hate groups

[pieces o nine]

These people don't deserve capital letters for the topic discussing them.



There is a family group traveling around this area, stuffing Klan recruitment cards into the merchandise in a wide array of local businesses. They've been caught and expelled from some (including the entire mall) but I didn't know about it until a distressed customer brought me a handful of cards which had been jammed into the art books and tablets she had been browsing. When I informed my boss he laughed it off dismissively with a *very* strangely worded response that *sounded* as if he supported them.

I know him well enough to guess that this was his (poor) attempt at frustrated humor; but it left me quite gob-smacked for a moment, with the customer standing in front of me waiting for a response from the other ed of the store phone. If I didn't know him as well as I think I do, I would have taken his weird statements about "the rights to free speech" and "they are my friends, after all" at face value. Other employees either found the cards independently or had upset customers hand them over, and we discussed it amongst ourselves until he broke down and made an announcement after closing that he knew about it and had received an epistle (my term, not his) from corporate that we were to just throw them away. Also, if we found anyone stuffing these noxious PoS into merchandise (again, my term, not his) we were to inform a manager who would "politely request that they leave the store".

Really?

That's it?




How about *telling* them to get out and not come back. Calmly and coldly.

How about joining with the other business owners/managers in placing an ad in the local paper that the undersigned most emphatically do *not* support this and will not tolerate hate group harassment on their premises. Maybe the paper could go crazy and discount or even donate a full page to do this.

How about a non-sensationalized bit on the news with PSA-type advice on what to do if approached by these people. (Don't over-react, don't allow yourself to be provoked into 'assaulting' *them*, etc.)

How about a bit in the sermon from local pastors about the incompatibility of hate groups and 'real' Christianity.

Because silence in a red-state area like this, with a population intellectually and culturally isolated and pandered to by Faux News and Tea Partiers, silence in the face of hate group incursion is not the way to "ignore" them into going away.

It implies consent.

[Swatopluk]

Maybe post a note to customers: This shop does not support the Klan or similar organisations. Any related material has been placed by third parties without knowledge or consent of owners, management or personnel of this shop.

[Sibling Zono (anon1mat0)]

How about a bit in the sermon from local pastors about the incompatibility of hate groups and 'real' Christianity.

[snip] silence in the face of hate group incursion is not the way to "ignore" them into going away.

It implies consent.

I had a similar argument with my evangelical mom, she claims that not all Xtians are fundies and that not all Xtianity can be labeled as fundies because of them, but how often do you see/hear them making clear that that isn't xtianity? In the best cases, the people that do, do so reluctantly only after being questioned about it, usually with a circumspect look that could be embarrassment or some sort of closeted support.

Funnily enough I have heard far stronger reactions from some muslim clerics regarding fundamentalist Islam, than priests and pastors regarding fundamentalist xtianity.

[Griffin NoName]

Silence does seem to imply agreement. Swato's idea is good.

[Scriblerus the Philosophe]

How about a bit in the sermon from local pastors about the incompatibility of hate groups and 'real' Christianity.

[snip] silence in the face of hate group incursion is not the way to "ignore" them into going away.

It implies consent.

I had a similar argument with my evangelical mom, she claims that not all Xtians are fundies and that not all Xtianity can be labeled as fundies because of them, but how often do you see/hear them making clear that that isn't xtianity? In the best cases, the people that do, do so reluctantly only after being questioned about it, usually with a circumspect look that could be embarrassment or some sort of closeted support.

Funnily enough I have heard far stronger reactions from some muslim clerics regarding fundamentalist Islam, than priests and pastors regarding fundamentalist xtianity.

Ah, well, I kind of agree with her, having known Chatty.

I think there are a couple parts to that answer:
a) Fundies isolate themselves, socially and religiously, from non-fundies. Quite a number of them act like cults (because, well, they are) in that they discourage people from having contact with former friends and family who are not part of their organization. When a preacher has something to say about fundies, they're not talking to fundies or even people who necessarily know folks like that.

b) That annoyingly over evolved persecution complex Christianity as a whole often carries? is multipled by a factor of ten in fundies. Any criticism of them is interpreted as a dire threat to their existence and ad hominem attacks on their person. It's hard to debate or denounce people like that, because they will respond with a nuke.

c) Congregations and pastors who are not in fact fundies may still have common interests with those who are, and it's a bad idea to talk shit on your allies, in potential or otherwise.

Maybe post a note to customers: This shop does not support the Klan or similar organisations. Any related material has been placed by third parties without knowledge or consent of owners, management or personnel of this shop.

This. Quick, easy, professional.

[pieces o nine]

Maybe post a note to customers: This shop does not support the Klan or similar organisations. Any related material has been placed by third parties without knowledge or consent of owners, management or personnel of this shop.

This. Quick, easy, professional.

Except we can't.

No notes! No way, no where, no how, except those Officially Printed and Sent Out from corporate. Apparently we *are* allowed to tell customers we are so sorry and are trying to find and dispose of the cards.

Meanwhile, the sounds of implied-consent-silence from the community as a whole. My quote marks on 'real' Christianity were an homage to 'No True Scotsman' earlier, even thought I also meant it. I think there is a natural affinity for the go-along Repubs to become NeoCons, then Tea Partiers, then birthers, then hate group supporters if no one they see as [authority figure] suggests that there is a saner way.



Back in Wisconsin, 'decent' people didn't politely feign blindness and deafness when the John Birchers came around. Of course, Wisconsin [used to be] a progressive Blue State, so perhaps that was a silly comparison.   

[Scriblerus the Philosophe]

LAEM.



Also, I forgot:
d) there are fewer and fewer non-crazy fundie churches and the ones that still exist have less and less influence overall.

[Sibling Zono (anon1mat0)]

But if that is right, regardless of what the decent ones like Chatty, and the few vocal Jesuit priests remaining, they do consent, they really want to go back to that idealized old time when god & country were the law of the land.

It becomes harder and harder not to see them as the enemy. 

[Scriblerus the Philosophe]

I  unapologetically see them as the enemy. They want to strip me, and people in general, of our rights and liberties. That makes them my enemy, end of story.

[Bob in a quantum-state-of-faith]

I have to agree with Scrib, here.... these people want to rewrite the constitution.

They have already begun in Texas, with re-writing school history books to fit their own warped (and imaginary) world-view.  As Orwell observed in 1984 if you control history and what people think it is (regardless of what it actually was), you control the people themselves.

If people are conditioned to the lie that the constitution is a 'christian document' then it is easy to convince them that it was a mere oversight on the part of the "christian founders" to have left out forced-conversion to xianity.  And so it gets modified as such.

There are folk out there both clever enough, and driven enough to try exactly that.

And I think it is not only moral, it is mandatory to see them as an enemy-- for they would strip away all other rights except for those they approve of.   And what was formerly voluntary?  Is either forbidden or mandatory.

[Sibling DavidH]

I'm with Scrib.  In general they're not as powerful here as in the US - yet - but in the medical field they're a huge roadblock, which is very likely to affect me before too long.

[pieces o nine]

I must reluctantly agree about churchianity being a real enemy and a real threat at this stage of our history.


Close to home again, V was raised 'unchurched' and was quite amused by even my 'backsliding' affiliation back in the day. When her son was born she joined a local crazy, far-right fundy group which confused me until I realized that it was roughly the same unthinking excess she had enjoyed before, just 180 degrees off. In some respects, not much of a stretch to accommodate. It took her years to shake them off completely, during which time our friendship remained intact, albeit sometimes strained and distantly  cordial. Some of their thinking still surfaces whenever she is confronted by people who do not and will not conform to her comfort zone. Example: a troublesome co-worker does not stand at über-patriotic attention during the daily Pledge Of A Legions* ritual. This just chaps her posterior and she refers to it furiously as due to his atheism. (NB: I do not like him either) but I always challenge this statement with a reality check on the non-correlation between opting out of voluntary public loyalty oaths and opting out of theistic worldviews. This shifts her anger to me, although I hear the muttered assertion of atheism=treason a lot less these days.

But I suspect she still thinks it is true, based on knee-jerk assertions regarding a "Christian Nation" blah blah blah.




~  ~  ~  ~  ~  ~  ~  ~  ~ 
*  I saw this in an [illiterate] indignant post on a message board once, and thought it was hilarious. 

[Bob in a quantum-state-of-faith]

But I suspect she still thinks it is true, based on knee-jerk assertions regarding a "Christian Nation" blah blah blah.

Re: "christian nation"  obviously there are the various diaries and personal notes from the Constitutional framers which prove this silly.  But just as obvious, these documents are ignored by True Believers^tm.

Lately?

I've started asking these people the following question:

Do either of the words, "God" and/or "Jesus" exist anyplace in the US Constitution?   Answer-- no.

If you remove either "God" or "Jesus" from all Christian literature and documentation (including the Bible), can you honestly say they are still 'Christian'?  No.

In short-- without the ideas of both "God" and "Jesus", Christianity no longer has any meaning¹, and becomes just another secular philosophy.

Since the US Constitution lacks both "God" and "Jesus" in all aspects of it's creation, it is not a christian document-- it's secular.

........

My argument has been met with some acclaim, mostly by either thoughtful theists and/or unbelievers.  The fundies simply ignore it, or tell me 'Yer gonna HELL²'.  


##################

...  during the daily Pledge Of A Legions* ritual.



~  ~  ~  ~  ~  ~  ~  ~  ~ 
*  I saw this in an [illiterate] indignant post on a message board once, and thought it was hilarious. 

Love it!

I've also seen it thusly-- a pretty accurate rendition if today's events are considered:

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation divided by God, indivisible, with liberty, and justice for all.


#################


__________________________

<sub>¹ from their limited perspective.  I've met self-proclaimed christians who have rejected all the supernatural fluff, and try to abide by the purely positive secular/moral ideas as they see them.

² yet again.</sub>

[Opsa]

To answer the original question of what to do, I like the idea of writing an anonymous letter to some local papers in regard to these unwanted pieces of propaganda.

Or pose this politely to your corporate headquarters (again anonymously if necessary): What if everyone started putting junk into your books? Wouldn't that constitute tampering with the merchandise? What if the books were full of other groups' messages, from Al Queda to Mary Kay Cosmetics? Where does it end? Why not make a policy about this before it gets out of hand?

[Griffin NoName]

I'm with Scrib.  In general they're not as powerful here as in the US - yet - but in the medical field they're a huge roadblock, which is very likely to affect me before too long.

I'd be interested to hear more about how this might affect you David (since I have extensive need for the NHS myself).