Canada as well.

Christian Electioneering Shenanigans

Well, the West has been most successful in their political mission to Africa. In my book Christians and Muslims: Parameters for Living Together I describe a situation in central Nigeria where three contenders for the position of State Governor all belonged to one and the same Christian denomination.  Officially, these contenders were brothers in Christ.  They were all taught human relations from a Christian perspective—love, mutual respect, dignity, speaking the truth, etc. etc., but none of this came through in the course of their campaign. Like those in Post 119, “they fought with each other like everyone else, berated each other, accused each other; lied to and about each other.” It’s too bad I cannot give you more juicy details, the reason being that the documents underlying my statements were deposited in a Yale archive. In short, they made mince meat of everything the Bible teaches in terms of positive human relations. And they all thought of themselves as Christian gentlemen! (The full text of that book is available on the Islamica page of my website <  www.SocialTheology.com  >, vol. 8-2, p. 144.)

I do hope the above paragraph will not make you think me racist.  After all, I say much worse things about American politicians. I should correct this last statement. I don’t say worse things about American politicians so much as more grimy details.  Those documents now at Yale contain similar grimy details about these Nigerian politicians.

The Disconnect

How is it possible that these prominent American politicians, some of them icons of US history and at least some of them Christians, could so defame and defile the name of their most prominent citizens and not be called on it, at least, not enough for them to cease the practice?  And how is the same thing possible with Nigerian Christian politicians?  How could they square such behavior with the Bible and their religion?  Probably the dominant reason is the disconnect between their official religion—Christianity—and their actions.

Dualism

A major theme in all my writings is “dualism,” that is, separation not of church from state, but of religion from state as well as religion from politics. The way missionaries in Africa brought the Gospel has lead to Africans disconnecting these pairs. Though many missionaries did not actively reject ties between these two entities, their failure to encourage building ties between religion and both state and politics led to a separation. The result is the attitude of religion is religion; business is business; politics is politics-- and never the twain shall meet, the “twain” being religion on the one side and business & politics on the other.

Secular Intolerance

Of course we Canadians have only recently suffered the same electioneering shenanigans for the same reason. In our country secularism has achieved such a majority position that the very idea that religion should be out there in the halls of power and in the market place is considered plain primitive and uncivilized. A current example is the legal battle over the proposed law school at Western Trinity University right here in BC.  It’s a pure example of secularism’s viciousness and intolerance.  But, hey, that’s how the establishment mind operates, whether it’s Islam or secularism—or Christian even.  But don’t let that intimidate you, for that secularism is so ignorant that it does not know itself.

The Gospel Alternative: Love and Respect

The bottom Christian line in all this is the plain Gospel recommendation—no, more than recommendation: demand,  prescription—that we love and respect one another, build up each other, the very opposite of our current culture of berating and destroying.  

Post 95--Trudeau: Due Diligence? (2)

  

More “Spontaneity” and Populism?

The same issue arose in my mind with respect to the PM’s announcement that his government was going to accept all the recommendations of the Truth and Reconciliation Committee—and, if my memory serves me right—they are up into the 90’s!  Again, that mix of spontaneity and populism.  Again, what seems like a serious lack of due diligence. All 90+ without careful analysis, even before he was enthroned?  I loved and still love the composition of his Cabinet, assuming that the Ministers are all fully qualified, but even that I am beginning to wonder in view of this pattern of spontaneity and populism without due diligence. Did he and his advisers possibly practice ethnic and tribal politics by glad handing Canada’s various races and religions, including recent immigrant arrivals as well as more settled non-Caucasians?  In view of already mentioned instances of seeming spontaneity and populism, the question of due diligence refuses to go away, even though I have no doubt that there are people worthy of cabinet appointments among all of us.  Once you have the suspicion of lack of due diligence, rightly or wrongly, you begin to look for it everywhere. 

Andrew Coyne’s Take

I have great respect for Andrew Coyne, one of Canada’s most prominent and, perhaps, most popular political commentators in both Canadian press and TV.  He recently published an opinion column under the title “Maximum political mileage with minimum thought.” The subtitle was “Promises: After three months in office, Trudeau big on smiles and symbolism but short on substance” (Vancouver Sun, Feb. 6, 2016).  Wow! Coming from Coyne, this is like a bomb shell. Under a picture of a smiling, waving Trudeau, the editor comments “A tendency ‘to announce policy first, then figure out the consequences later’ is the modus operandi of PM Justin Trudeau’s government….” 

In case you haven’t caught on yet, I want it understood that the suspicions I am airing are pre-Coyne. That is to say, they were raised in my mind before I read any commentator on the subject. They popped up immediately I first read about the 25,000. But Coyne strongly confirmed these suspicions and he buttresses them with more facts at his fingertips than I can muster.  So, with your permission, here’s a little more of Andrew’s take. I promise that tomorrow I will move on to another subject.

Apart from their tragic content, namely a seemingly light-hearted playing with the destiny of 34 million plus people, Coyne’s article contains so many pithy and humorous quotables, that I thoroughly enjoyed reading it. Here are some samples about Trudeau’s government:

It is one part not being Stephen Harper, one part symbolic gesture, one part wriggling out of campaign promises, and one part saying yes to everybody. … Get used to it.

For a government that makes much of its…forward-looking credentials, the Trudeau crew are unusually obsessed with digging up the recent past. The platform itself was filled with promises (my colleague, Bill Watson, puts the number at 50) to reverse this or that Conservative initiative.  … What was common to all was their relentless symbolic focus, achieving maximum political mileage for least expense.   

Is it to be supposed that the “evidence-based” party had any research to support its claim to be able to safely admit 25,000… refugees… by December?

Referring to the announcement of a tax increase for high incomers that would precisely offset a tax decrease for the “middle tax bracket,” Coyne asks, “Was there any basis for the party’s claim?” The original $3 billion income from the increase was subsequently whittled down to $1 billion.  Any basis?

Of course not: they gave…about the same amount of thought as Trudeau did in announcing…that he would implement all 94 of (the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s) recommendation. Which is about twice as much thought as he and his advisers gave to the implications of abolishing party caucuses in the Senate. Or, for that matter, than they gave to their pipeline policy.

You have no idea how hard it is for me to refrain from just reproducing Coyne’s entire article, but I have to watch copyright restrictions and may already have transgressed them.  I plead for mercy from the Vancouver Sun on the grounds that I am such a strong advertiser for them apart from being part of that rare breed of remaining loyal paper subscribers.

Coyne does not relent. Two weeks later, he published another article entitled “Liberals fooled by their own image” with the subtitle “Broken promises: This Trudeau government says one thing and does the other at the same time”  (Feb. 20, p. B2), also loaded with gems:  “It is one thing to say one thing and do another in sequence. But to do both at the same time is deeply worrying.”  But be comforted; things are not as bad as they could be. Andrew writes that he would not go as far as therapist Evan Solomon, who describes Trudeau “as a kind of psychopath, alternatively charming (‘the romantic’) and homicide (‘the killer’). I think…he poses no danger to anyone but the economy. Still a number of recent incidents give one pause.” And then comes another litany of examples.

If Andrew does not relent, I will, right here, before the temptation overpowers me. I am no politician, but I do recognize political irresponsibility when I see it, at least this brazen variety of it. And this is not a political column, but I have stated somewhere in the past that social responsibility is one of my trademarks that comes straight out of my Christian convictions. When I see that, whether political or not, I get my dander up high and mighty. I need time to cool off. See you next time.

P.S.--It’s February 28, 2016. Today the announcement was made that Canada received the quota of 25,000 refugees.