What Should Christians Do in Response to Charlottesville?

The disgusting displays of racism last weekend in Charlottesville have been a wake up call to many Christians.

luv more peepul
The disgusting displays of racism last weekend in Charlottesville have been a wake up call to many Christians. Some Christian leaders have denounced the resurgence of white supremacists while others have remained silent. The president took two days to declare specifically and clearly that racism is evil. Some evangelicals have defended his slow response while others have called him out for taking so long. Because of the diversity of views under the label evangelical, there is little chance for a unified response among those who identify with that word.
Even though national media statements are important, ultimately the response of local churches will move us toward or away from racial reconciliation. In response to the events in Charlottesville, I hope more Christians will consider at minimum these responses.

1. Denounce racism locally and nationally

There should be no delay for church leaders to denounce racism and racist groups. Statements must be clear and to the point – racism is wrong and antithetical to the Gospel. Racial supremacy is evil and a cancer in the church. Historically, many in the white church fought integration and used the Bible as a reason. This should not be denied or politicized.
Local church pastors and people in the pews must hold national leaders to this same standard. When there is silence from those who have a national platform, we must ask why and mark those who can’t or won’t call out racism.

2. Put aside politics

Whether you supported Trump or not, this is no time to defend the improper actions of your political favorites. Currently, some Trump supporters are defending his slow and confusing response to white supremacy on display in Charlottesville. This political posturing doesn’t help the situation and improperly gives loyalty to Caesar instead of God. On the other hand, Christians must work with the current administration to make change and not simply criticize to score political points against the president.

3. Take the lead in removing Confederate symbols from the public square.

Although this may be controversial, I think it is crucial right now. I believe churches should take the lead in community efforts to remove vestiges of pride in the Confederacy. Some Christians defend Confederate symbols. but I think they are wrong.
Defending Confederate symbols has become a signal for white supremacy. All reasons for flying the Confederate flag or allowing Confederate statues to remain in place ultimately come back to a defense of a painful and evil time in American history. In America today, the display of a Confederate symbol is analogous to the display of a swastika. Americans have the right to free speech but the church is called to a higher standard. I support all lawful means to put Confederate symbols in the museum and out of the public square. Such action would go a long way toward my next point.

4. More action, more learning, less preaching

In addition to action to attack racist symbols, evangelicals, especially those in majority white evangelical churches, must talk less and learn more. White evangelicals must learn about white privilege and the vast differences in perception of society. African-American and whites often see problems and solutions differently. As a white evangelical, I need to listen and learn more, and talk less. I realize as I write this that I may not have gotten more wrong than right in this article. I welcome dialogue and see this piece as an effort to contribute to discussion and learning.
There are two organizations I can recommend (there are many good ones, I just happen to know the leaders of these groups).
Race to Unity
Return to the Roots of Civil Rights Bus Tour
 

GOP Candidate for Governor of Virginia Compares Removal of Confederate Monument to ISIS

I kid you not. Corey Stewart a GOP candidate for Virginia governor compared the removal of the white supremacist Liberty Place Monument in New Orleans to the destruction of antiquities carried out by ISIS.


The statue once carried a visible message celebrating white supremacy:

United States troops took over the state government and reinstated the usurpers but the national election November 1876 recognized white supremacy in the South and gave us our state.

Stewart, apparently unaware he is self-destructing, issued a statement:

Woodbridge, VA – Republican gubernatorial candidate Corey Stewart released a statement on the removal of confederate monuments deemed “racist” in New Orleans.
“The removal of these historical monuments is nothing less than the blatant destruction of U.S. history,” Stewart said. “This is what happens when weak-chinned Republicans refuse to stand up to the tyrannical political correctness on the left.”
“Democrats in New Orleans are destroying history today, just like they’re trying to in Charlottesville. This will not stop with Robert E. Lee or P. G. T. Beauregard. Next, they will tear down statues of Washington and Jefferson.”

Well, call me a weak-chinned Republican. Stewart supported Trump in the last election and reflects him well. New Orleans is doing the right thing and I hope more monuments to racism come down.

Donald Trump's Chief Strategist Stephen Bannon Tolerates Racism to Achieve Political Goals

Hillary called them “deplorables,” Bannon calls them “baggage.” What will Trumpists do with “aspects that may be anti-Semitic or racial?”
 
In a speech to a Catholic group published by Buzzfeed, President-elect Donald Trump’s chief strategist Stephen Bannon presented his view of the world and political goals related to that view. The speech and subsequent Q&A are revealing and should be read carefully. While there is much to learn from the transcript, I focus now on Bannon’s statements about racism.
In short, Bannon knows racists are a part of his coalition but he takes a passive approach to it since he assumes they will eventually be “washed out.” Here are some quotes from the transcript:

Bannon: Outside of Fox News and the Drudge Report, we’re the third-largest conservative news site and, quite frankly, we have a bigger global reach than even Fox. And that’s why we’re expanding so much internationally.
Look, we believe — strongly — that there is a global tea party movement. We’ve seen that. We were the first group to get in and start reporting on things like UKIP and Front National and other center right. With all the baggage that those groups bring — and trust me, a lot of them bring a lot of baggage, both ethnically and racially — but we think that will all be worked through with time.
The central thing that binds that all together is a center-right populist movement of really the middle class, the working men and women in the world who are just tired of being dictated to by what we call the party of Davos. A group of kind of — we’re not conspiracy-theory guys, but there’s certainly — and I could see this when I worked at Goldman Sachs — there are people in New York that feel closer to people in London and in Berlin than they do to people in Kansas and in Colorado, and they have more of this elite mentality that they’re going to dictate to everybody how the world’s going to be run. (emphasis added)

Trump’s movement has attracted much of that “baggage.” Bannon’s appointment as chief Trump strategist has been lauded by the KKK, neo-Nazi’s and other racist organizations and leaders (e.g., Richard Spencer, David Duke). Although Bannon calls the racists “baggage,” it doesn’t appear that he does anything obvious to discourage it.

Bannon: I don’t believe I said UKIP in that. I was really talking about the parties on the continent, Front National and other European parties.
I’m not an expert in this, but it seems that they have had some aspects that may be anti-Semitic or racial. By the way, even in the tea party, we have a broad movement like this, and we’ve been criticized, and they try to make the tea party as being racist, etc., which it’s not. But there’s always elements who turn up at these things, whether it’s militia guys or whatever. Some that are fringe organizations. My point is that over time it all gets kind of washed out, right? People understand what pulls them together, and the people on the margins I think get marginalized more and more.
I believe that you’ll see this in the center-right populist movement in continental Europe. I’ve spent quite a bit of time with UKIP, and I can say to you that I’ve never seen anything at all with UKIP that even comes close to that. I think they’ve done a very good job of policing themselves to really make sure that people including the British National Front and others were not included in the party, and I think you’ve seen that also with tea party groups, where some people would show up and were kind of marginal members of the tea party, and the tea party did a great job of policing themselves early on. And I think that’s why when you hear charges of racism against the tea party, it doesn’t stick with the American people, because they really understand.

Bannon is aware of the racists in his movement but, if anything, he has encouraged them through adopting the platform of the alt-right at Brietbart. He says they will be washed out, but how will that happen if someone is not doing laundry?
I think I understand what he is claiming — the movement is unified at the core by a populist impulse to return power to the people and not by racism per se. The problem for Bannon and the nation is that unless Bannon and Trump actively and publicly move to oppose white nationalism, his movement will not catch on with a lasting majority of Americans. In fact, their weak disavowals make it appear that Bannon and Trump support the “baggage.”

Questioner: Very simply put, there’s a growing movement among young people here in Europe, in France and in Austria and elsewhere, and they’re arguing very effectively against Wall Street institutions and they’re also appealing to people on an ethnic and racial level. And I was just wondering what you would recommend to counteract these movements, which are growing.
Bannon: One of the reasons that you can understand how they’re being fueled is that they’re not seeing the benefits of capitalism. I mean particularly — and I think it’s particularly more advanced in Europe than it is in the United States, but in the United States it’s getting pretty advanced — is that when you have this kind of crony capitalism, you have a different set of rules for the people that make the rules. It’s this partnership of big government and corporatists. I think it starts to fuel, particularly as you start to see negative job creation. If you go back, in fact, and look at the United States’ GDP, you look at a bunch of Europe. If you take out government spending, you know, we’ve had negative growth on a real basis for over a decade.
And that all trickles down to the man in the street. If you look at people’s lives, and particularly millennials, look at people under 30 — people under 30, there’s 50% really under employment of people in the United States, which is probably the most advanced economy in the West, and it gets worse in Europe.
I think in Spain it’s something like 50 or 60% of the youth under 30 are underemployed. And that means the decade of their twenties, which is where you have to learn a skill, where you have to learn a craft, where you really start to get comfortable in your profession, you’re taking that away from the entire generation. That’s only going to fuel tribalism, that’s only going to fuel [unintelligible]… That’s why to me, it’s incumbent upon freedom-loving people to make sure that we sort out these governments and make sure that we sort out particularly this crony capitalism so that the benefits become more of this entrepreneurial spirit and that can flow back to working-class and middle-class people. Because if not, we’re going to pay a huge price for this. You can already start to see it.

The questioner asked Bannon how to counteract the movements which appeal to racial identity as a reaction to large corporate interests. Bannon’s answer did not address the racism, but said crony capitalism was to blame for what he called tribalism. On the economics front, his argument is appealing. The middle class is working harder for less but seeing the wealthy class have more. Capitalism is working for the wealthy but not the little guy. Bernie Sanders touched this sentiment but offered a different ideology as a solution.
Bannon, however, tolerates this racist tribalism in the service of his broader goals. Although I don’t think it would have mattered, I wish this transcript would have surfaced before the election. This is a pretty straightforward statement that Bannon’s movement uses racists to further his broader ends all the while asserting the “baggage” (dare I say “deplorables?”) will somehow be “washed out.” Evangelicals who supported this need to recognize the deal with the devil they have made. Bannon dresses his tolerance of racism in religious language of Christianity. I expect that religious people will find their values severely tested over the next four years. What will evangelicals, particularly white ones, do when a movement that tolerates racism is pitted regularly against achieving religious liberty goals? So far, many evangelical leaders have winked at the racist concerns in the service of other goals.
I don’t have expert knowledge of these movements but what I do know tells me that history is not on Bannon’s side. If anything, smaller acts of aggression and dehumanization toward a identifiable group have degenerated into acts which are much worse. Preventing this degeneration will continue to animate those opposed to Trumpism and the unholy alliance it tolerates with racists.
Such a standoff could be prevented. If Trumpists and his evangelical sympathizers draw a sharp line against the “aspects that may be anti-Semitic or racial” (aka the “baggage”), the movement would less corrosive and have more chance to make some positive changes. Otherwise, I pray it fails in time for the mid-term elections.

Charleston Shooter Targeted Blacks During Prayer Meeting (UPDATED – Wanted to Start Race War)

There are many bizarre and horrid aspects to the Charleston massacre of eight black church members. This post brings together some of the coverage of the tragedy with links to the poisonous words of white supremacists by the alleged shooter, Dylann Roof.
Roof sat in the prayer meeting for about an hour before he began shooting.
According to a CNN report, Roof said he was at the church “to shoot black people” and he wanted to start a “race war.”
White supremacists are worried this makes them look bad.
They should be worried given the rhetoric their leaders engage in.  Here is the League of the South’s president Michael Hill opining on an American race war (chilling in light of Roof’s purpose of starting a race war).  Hill claims desegregation has been a failed policy and calls for re-segregration.  Hill calls for his followers to fight and die for the Southern nationalist cause.

But it is not natural for us Southerners to sit idle against threats. We are fighting men. We are not comfortable claiming victimhood and begging that some human right be created for us. Instead, we are bound up in a long community of blood, and that blood has often been shed in defense of itself. 

A commenter at Occidental Dissent said this in reaction to the shootings:

I don’t believe in a lot of things. You’re going to have to be more specific when you talk about murder and which people truly are considered innocent. The anti-White establishment gives itself an extremely wide berth when it factors in the collateral damage caused by its policies and rhetoric. To them, most of us [White people] are expendable. Were Spartans deterred from defending their families and territories because the Persian army consisted of many slaves, mercenaries and those forced to fight? You’d have to be batshit crazy to lose sleep over people losing their lives while playing at least some kind of role in your demise. Not that I condone that type of killing, I just don’t give a shit about the lives of those who don’t give a shit about me.
I would also assume you don’t believe in handing over the keys to your survival and the survival of your family to a growing number of brown and black people who have an insatiable desire to “murder” White society. How confident are you that you are doing something adequate enough to counter their agendas? What if they are “Christian” black people? Are you okey dokey with them spreading their social experiments into your neck of the woods then? You sure as hell can’t vote your way out of this predicament, so what’s left?

 

Christ and Pop Culture on Ferguson and Racism

Alan Noble at Christ and Pop Culture posted an article yesterday that is actually a rebuttal to an article at Gospel Coalition by Voddie Baucham. I am linking to it because it has so much to offer in addition to the response to Baucham. Even though Baucham has been the victim of systemic racism, he relies on an explanatory framework which leads to a number of false dilemmas. I won’t review them all since Noble examines them well. Here is just one example from Baucham’s article:

I [Baucham] have been pulled over by police for no apparent reason. In fact, it has happened on more than one occasion. I was stopped in Westwood while walking with a friend of mine who was a student at UCLA. We found ourselves lying face down on the sidewalk while officers questioned us. On another occasion, I was stopped while with my uncle. I remember his visceral response as he looked at me and my cousin (his son). The look in his eye was one of humiliation and anger. He looked at the officer and said, “My brother and I didn’t fight in Vietnam so you could treat me like this in front of my son and my nephew.”

Again, this experience stayed with me for years. And for many of those years, I blamed “the system” or “the man.” However, I have come to realize that it was no more “the system” when white cops pulled me over than it was “the system” when a black thug robbed me at gunpoint. It was sin! The men who robbed me were sinners. The cops who stopped me were sinners. They were not taking their cues from some script designed to “keep me down.” They were simply men who didn’t understand what it meant to treat others with the dignity and respect they deserve as image bearers of God.

Baucham seems to see the problem in this situation as either sin or systemic racism. Can’t it be both? Systemic racism is sin but reframing what Baucham, and countless other African-Americans, go through as sin alone in some vague manner doesn’t help address the problem in the real world. Furthermore, racism exists in the church where everybody agrees sin is bad. Being against sin hasn’t kept white Christians from racism. Baucham’s analysis isn’t totally false, but it is incomplete and therefore unhelpful.

I have been in churches where everybody believed in sin but didn’t believe segregation and exclusion was sin. Unless the script to keep African-Americans down is named and confronted, nothing will change. The whites in the pews thought they were treating others with dignity but wanted the dignity to stay down the street at the black church.

As a teen, I sat in a church where white members didn’t want blacks to worship in the same building. In my hometown, I recall blacks being refused service at various establishments, including a bowling alley and swimming pool. When my father took over as principal at an integrated school, he was told that there were two sets of rules, one for the whites and one for the blacks. My dad’s answer: “Like hell there is! Not while I’m here.” My dad wasn’t an evangelical Christian but he did a very Christian thing without believing he was fighting sin in some theological sense.

Baucham calls the concept of white privilege “Gramscian” and “neo-Marxist.” This is stunning coming from someone who has experienced something because he is black that I have never experienced as a white man. I have never been stopped by police for reasons other than my conduct (i.e., my lead foot as a young man). I was never chased out of an establishment because of the color of my skin. I have never worried about my son being targeted because of the color of his skin. 

It is simply true that I have never experienced what many black men experience due to the difference in skin color. There is no virtue in dismissing a truth because it is unpopular with one’s ideological mates. Calling the concept of white privilege Marxist doesn’t make it false.

Noble closes with a hope that we can go deeper than an either-or analysis:

What Ferguson has demonstrated in a very public way is the deep divisions between the various ways that Christians understand race in America. While I am glad to see many in the evangelical church speaking out and having important conversations about race, we must be able to imagine a way forward which does not rely on an overly simple view of personal responsibility and causality.