Skip to content

“US” as “United States” or ‘first person plural’; versus “Them”: Election Revealing Two Nations?

November 9, 2012

If all the attacks against Obama weren’t enough when he first got in, it seems conservatives have really stepped it up now that he has been reelected. I have seen many online proclaim that the nation is officially dead; having committed “suicide”.

You even have people posting YouTube videos of “Obama voters”; both clueless whites who don’t even know who the candidates or issues are, and especially blacks, usually on welfare lines, boldly yearning for their free “Obama stuff”; most of them sounding like a bunch of stereotypical parodies people went around collecting. You still see the whole “Obama phones” distortion, ignoring that the program was put in place before he entered office. Yet he gets tagged with it.

People seriously base their opinion on this stuff. They actually insist that accurately reveals and characterizes the majority of voters, since they voted for Obama.

And the one conclusion I see coming out of all this is an “us vs THEM” mentality. One Texas GOP leader derides Obama voters as “maggots”, and then calls for secession!
Also of note, the red/blue map already appeared to reflect ‘two nations’, with many of the same states being “red” or “blue”, with the “heartland” being red, and the smaller, but more densely populated centers (which include higher numbers of these “disparate groups” the person referred to) being blue.

So they’ve divided the entire country into two classes, “the TAKERS”, and what is the other side? The “givers”? or “earners”? Or “deservers”?
Oh wait; I remember now (from when I first heard this coined); it’s “the makers“. The original full concept was “the ‘makers’ vs the ‘takers’“. (When I see how cheap in quality stuff has become in the last 40 years or so, plus all the games that get run; —remember Windows Vista; which was nothing like it was supposed to be, and had so many flaws it was quickly replaced with Windows 7— and capitalists are the “makers” and not the real “takers”?)

Even if you say (regarding the division and fingerpointing) “that’s what they’re doing” [i.e. the liberals or blacks complaining about race or class, or the people in these videos]; by doing the same thing in return, you’re just like them, and just as much apart of the problem.

The Christians who have participated in all this don’t seem to even have a clue that that kind of thinking is what scriptures condemn (it was precisely what the Christ rejecting Israelites were doing, leading them to condemn Christ along with the rest of “them”).
Many keep tearing parts of Israel’s history out of their contexts, and applying the relevant scriptures to modern America, and the ministries of the prophets then seems to justify this attitude.

I’ve actually seen one person on a board, responding to the issue of Romney losing because the GOP crowd supposedly catered only to the “white voting bloc”, claim “the demographics of America have changed and white working people are in the minority”. (Wow; I heard the Hispanics were going to eventually become the majority, but that’s about 50 years from now. didn’t know it already occurred!)
Another person added to this comparing the Republican Party as “by and large made up of white working class folks. They work, go to church, pay their bills, and stay out of trouble for the most part”, with the Democratic party, as “a conglomerate of special interest groups. You have the gays, the tree huggers, the feminists, socialists, etc… These folks love big government and lots of freebies.” (He mentioned the blacks and others in a separate post responding to my response; citing the “coalition of disparate groups” the Democrats have built since FDR and LBJ, with the $15 trillion spent on welfare the whole time, significantly enough, the size of the national debt!)

Here we see the issue clearly set in terms of the “good white Christian folk” versus everyone else, basically. But these people are the ones who scream when they feel accused of bigotry!

Limbaugh comes right out and says “We’re outnumbered and losing ground” (You can see this discussed here: While he didn’t mention race, at least in the clip cited, still, commentators, including even Republicans assessing the loss, are concluding the party is all about the older white male Christian.

As always, the focus remains solidly on “government programs”. Now, up to 47% are said to pay “no income taxes“. And this shrinking group of “hard-working” Americans has to bear the weight of them all. I wonder just what is being defined as paying “no taxes”, or even as “non-working” as some claim? Because one benefits from any program (including stuff like student loans and social security)?

As always, people seek to blame the lower classes benefiting from programs for the entire debt, and rail on against them, while always defending the rich as “deserving”. They won’t allow that corporate greed could play a part in it at all. They only do what they do (take jobs away, raise prices, etc) because of the taxes, which are all going to these “programs”.
They really tried to implicate a particular race, on a particular program called “welfare” (AFDC, basically), but now it has had to go way beyond that in scope, to a whopping 47% of the entire population.

All of this is overgeneralization, and as with the “you didn’t build that” controversy, it seems people believe only [themselves and] their corporatist heroes work hard and truly “earn” anything. It’s why that statement was so offensive to them. They really believe those at the top are just smarter and harder working, and needed no help from others at all (which was the point of the statement).

A lot of these programs are because of the high (and increasing) prices of everything, and that’s unfortunate. People might blame it on one set of policies or the other, but it’s totally wrong to just label all of these people (47% of the entire nation) as just trying to get “free handouts”. (And ignoring how a major issue is the “freebies” given to corporatism. But that’s different, they “earned” it!)

Poverty programs were always one relatively small part of expenditure, and yet it’s always what’s focused on in these debates; as if the poor have gotten all the money! (The fact that poverty apparently hasn’t changed much (as reports people link to show), ought to show that they must not be the ones who have all the money. Unless we go with Quinn’s “Grasshopper” parable, that the “Green Bugs” (With their “NAAGB”, to give you an example of what this rhetoric comes to) are so careless that they throw away all the money, leaving both themselves and everyone else in poverty. But that still begs the question, if they threw it away, then who picked it up and carried it off? The poor certainly aren’t the ones sitting on it, even if we grant the ridiculous assumption that they had gotten all of it)

It’s true that obviously, money has not been handled properly, but to begin framing it in this “us versus them” rhetoric (even naming various groups as the problem) is dangerous. It often becomes the smokescreen the the true culprits behind the problems use to get all the “ants” blaming and fighting each other, while they ruin them all.
The liberals might be the ones who more frequently mention race (as well as, of course, class), but then it seems as if some people are taking the bait and running with it. Yet they continue to get angry when they feel a “card” is being “played” on them. It is not one group or another that is the problem.

Their ideology in a nutshell (building on my earlier posts, below explaining why all of this is coming up now from them):

•Forefathers were “chosen” by God;
-thus “regenerated” by His Spirit; which produces “holiness”, evidenced by behavior, morality, “values”, “principles”, “reverence” of God (private and public), etc.

•Other people were “cursed”, evidenced by their pagan religion,“barbarism”, “sensuality”, etc.

•God once ordered His chosen people to conquer and destroy or enslave the cursed people.
-The reward for a godly chosen nation was earthly dominion.
-(The original chosen nation, Israel failed and was thus punished; at least until “the end times” among many.
-We have accepted Christ, and thus “replace” Israel and gain all her promises. We also still try to show our support for the “original” Israel, now embodied in the 1948 nation, however).

•Therefore, colonialism and slavery were not really wrong; at least not in the ethos of the times; only according to our “modern sensibilities” —(which are basically screwed up and anti-God anyway, as we have “turned away from Him”).

•So for modern movements to try to change what our forefathers made this great nation into is an evil attack against us AND God.
-(This also extends to the other issues such as gay rights, immigration, Constitutional issues etc.)

•Can’t directly continue to directly maintain the inferiority of other races, but instead must prove that the people who claim to have been wronged by the nation really did it to themselves, and are even bringing the rest of us down with them. (See here).

•Since the Christian patriots today are also “regenerate” and geared to “God’s truth”, then they cannot allow that they or their forefathers could ever be wrong. So they spend their time decrying what everyone else is doing wrong. They’re destroying the nation, they’re immoral, they’re “taking” from us, they think they’re “entitled” , we demand it back, etc.
-They bemoan the loss of their “freedoms” and yet preach “contentment” to others. It never seems to apply to them.
-Since they as “regenerate Christians” who follow His “principles” are therefore geared toward what’s right; they seem to imply themselves as the only ones working, and everyone else is trying to get “freebies”.

So this of course often crosses over into race, as much as they violently deny any charge or racism.

See also:

Also, just found a reprinting of the entire first chapter of Carl T. rowan’s The Coming Race War, which handled the issue excellently:

I had hoped that we had moved even past this stage (in the late ’90’s), especially when we came far enough to elect a black president; but it seems this is just flaring up more of what he discusses here; which rings so true for today’s political climate.

From → Politics

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: