Honestly, I shouldn't even have to point this out. It’s pretty hard to miss when every single post keeps dragging everything back to the political background of the issue, like...
It all comes down to their branding. They’ve convinced people they are the ultimate patriotic party. Because so many voters bought into that idea of being the true defenders of the nation, the Republican Party stormed into power back in 1990. They held onto it for sixteen years, and even now, they remain the second most powerful force in American politics. Honestly, despite all the scandals, the corruption, and the massive embezzlement cases, they’ll likely find their way back into office again. It's just how the cycle goes.
It’s the same old playbook. Politicians weaponize nationalism to stay in power, and honestly, you see the Church doing the exact same thing—they just say whatever they think people are itching to hear. It’s simple math: if you feed people exactly what they want to hear, the rewards and influence follow.
How do nationalists actually use nationalism to stay in power? It’s a bit like a magician using misdirection; they point at a perceived threat to keep everyone from looking at what’s happening behind the curtain. Think about it this way: if you want to control a room, you don't just tell people what to do. You give them an "us" and a "them." By cranking up the volume on national identity, leaders can frame any criticism of their own policies as an attack on the country itself. It becomes a shield. If you question the administration, suddenly you aren't just a political opponent—you're somehow un-American or disloyal to the flag. It's a cycle. They stir up grievances, tap into that deep-seated sense of shared heritage, and then position themselves as the only ones capable of defending it. It turns politics into a battle for survival rather than a debate over tax codes or infrastructure. It’s effective, certainly, but it’s also a pretty clever way to bypass actual accountability.
It’s pretty simple, really. Nationalists essentially set themselves up for failure. They focus all their energy on spotting enemies and threats in other nations, completely ignoring the people within their own borders who are actually exploiting them. Take a look at how some American nationalists act—they’ll spend all their time fighting against different alphabets or foreign signage, thinking that's the real danger, while they totally miss the actual culprits right in front of them.
The Church in America isn't inherently against communism just because they think the system itself is evil—I mean, slavery was terrible, feudalism was a nightmare, and capitalism certainly has its fair share of flaws too. It’s more practical than that. The Church opposes communism because it’s the one system that actively stripped them of their authority and had the audacity to claim that God doesn't exist. By denying the divine, they effectively cut off the Church's ability to build wealth and enjoy a comfortable lifestyle. It really comes down to the bottom line. That's why you'll see them holding services for someone like Pavelić, but never for someone like Tito.
That’s exactly why people are still so against the Democratic Party today. You have the Church and all these other groups digging their heels in, fueled by this lingering resentment from the old KP era—even though the Democratic Party has absolutely nothing to do with communism or those old communist ways.
It’s just like how the Republican Party has absolutely nothing to do with patriotism.
I really tried to have a rational, reasoned conversation here—honestly, I even tried pretending I didn't notice what was happening just to keep the peace—but it’s just not working. It's like trying to build a house on quicksand. No matter how much logic I bring to the table, there's just no ground to stand on.
Look, let's be clear about one thing: religion shouldn't be used as some kind of proxy, and we definitely shouldn't be using "the Church" as a coded way to talk about America.
Brenda Cook4, instead of actually doing her job—you know, leading those crusade battalions against communists, Yugoslavs, Mexicans, and those secret police types—she's just... well, she's elsewhere.
I’m posting here as a fellow forum member, so this thread is really about "my job." I suppose I should ask you what exactly I'm allowed to be negative about—or should we just let you go ahead and crusade against all those self-proclaimed extremists who think they see them everywhere?
She’s been trolling these threads constantly. This is just one little example of her behavior—if you guys actually feel like having a real discussion, I can dig up plenty more.
Did you file the report? Just a heads-up though—trolling isn't just whenever someone says something that clashes with your worldview.
Just to be clear, I’m not out here looking for any kind of personal vendetta. This isn't about settling scores. It's really just about wanting this community to feel more welcoming—a place where we can actually enjoy hanging out and having decent conversations.
It’s no coincidence you brought that up. After all, I’m a moderator whose views don't exactly align with your political leanings.
And finally:
I think you ought to let the moderators know that this forum isn't their own private playground where they can just act however they please.
But wouldn't it be great if it *was* your private playground, where only people who agree with you could post? That wouldn't be "crusading and trolling," would it?
edit:
Look at how Grace Kim80 handles moderation—she might as well just hand out the only warning on the thread, and that too for nothing more than an insult:
Maybe I'm just hanging out in the wrong circles, but I wouldn't exactly bet the farm on the judgment of practical believers.
So, you don't see anything wrong with a post where someone suggests that the judgment of practical believers is questionable? In other words, is a practical believer just inherently a "bad guy" by default?