Oct 20, 2022·edited Oct 20, 2022Liked by Kristin Du Mez
I think the verse "out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks" (and the fingers tweet) fits here really well. They may be trying to drive outrage (because the twitter algorithms latch onto outrage and amplify it), but they're also telling us who they are. Yes it's apocalyptic to see large swaths of American Evangelicalism openly embracing nationalism as well as racism and misogyny. It's not necessarily new (as you outline in J&JW) but there was a period where they used to be a lot more quiet about it and many of the people in the pews weren't even aware of many of these issues. But now it's all out there and the folks in the pews are either going to be embrace it or some of them will decide that it's gone too far and leave.
As for engaging or not, I got completely off of twitter back in May. As I said above: the algorithms latch onto outrage and amplify it. They're doing what they're designed to do. Engaging on a personal, face to face level is probably more what we need to aim for. But maybe instead of directly engaging the purveyors of much of this darkness, we should instead be preparing our family, friends, congregations - inoculating people against the Overton Window-shifting that the Christian Nationalists are attempting.
An interesting and timely post for me. I was becoming troubled by the fact that it seemed I was seeing mostly snarky and condescending defense Tweets from you of late. As a small-town Midwestern boy, Dordt alum (1990) and former Infantryman now living in Florida, J&JW resonated deeply with me. However, classmates, friends, and family who I respect and cherish had very different reactions. Engaging them with snark and condescension may feel good in the moment but does nothing to sway their mindset. Upon further reflection, I am hoping that my reaction is due to the fact that I only see you “responding to the absurdities” on Twitter and that you are having thoughtful dialogue elsewhere with respectful critics. I am still wrestling with how I can influence my friends and family who lean more toward a gentler form of Christian Nationalism than embracing their Christianity and working to win hearts for Christ in a secular society.
I think it might be helpful to consider if there is a difference between snark and humor, and/or how each is employed. When people have personally attacked me in ways that are malicious and dishonest, I actually find that making light of things can defuse rather than amplify outrage. In a brush it off kind of way. It sends a message that yes, I see this, and yes, it's ridiculous, and no, I've got this and don't need 60k followers to go after them. That's generally how I employ humor/snark. Also I tend to think lots of things are funny generally, and tend to take a light approach to myself as well as to others, good or bad. If I do employ genuine snark, it's nearly always in a truth-to-power sort of way. I try to never do this against someone who isn't in a position of power and misusing that power. Not sure if that helps, but feel free to look back over my feed to see if this holds true.
I believe that the Twitter users attacking Kristin and others have an agenda that is not positive Christian witness. Rather, I believe there is a great deal of money and access to power that is the rocket fuel behind her detractors’ tweets. It’s not just “owning the libs”, it’s “numbing the normies” by constantly promoting discord. These players are deliberately trying to move the “Overton Window” to make the unacceptable palatable to the subculture. These tactics, while now high tech, because of social media, are based on ancient methods. More importantly, these actors are trying to unleash these ancient hatreds. The task at hand is to find effective methods to fight back against these evil forces. Humor is one method. Educating others of the dangerous tactics is a 2nd strategy. Lowering the number of engagements on these clowns’ Twitter feeds is another strategy. Already, one of the Wolfes is complaining about “losing” followers. Who knows if it’s true, but it can be effective to reduce engagements.
I think the verse "out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks" (and the fingers tweet) fits here really well. They may be trying to drive outrage (because the twitter algorithms latch onto outrage and amplify it), but they're also telling us who they are. Yes it's apocalyptic to see large swaths of American Evangelicalism openly embracing nationalism as well as racism and misogyny. It's not necessarily new (as you outline in J&JW) but there was a period where they used to be a lot more quiet about it and many of the people in the pews weren't even aware of many of these issues. But now it's all out there and the folks in the pews are either going to be embrace it or some of them will decide that it's gone too far and leave.
As for engaging or not, I got completely off of twitter back in May. As I said above: the algorithms latch onto outrage and amplify it. They're doing what they're designed to do. Engaging on a personal, face to face level is probably more what we need to aim for. But maybe instead of directly engaging the purveyors of much of this darkness, we should instead be preparing our family, friends, congregations - inoculating people against the Overton Window-shifting that the Christian Nationalists are attempting.
An interesting and timely post for me. I was becoming troubled by the fact that it seemed I was seeing mostly snarky and condescending defense Tweets from you of late. As a small-town Midwestern boy, Dordt alum (1990) and former Infantryman now living in Florida, J&JW resonated deeply with me. However, classmates, friends, and family who I respect and cherish had very different reactions. Engaging them with snark and condescension may feel good in the moment but does nothing to sway their mindset. Upon further reflection, I am hoping that my reaction is due to the fact that I only see you “responding to the absurdities” on Twitter and that you are having thoughtful dialogue elsewhere with respectful critics. I am still wrestling with how I can influence my friends and family who lean more toward a gentler form of Christian Nationalism than embracing their Christianity and working to win hearts for Christ in a secular society.
I think it might be helpful to consider if there is a difference between snark and humor, and/or how each is employed. When people have personally attacked me in ways that are malicious and dishonest, I actually find that making light of things can defuse rather than amplify outrage. In a brush it off kind of way. It sends a message that yes, I see this, and yes, it's ridiculous, and no, I've got this and don't need 60k followers to go after them. That's generally how I employ humor/snark. Also I tend to think lots of things are funny generally, and tend to take a light approach to myself as well as to others, good or bad. If I do employ genuine snark, it's nearly always in a truth-to-power sort of way. I try to never do this against someone who isn't in a position of power and misusing that power. Not sure if that helps, but feel free to look back over my feed to see if this holds true.
I believe that the Twitter users attacking Kristin and others have an agenda that is not positive Christian witness. Rather, I believe there is a great deal of money and access to power that is the rocket fuel behind her detractors’ tweets. It’s not just “owning the libs”, it’s “numbing the normies” by constantly promoting discord. These players are deliberately trying to move the “Overton Window” to make the unacceptable palatable to the subculture. These tactics, while now high tech, because of social media, are based on ancient methods. More importantly, these actors are trying to unleash these ancient hatreds. The task at hand is to find effective methods to fight back against these evil forces. Humor is one method. Educating others of the dangerous tactics is a 2nd strategy. Lowering the number of engagements on these clowns’ Twitter feeds is another strategy. Already, one of the Wolfes is complaining about “losing” followers. Who knows if it’s true, but it can be effective to reduce engagements.
Oh my God, truly, how strident, exploitive, perverse!
This is an excellent piece. It is prescient now for multiple reasons. Thank you so much for standing strong.