Is it OK to refer to MAGA by name?

[Grace]

Second of all, I have not been throwing labels around like you have in snarky ways. So the burden rests with you to prove that you, in fact, practice what you say you want everyone else to do, which is to stop with the negative labeling of "the other side".

I am certainly not saying that we should not point out problems, including major problems, with the world views of political movements. Especially political movements that are infiltrating Christianity and sometimes dividing Christians. In fact, I think doing that, from a Kingdom perspective, is important. But I do think we should focus on Kingdom of God versus various political movements, not on which political movement is "the right one" for Christians.

I am trying to find a descriptive label that you do not consider snarky. Can you suggest one? Or is MAGA really the best descriptive label? It does seem to be the label they use most frequently to describe themselves. They sell merch that has that label.

First paragraph, we are told to focus on the Kingdom of God versus various political movements and not on which political movement is "the right one" for Christians.

Second paragraph the question is raised, asking for a descriptive word to "label" the MAGA "political movement" other than MAGA.

Can't say I saw such a contradiction in two short paragraghs and all in one post.

[Bootstrap]

First paragraph, we are told to focus on the Kingdom of God versus various political movements and not on which political movement is "the right one" for Christians.

Second paragraph the question is raised, asking for a descriptive word to "label" the MAGA "political movement" other than MAGA.

Can't say I saw such a contradiction in two short paragraghs and all in one post.

We definitely talk past each other sometimes.

First, I think that you and a LOT of other people are constantly harping on LOTS of political movements. But you seem to be allergic to actually discussing MAGA. Why is that political movement different from all other political movements on earth? Why is it the only one we cannot criticize?

And I would prefer to simply use the name MAGA. Some people seem offended by that. I have asked if they have an alternative to offer. So far, the responses seem to indicate that MAGA is not to be named or criticized. That doesn't seem right to me. Especially when it seems that MAGA is playing a big role in redefining what Christianity looks like to the society around us, and sometimes even within our churches.

Does that clarify what I was trying to say?

[temporal1]

boot:
We definitely talk past each other sometimes.

You often appear to be “talking past yourself,” trying so diligently to call to Kingdom thinking, then immediately flipping into TDS; Sam Harris would be proud. For others, it causes mental whiplash.

If everywhere you go, you encounter the same tired feedback, it might indicate there’s confusion within.

[Grace]

First paragraph, we are told to focus on the Kingdom of God versus various political movements and not on which political movement is "the right one" for Christians.

Second paragraph the question is raised, asking for a descriptive word to "label" the MAGA "political movement" other than MAGA.

Can't say I saw such a contradiction in two short paragraphs and all in one post.

We definitely talk past each other sometimes.

First, I think that you and a LOT of other people are constantly harping on LOTS of political movements. But you seem to be allergic to actually discussing MAGA. Why is that political movement different from all other political movements on earth? Why is it the only one we cannot criticize?

And I would prefer to simply use the name MAGA. Some people seem offended by that. I have asked if they have an alternative to offer. So far, the responses seem to indicate that MAGA is not to be named or criticized. That doesn't seem right to me. Especially when it seems that MAGA is playing a big role in redefining what Christianity looks like to the society around us, and sometimes even within our churches.

Does that clarify what I was trying to say?

In your prior post we were told to focus on the "Kingdom of God versus various political movements". Yet, then we were asked for a descriptive word for the political movement MAGA. You can criticize the MAGA political movement all you want. However don't come back and tell the rest of us we should be focusing on the Kingdom of God and not political movements.

I agree that we need to focus on the Kingdom of God more and not identify with political movements. However I do not think those who are focusing on a political movement, should be telling others not to.

And I have discussed MAGA. The acronym Stands for Make America Great Again. It represents millions of people who believe in a good economy, low inflation, strong borders, affordable housing, energy independence, no proxy war, etc.

[Neto]

First paragraph, we are told to focus on the Kingdom of God versus various political movements and not on which political movement is "the right one" for Christians.

Second paragraph the question is raised, asking for a descriptive word to "label" the MAGA "political movement" other than MAGA.

Can't say I saw such a contradiction in two short paragraphs and all in one post.

We definitely talk past each other sometimes.

First, I think that you and a LOT of other people are constantly harping on LOTS of political movements. But you seem to be allergic to actually discussing MAGA. Why is that political movement different from all other political movements on earth? Why is it the only one we cannot criticize?

And I would prefer to simply use the name MAGA. Some people seem offended by that. I have asked if they have an alternative to offer. So far, the responses seem to indicate that MAGA is not to be named or criticized. That doesn't seem right to me. Especially when it seems that MAGA is playing a big role in redefining what Christianity looks like to the society around us, and sometimes even within our churches.

Does that clarify what I was trying to say?

In your prior post we were told to focus on the "Kingdom of God versus various political movements". Yet, then we were asked for a descriptive word for the political movement MAGA. You can criticize the MAGA political movement all you want. However don't come back and tell the rest of us we need to focus on the Kingdom of God and not political movements.

And I have discussed MAGA. The acronym Stands for Make America Great Again. It represents millions of people who believe in a good economy, low inflation, strong borders, affordable housing, energy independence, no proxy war, etc.

My outsider's understanding of it is that the basic idea or philosophy is "America First". My impression is that that's fine as a political ambition, but it doesn't mesh with Kingdom life. (But then no kind of politics does, in my opinion. Now I'll butt out of the politics section. Admittedly a sort of "hit & run" action. )

[GaryK]

Second of all, I have not been throwing labels around like you have in snarky ways. So the burden rests with you to prove that you, in fact, practice what you say you want everyone else to do, which is to stop with the negative labeling of "the other side".

I am certainly not saying that we should not point out problems, including major problems, with the world views of political movements. Especially political movements that are infiltrating Christianity and sometimes dividing Christians. In fact, I think doing that, from a Kingdom perspective, is important. But I do think we should focus on Kingdom of God versus various political movements, not on which political movement is "the right one" for Christians.

I am trying to find a descriptive label that you do not consider snarky. Can you suggest one? Or is MAGA really the best descriptive label? It does seem to be the label they use most frequently to describe themselves. They sell merch that has that label.

If you are going to keep admonishing everyone else to be more Christlike in their responses to "the other side" and then not practice it yourself, people are not going to take you seriously. The inconsistency is what I'm trying to point out. It's easy to pick up when you are being snarky. And when you do that, it is no different than what I read and hear left-leaning media and congressional Democrats say about "the other side".

Now if you decide to stop admonishing everyone else to be more Christlike in their responses to "the other side" then I really don't care what you label "the other side". To me it's not about finding a term that I do not consider snarky. Politics has always been snarky.

The inconsistency in what you say versus what you practice on MN is evidence to me that it really is pointless to discuss earthly politics from a Christian perspective. Jesus could never have been an earthly politician because His Kingdom is not of this world. IMO, politics cannot be made Christian, so why try?

[Jazman]

The inconsistency in what you say versus what you practice on MN is evidence to me that it really is pointless to discuss earthly politics from a Christian perspective. Jesus could never have been an earthly politician because His Kingdom is not of this world. IMO, politics cannot be made Christian, so why try?

You're right that Jesus never was nor could be a politician... but he did discuss political things, all the time. It's one reason, maybe among many, that the religious leaders hated Him so much. He addressed their political ambitions which they often veiled in religious/God talk. (kind of like today). You're right, that "politics cannot be made Christian", but Christians are allowed to, in fact called to, address politics, in a 'christian' way and from a Kingdom of God point of view.

[Bootstrap]

The inconsistency in what you say versus what you practice on MN is evidence to me that it really is pointless to discuss earthly politics from a Christian perspective. Jesus could never have been an earthly politician because His Kingdom is not of this world. IMO, politics cannot be made Christian, so why try?

You're right that Jesus never was nor could be a politician... but he did discuss political things, all the time. It's one reason, maybe among many, that the religious leaders hated Him so much. He addressed their political ambitions which they often veiled in religious/God talk. (kind of like today). You're right, that "politics cannot be made Christian", but Christians are allowed to, in fact called to, address politics, in a 'christian' way and from a Kingdom of God point of view.

In fact, when we do not do this, I think politics has a tendency to take over churches. It certainly did that in Nazi Germany. I think I have seen that happen to MC-USA on the left and to the Southern Baptist Convention on the right.

Two-state theology has been an important foundation for Mennonites, both the Sattler and the Marpeck variety.

[Valerie]

We definitely talk past each other sometimes.

First, I think that you and a LOT of other people are constantly harping on LOTS of political movements. But you seem to be allergic to actually discussing MAGA. Why is that political movement different from all other political movements on earth? Why is it the only one we cannot criticize?

And I would prefer to simply use the name MAGA. Some people seem offended by that. I have asked if they have an alternative to offer. So far, the responses seem to indicate that MAGA is not to be named or criticized. That doesn't seem right to me. Especially when it seems that MAGA is playing a big role in redefining what Christianity looks like to the society around us, and sometimes even within our churches.

Does that clarify what I was trying to say?

In your prior post we were told to focus on the "Kingdom of God versus various political movements". Yet, then we were asked for a descriptive word for the political movement MAGA. You can criticize the MAGA political movement all you want. However don't come back and tell the rest of us we need to focus on the Kingdom of God and not political movements.

And I have discussed MAGA. The acronym Stands for Make America Great Again. It represents millions of people who believe in a good economy, low inflation, strong borders, affordable housing, energy independence, no proxy war, etc.

My outsider's understanding of it is that the basic idea or philosophy is "America First". My impression is that that's fine as a political ambition, but it doesn't mesh with Kingdom life. (But then no kind of politics does, in my opinion. Now I'll butt out of the politics section. Admittedly a sort of "hit & run" action. )

I understand where you are coming from. However the President or leader of any country is supposed to protect his own country first imo. In fact, by so doing thT nation or country is stronger then and is in more of a position to help others. Let's just take the border crisis. Trump has repeatedly contended for "legal" entry I to our country. It is for the protection of all. We have a legal system in place for this for good reason. That is not selfish. It is wise. It is careful. ALL kinds of harmful & evil people are mixing in the crossing and they're coming from many countries through the masses. We have been dealing with the vastly increasing deaths from illegal drugs. We know there are terrorists looking for opportunity. We k ow there's potential for many to be harmed. Trump was sick of the border CRISIS to continue ue.

Personally, I do not expect Mexico's president to have a Christian attitude & put us before his own country, do you?

The border crisis is just ONE of the many issues.

In 1976 i had an Ecology class teacher say "America is a lifeboat, but if a lifeboat takes on too many it will sink" That stuck with me.
MAGA fits- being "Great" means we need to clean up our act in an abundance damce of ways, to restore some values. People may disagree on which values. Everyone e agrees we need to do better.

[Bootstrap]

Now if you decide to stop admonishing everyone else to be more Christlike in their responses to "the other side" then I really don't care what you label "the other side". To me it's not about finding a term that I do not consider snarky. Politics has always been snarky.

Could you be specific about what you mean by "snarky"?

I can't tell if you are talking about something specific that I am doing or how you feel about me when I post things that are critical of MAGA. On many, many subjects, I feel like what I am trying to do is:

1. Ask what the question is
2. Ask what evidence is there
3. Try to apply the same standards to each political side
4. Stick with the subject
5. Avoid personal fights
6. Keep asking how the Kingdom of God should view this, stepping outside political identities

When I do that, I often get the feeling that you are trying to find some fault with me that you can push, changing the subject to "what's wrong with Bootstrap". I am trying not to do the same to you or others. In general, I think it's best to keep reminding each other to return to the subject and keep it based in fact, not trying to tear the other person down. Not gloating over someone who fails to do this, not rubbing it in their face, not trying to turn the crowd against them. Just helping each other talk about subjects reasonably, as Christians.

I hear a lot of vivid descriptions of emotions people imagine me having and things the imagine I must think. I often don't recognize those things in myself. It feels like gaslighting. It feels like turning your critics into enemies to shut them up. In general, MAGA media seems to specialize in this approach to people who are strongly against MAGA - they are portrayed as haters, irrational, people who don't care about America. And I sometimes suspect this is rubbing off in the way people respond to me. I think this is one of the reasons that churches are dividing over MAGA.

Now, it's quite possible that I'm not doing that as well as I imagine, but in light of what I have experienced, I need you to be specific so that i can tell if you are gaslighting me or pointing to something real. So if you have specific behaviors you want me to focus on, please do be clear. But not endlessly, in every thread, let's explore it here.

One example: you really disliked it when I used the term Trumpies. In this thread, I am asking you what term to use. And it feels like you don't want to let me have a term I can use to refer to MAGA at all. Shrug. At that point, it doesn't feel like there's any term that I can use without offending you.