Friday, December 27, 2019

Enemies - Real or Manufactured - are Evangelical Christian Currency

Eddie Hyatt
Eddie Hyatt is a Christian Nationalist with books to sell, enemies to create and American history to revise.
via YouTube
Eddie Hyatt is a prolific polemicist for conservative Christian outlets. Hyatt seems possessed of the notion that his relevance is defined by the enemies of his constituency. It might be personification of the LGBT Agenda™, secuarists, The Left, socialists, Democrats, George Soros … the list is endless. Friday, the enemy is those who are supposedly waging The War on America's Christian Heritage.

Mr. Hyatt is a Christian nationalist. And he has a book to sell. Apparently Hyatt's enemy is not only pernicious but very well organized:
A major battle strategy of the secularist left is to redefine America by rewriting and reinterpreting her history and thereby making her vulnerable to radical change.
Does the above sentence make any sense at all? “[B]attle strategy?”

The enemies are in league with Karl Marx:
Cut off a people from their past, and they can easily be molded into something very different. This is what Karl Marx was referring to when he said, “People without a heritage are easily persuaded.”
In other words, enemies, who don't really exist, have a strategy, that doesn't really exist, to effect a goal that doesn't really exist of those enemies who do not really exist.

You can add the venerable New York Times to the enemies list.
A glaring example of this crusade to rewrite America's past is the New York Times' 1619 Project. Supposedly begun to commemorate the arrival of the first African slaves on American soil in 1619, their website reveals their real and sinister motivation. Their stated goal is to "reframe" American history by insisting that 1619, not 1776, represents the nation's true founding. They assert, therefore, that America is racist and corrupt at its very core and in need of fundamental change.
Hyatt does not provide a supporting link to the Times so I will. The “stated goal” is a tad different from Eddie Hyatt's assertion:
The goal of The 1619 Project is to reframe American history by considering what it would mean to regard 1619 as our nation’s birth year. Doing so requires us to place the consequences of slavery and the contributions of black Americans at the very center of the story we tell ourselves about who we are as a country.
Hyatt claims that the Times is “insisting.” The word the Times uses is “considering.” Rather than sinister, the American story is one of progress. Our progress has not been complete — nor perfect. Recently we have gone from an African-American president to an occupant of the Oval Office with racist tendencies.

We cannot make our history go away. Our heritage includes slavery and the ethnic cleansing of Native Americans. Who we are as a country includes things that we are not proud of. For 250 years we actually owned other people who could be put to work, beaten, raped or even murdered on a whim. 50 years from now our history will include the sociopathy of Donald J. Trump.

Hyatt is prepping his audience for his book which is based on a mythical happening in 1726:
Their thesis is flawed, however, because they have chosen to ignore what happened between 1619 and 1776.
Actually they have not ignored that period of time. Mr. Hyatt is ignoring the printed work of the project.

A salient quote offers Hyatt the opportunity to link to his book. In addition to enemies these blowhards always seem to have books to sell:
And commenting on the demise of nations in world history, Carl Sandburg, winner of two Pulitzer Prizes, wrote:
When a nation goes down, or a society perishes, one condition may always be found; they forgot where they came from. They lost sight of what had brought them along (Hyatt, 1726: The Year that Defined America, 11).
So the whole point of creating the enemies is to reframe American history so that it coincides with Hyatt's book?

Nevertheless, Sandburg makes a good point; one that Hyatt is incapable of appreciating. Most of us know our history. It includes what we did right and what we did wrong. We have learned from our mistakes. Carl Sandburg continues with (emphasis added):
The hard beginnings were forgotten and the struggles farther along. They became satisfied with themselves. Unity and common understanding there had been, enough to overcome rot and dissolution, enough to break through their obstacles. But the mockers came. And the deniers were heard … And men whose forefathers would go anywhere, holding nothing impossible in the genius of man, joined the mockers and the deniers. They lost sight of what brought them along.
Rinse and repeat:
In her book, The Rewriting of America's History, Catherine Millard documents just how pervasive is this crusade to rewrite America's history. She points out that it is being carried out, not only in the rewriting of textbooks, but also in the rewriting and reinterpretation of national monuments. She writes:
It is happening through the rewriting and/or reinterpretation of America's historical records: in our national parks, monuments, memorials, landmarks, enshrines, and churches. In some cases, changes are subtle, and in others, blatant. It's done through removal of key historic pieces that do not support the current ungodly bias (Hyatt, 1726: The Year that Defined America, 9-10).
Ms. Millard writes books but lacks real academic credentials. She is the founder of Christian Heritage Tours. Millard is on par with Christian nationalist David Barton. And, yes, that is another (deleted) link to Hyatt's book. The next three paragraphs are Hyatt's own book review of Hyatt's book with more links.

Eventually Hyatt concludes:
If the America of Washington, Jefferson and Lincoln is to survive, we must remember our heritage. The needed change is not going to come as a result of a new church program, a new church crusade, a bigger and better choir, a new cathedral or the next election. It will come as we remember 1726 and cry out to God, "Do it again, Oh Lord!"
Hyatt writes “1726” 13 times. What happened to the supposed war?


Related content:



No comments:

Post a Comment

Please be civil and do NOT link to anti-gay sites!

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.