In this edition we're dissecting yet another Medusa Magazine article full of shit. I hear you asking what more this magazine could have possibly done. Well, they've now decided that the Holy Bible supports their campaign against Donald Trump. Surely they wouldn't drop to the level of shoehorning ancient texts into irrelevant issues would they? Ha, remember who we're talking about here.
______________________________________________________________________________
https://medusamagazine.com/a-message-to-christians-the-gospel-calls-us-to-resist-donald-trump
______________________________________________________________________________
Okay, what fucking Bible have you been reading? The term 'white supremacy' is used a total number of zero times in the Bible, yet alone becoming the fucking cornerstone in the teachings of Jesus Christ. Maybe I would be more inclined to believe you if there was at least some evidence from the source material, because I don't recall any stories from the Bible where Jesus comes into conflict with the Roman regime. I also get the impression that you want to lump all European colonisation into one unitary category of evil. This is plainly a reductive argument, as there's a stark difference between the Roman Empire and the later imperial powers of Europe that surprisingly the Bible doesn't explore in great depth. Still, apparently according to this totally reliable source Jesus calls for a resistance against Donald Trump, a democratically elected leader, and we're about to discover why. Oh boy am I excited for this one.
First of all I should point out that Palestine isn't a country, it's a historical region of Israel. It would also be incorrect to state that this area has ever experienced white 'pollution'. Not only is that statement racist, but it's also incredibly antisemitic and completely in denial of why there are so many white people residing in today's Israel. Turns out that denying historical evidence is your go to move. You see Judea has been invaded by many different races, including the Assyrians, who butchered the rebelling kingdom. There's also been colonisation by various Islamic Caliphates that conquered the region, and probably most famously the Mongols who virtually destroyed those Islamic caliphates by butchering them. But yeah, it's definitely just white pollution that's ravaged the area. At some point you're going to have to admit that your argument is based on your racial prejudices rather than being a serious historical discussion, because there is no way that solely blaming white colonisation is reflective of the truth.
I'm really not too sure what all this has to do with resisting Donald Trump. It may well be a quaint, if reductionist view of the period when Jesus was alive, but absolutely none of it is in any way relevant. Oh no my mistake, this isn't a quaint history lesson and actually some Afrocentric bullshit that follows the zany logic that all black people are descended from Kings. In my funny little world I always imagined Jesus was the son of God, not some descendant of African royalty, which by that logic means I must be black considering I'm a descendant of the first homo sapiens from Southern Africa. I'm not quite sure you're aware of what being a royal descendant involves, but assuming Jesus was black requires evidence that the two individuals are actually related. Even then, that still doesn't necessarily mean Jesus was black, and you have no evidence to suggest otherwise. I'm also not quite sure how being the son of God means you're actively being oppressed. You know this sort of identity politics is fucking stupid when the son of God is apparently under systems of oppression from people such as the white beggars of Judea.
Then we move on to the issue of colonisation in the Bible, which has absolutely nothing to do with Donald Trump. Apparently the Roman Empire was evil because of illegitimate and unnatural methods of colonisation. Firstly, as I've already explained, colonisation is not something exclusive to the white race, and secondly what fucking difference does it make if colonisation isn't natural or legitimate? I wasn't aware the Roman Empire was a feudal monarchy or a wild population of animals, so why is this even relevant to the discussion? More importantly what has this got to do with Donald Trump; a democratically elected leader, who the last time I checked was actively trying to stop this process of colonisation by building walls.
Also, to fact check you once again, I don't believe Jesus ever referred to himself as the 'King of the Jews', and this spitting in the face of white occupiers is pure fantasy. Unless you have evidence to counter my argument, I'm fairly confident in saying that Jesus never actively opposed the Romans, and even in the face of death accepted their rule and sovereignty. It's certainly true that the Romans did love to kill Christians, but just a few hundred years later the Romans wold also convert to Christianity, which is strangely forgotten in this lopsided historiography. Simply stating the Bible is anti imperialist without any evidence is just a meaningless statement.
Again, what a lovely yet completely inaccurate anecdote that's also not relevant. You have a whole fucking book to source from and yet you can't even give me one quotation to support your argument. Turns out the Gospel also thinks you're a fucking liar. I'm struggling to recall this biblical tale where Christ destroyed capitalist structures, so would greatly appreciate a reminder of what fucking universe this bullshit occurred in. I would say this is becoming a literal translation of the Bible, but it would be more accurate to say this is an inaccurate and fantastical translation. I should remind you that the Bible is a holy book, and not a fictional novel.
Whilst I would certainly agree that America views itself as the pinnacle of Western civilisation in the modern world, I believe it to be completely nonsensical to compare the vastly different Roman and American methods of government. The age of empires is long gone, yet you want to hold the America of today to those same values. I guess this is what happens when you start shoehorning religious texts into your political beliefs. I still have no idea how any of this relates to Donald Trump, a democratically elected leader. The Bible never claims Donald Trump is an illegitimate leader, and to simply state that any white invaders are illegitimate is just naive considering invading other countries has been the cornerstone of human civilisation since the dawn of time. In your warped logic no human has a right to any land. Even the Bible has stories of invasions, so what the fuck are you going on about? There's just no point to be made here, and you don't help yourself with just how poorly your whole argument is structured. If Donald Trump has no right to be in power over America then what right do your African kings and queens? Oh wait, it's purely skin colour isn't it? The last time I checked Africa wasn't in America, so surely by declaring yourself monarchs you would be illegitimately colonising America yourself. May I also add that this all comes from the same author who wanted to forcefully abort all white children, so she has no fucking right to start lecturing me about Christian values and standing against oppression.
Honestly this is like the rhetoric of a fanatical religious cult. It's honestly quite frightening that some people actually think like this. It's certainly not an argument based on religion, but rather political ideologies. It's a blatant misrepresentation into the meanings of a holy book written thousands of years ago to loosely tie these thoughts into the current events of today. I leave you with a quote from Matthew chapter 5:
“You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbour
and hate your enemy.’ But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you"
No comments:
Post a Comment