From The Author Of SC&A: Charlie Johnson’s War

An extended period of a heavy workload has precluded me from serious blog posting for the last few months. While my workload has not decreased, the state of affairs on the right side of the blogosphere merits serious attention.

Charles Johnson of Little Green Footballs has been under increasing assault for the past few months. Some conservative bloggers are upset at what they perceive is the  ‘new’ editorial positions his blog has staked out, reflecting positions that are increasingly in conflict with their own.

It is my opinion that Johnson is being unfairly targeted.

To be clear, Johnson doesn’t need me to defend him. He is quite capable of defending himself. There are those who have serious differences with him and others who have made their adversarial relationship personal. It is not my intention to determine the motivations of his critics.

Charles Johnson has remained a force in the blogosphere because he is intellectually consistent. His positions have not changed or wavered. Remarkably, he has managed to aggravate the entire political spectrum, no small feat. Even his harshest critics (on either side) cannot dismiss him or the influence his blog has because when all is said and done, his arguments are relevant to his supporters and detractors.

It is my intention to explore some of Johnson’s opinions and ideas.

In a recent conversation, a fellow psych blogger remarked Johnson’s focus on evolution/creationism was becoming a ‘distraction’. I responded that I thought the conversation was not distracting and in fact, was necessary. I also said that I agreed with him. My friend was somewhat curious, noting that I was a believer in God. I replied that I saw no conflict between faith and science and I understood where Johnson was coming from.

Creationism is is predicated on certain assumptions and unlike evolution, has yet to stand the same real scientific scrutiny and analysis. Until such time as creationist theories are subject to the same scrutiny as has the science of evolution, those creationist theories cannot be afforded the same or equal status to the theories of evolution. While Darwinist based theories  may at times be imperfect, it is clear that evolution offers us a clearer picture in how we understand our world than does creationism. That is no threat to religion or faith. For believers, God’s Creation is a profoundly magnificent endeavor. Evolution can be a part of the Great Design.

Johnson does not and has not denigrated believers. It is also just as clear that Johnson’s stance on evolution is predicated on keeping religion out of the classroom, where it has no place.

Suppose a few schools in predominantly Muslim school districts wanted to serve up the Islamic creation story (replete with references to sons of pigs and apes as God willed) as opposed to the very familiar and shared Judeo-Christian version we all know.  How would Jewish or Christian believers react? Further, proponents of creationism increasingly insist their beliefs have social and political consequences- and they insist that those with dissimilar views are not unlike some of the most murderous regimes of the last century. Do we want our schools to reflect that same kind of Madrassa type schooling? The question isn’t moot. More and more, different religious ideologies are finding their way into school textbooks and curriculum. Is that what we want?

Let’s keep it closer to home and a little more real.  Jews reject Christ as the messiah and Christians regard Jews as unredeemed and unsaved. We may speak of each other in the most glowing terms (because it suits us at the moment) but when you get right down to it, dogma and doctrine rule the day. Fidelity to faith is the clearest rejection of moral relativism. While today we might be talking about creationism, suppose tomorrow we venture into religiously based morality? Suppose that religiously based morality were to include religions that are not sympathetic to Christianity or Judaism. How do you suppose those conversations might go?

Charles Johnson’s position on is creationism  right and unequivocal- and believers of all stripes and faiths ought to be most grateful. Religion based education of any kind has no place in our schools. We can teach morals and ethics without specific religious overtones and that is certainly something we ought to be doing. It is unfortunate that in our zeal to remove all religious dogma and doctrine influence from schools, we have gone overboard in excoriating all forms of religious expression.  Johnson does not criticize Christmas trees, creches, menorahs or other religious symbolism. His argument is with religion based instruction.

This is America. Forced religious instruction, cultural mores and tribalism are antithetical to everything this nation stands for.  Millions of immigrants came to these shores precisely because they and their children would not be indoctrinated. Why there so many people in this country who insist we must become a monument to mediocrity, no different from the very nations with whom we take issue, is a mystery.

Johnson reminds us that in a free society we do not care about your beliefs. We do care about your actions and your behavior. Your beliefs are your own and we really don’t care what you believe. Do not tell us we need to care about your beliefs and your concerns above all else and above our own concerns and beliefs.

Johnson makes clear if and when you make those assertions, you will be resented and marginalized- not for your beliefs but rather because you attempt to jump to the head of the line. You are not more important than anyone else by virtue of what you believe. It is our actions and willingness to live and let live that has distinguished America and Americans form other nations. We cannot force beliefs down anyone’s throat, no matter how well meaning.

American conservatives and members of the Republican Party are not beholden to the religious Right. The Republican party is not an exclusive club with strict admission policies. The party of Lincoln was inclusive and tolerant, not exclusive and strident. That lesson is of no small import. There are Muslims who say that Lincoln was a Muslim- and they are serious. Why should their claim be taken less seriously?

Johnson is often taken to task as being ‘soft’ on radical Islamism, an idea that would be hilarious if his critics weren’t so earnest.

In the curious world of the blogosphere, the more outrageous and egregious a story of radical Islamism is told, the more credible the story teller becomes. Authors want to whip their readers into a frenzy and expect other bloggers to validate their ever more radical ideas, beliefs and even conspiracy theories and join the anti Muslim parade. After all, everyone loves a parade, right?

Charles Johnson doesn’t do parades.

Islam will not be eradicated from the face of the earth and Muslims in America and Europe will not all be deported or summarily shot.

Not all Muslims are terrorists and not all Muslims support terrorism. Those who are sympathetic to terrorists are unfortunate and ignorant wretches, no different than that portion of the American population who believed Black Americans were lessers and were sympathetic to southern slave owners, or those European Christians who regard Jews as lessers and turned a blind eye to anti semitism and the Holocaust, or the Kahanists who advocate the elimination of the Palestinians (and Arabs) who refuse to recognize their God given rights, etc., ad nauseum and ad infinitum.

Johnson will not be a party to the shrill and frenzied calls from some quarters of the blogosphere. Some of those calls are well meaning to be sure. Sometimes Johnson may misread some of his critics as they misread him. He makes no apologies for his position. He is suspicious of the background of many of those involved in the European anti Islamist movement, and with good reason. Many of the political figures and parties he excoriates have less than savory backgrounds and there is good reason to believe that some of these figures and parties have adopted more palatable positions and ideologies for reasons of expediency only. Given the nature 0f the political beast, he is standing on firm ground. The onus of proof of sincerity lies on those politicians, not on those who question them.

Nevertheless, it is also clear that some of Euro politicos of whom Johnson is so suspicious may in fact be on the up and up. The rise of European Islamism has had an profound effect on whole segments of the population, not unlike the events of 9/11 had profound impact on many liberals and progressives in this country. In the same way those of us that are right of center made room for them, we have to acknowledge that there are some in Europe who may have found the way into our camp. Great saints often began life as great sinners. That truth is best not forgotten.

Glenn Beck derisively referred to Charles Johnson as a ‘Jazz musician’, as if somehow, that was an insult. In fact, that is a compliment of the highest order.

It has been said that Jazz is really the story of America, that playing those improvised notes in relation to and in response to the music is in fact the story of our sucess as a nation. We are never bound to the notes on the page and are always at our best pushing the envelope and coloring outside the lines. Charles Johnson and Little Green Footballs are examples of what we do best. We challenge ourselves, we challenge others and we challenge the status quo.

Charles Johnson possesses great passion for this nation. More importantly, he is a fierce defender of every citizen of this country, irrespective of their beliefs. He may be brash, he may be confrontational and he may even be wrong sometimes but in the end, he is an enemy to none, save those who would trample those things we hold dear.

When the history of bloggers is told, his story and fierce efforts to make us better citizens of this great and inclusive nation will be remembered.

The rest of us should be so fortunate.