Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Archive for the ‘intolerance’ Category

“Let Your Rage Fuel You”: Politicians and Pundits Embrace Rage Politics


By: Jonathan Turley | September 29, 2025

Read more at https://jonathanturley.org/2025/09/29/let-your-rage-fuel-you-politicians-and-pundits-embrace-rage-politics/

Below is my column in the Hill on the rise of rage politics. There was barely a respite from the rage rhetoric after the assassination of Charlie Kirk and the sniper attack on the ICE facility. Gov. Gavin Newsom is back this week to calling his opponents “fascists” while other Democratic politicians are back to calling ICE “fascists.”

Here is the column:

“Let your rage fuel you.” Those words from Virginia Democratic gubernatorial nominee Abigail Spanberger captured what I have called “rage politics” in America.

Across the country, politicians and pundits are fueling rage, encouraging voters to embrace it. If you turn on the television, you would think that Darth Sidious had taken over: “Give in to your anger. With each passing moment, you grow stronger.”

I do not think for a second that Spanberger supports violence. She was sharing with voters the “sage advice” of her mother, which she said she has applied in her political career. However, the anger is all around us.

Recently, I debated Harvard Law Professor Michael Klarman, who declared, “I am very angry” and “I am enraged.” In denouncing ICE as “thugs” and saying Trump supporters are “fascists,” Klarman explained that the rage had a purpose: “to shake people out of their insomnia.”

Rage, however, comes at a cost in politics. I recently wrote a book about rage and free speech, “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.” It discusses our history of rage politics and how it has led to violence and crackdowns. Rage gives people a license to say and do things that they would not otherwise say or do. It is addictive, it is contagious, and it is dangerous.

We are seeing the result of rage rhetoric all around us. That includes the assassination of Charlie Kirk and the sniper attack on ICE agents in Texas this week, in addition to violent protests around the country. Rage allows you to deny the humanity of those you disagree with. Recently, two sisters were caught on video destroying a memorial to Kirk. Kerri and Kaylee Rollo were later arrested. However, they immediately opened a GoFundMe site to call for donations for “fighting fascism” and Kaylee wrote “my sibling was fired from her job.” Hundreds of donors gave the sisters thousands of dollars as a reward for the latest such attack on a Kirk memorial.

For many months, some of us have warned that violent rhetoric was crossing over into political violence. Democratic politicians have spent months ratcheting up the rhetoric against ICE agents, who have suffered more than a 1,000 percent increase in attacks, including the recent sniper attack.

Gov. Gavin Newsom (D), the day before that attack, signed a law that purports to bar ICE agents from wearing masks in California. He openly mocked them, asking, “What are you afraid of?

Joshua Jahn answered that question the following day in Texas when he fired at ICE personnel, only to shoot three of their detainees.

Previously, Newsom had warned voters that Trump was building ICE into a personal army that might be used to suppress voting in the upcoming midterm elections. “Do you think ICE is not going to show up around voting and polling booths to chill participation?” he said.

Others added to the rage rhetoric by declaring the impending death of democracy and lashing out at ICE. Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas), who has used violent rhetoric in the past, declared that ICE agents were acting like “slave patrols” in hunting down immigrants in the streets.

Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz (D) used a commencement address to denounce Donald Trump’s modern-day Gestapo is scooping folks up off the streets. They’re in unmarked vans, wearing masks, being shipped off to foreign torture dungeons… just grabbed up by masked agents, shoved into those vans, and disappeared.”

Others, like Boston Mayor Michele Wu,  echoed the claims that ICE personnel are “Nazis” and called ICE Trump’s “secret police.”

The rage rhetoric (and claims of a fascist takeover) has been adopted by a wide range of Democratic politicians, often using the same catchphrases of an “authoritarian playbook.” In our debate, Professor Klarman warned that this was all “authoritarianism rooted in old-fashioned white supremacy.”

As discussed in my book, politicians and pundits have long sought to ride the wave of rage into power or influence. Rage is a powerful narcotic. The problem is when it becomes an addiction. There is always a certain percentage of the population that will believe such hyperbolic claims.

Those are the people who end up trying to kill jurists like Justice Brett Kavanaugh or politicians like Trump. It was also seen in the assassination of Democratic politicians earlier this year in Minnesota.

With the recent assassination and attacks on ICE, some are expressing regret. One of the most telling was Hillary Clinton on MSNBC, who said that we should “stop demonizing each other” while blaming “the right” for most of the hate. It was a curious call from a woman who called Trump supporters “deplorables” and suggested that they should collectively be forced into “deprogramming” as a cult. Just before the interview, Clinton had embraced the “fascism” mantra and, during the interview, she went right back to attacking Republicans.

new poll shows that 71 percent view political violence as a serious problem, but the rage rhetoric continues unabated.

The perfunctory calls for lowering the temperature after the latest shooting are unlikely to last. Key figures in public life keep injecting rage directly into the veins of American politics. It is hard to go “cold turkey” in breaking that addiction, but you first have to want to do so. There is no indication that our rage-addicts are anywhere near a step-program for recovery. If history is any measure, this fever will only break when voters clearly reject the politics of rage.

Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. He is the author of the bestselling book “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.”

Christianity faces being ‘wiped out,’ UK’s FoRB envoy warns amid intensifying persecution


By Anugrah Kumar, Christian Post Contributor | Monday, July 21, 2025

Read more at https://www.christianpost.com/news/christianity-faces-being-wiped-out-uks-forb-envoy-warns.html?utm_source=Daily&utm_campaign=Daily&utm_medium=newsletter

PIUS UTOMI EKPEI/AFP/GettyImages
PIUS UTOMI EKPEI/AFP/GettyImages

Christianity is at risk of being “wiped out” in parts of the world due to intensifying persecution, the United Kingdom’s special envoy for freedom of religion or belief, David Smith, has warned. The British government is now targeting 10 countries as part of its revised foreign policy focus to defend this human right.

Smith, the Labour Party MP for North Northumberland, made the remarks during a briefing at the Foreign and Commonwealth Development Office. A Christian who previously worked with Tearfund and the Bible Society, he announced a new plan to prioritize FoRB in countries where religious minorities, including Christians, Baháʼís and Ahmadiyya Muslims, face repression or violence, the Religion Media Centre reported.

Smith said the U.K. will focus on 10 countries, naming Vietnam, Algeria, India, Nigeria, Pakistan, China, Syria, Ukraine, Afghanistan and Iraq. He said these were selected because of the severity of need, the U.K.’s diplomatic ties and the possibility of making progress.

He added that persecution, carried out both by governments and social groups, can involve harassment by police, social ostracism, detention without cause, denial of citizenship, torture, attacks on places of worship and even killings, citing research by the Pew Research Center.

He cited recent data showing that 380 million Christians face persecution worldwide and warned, “Persecution on the basis of religion or belief, enacted by States themselves and social groups, is taking place on every continent in the world.”

Smith called the U.K.’s commitment “a new chapter” in foreign policy and said freedom of religion was interlinked with other liberties, including freedom of speech, conscience and assembly.

Of the 10 selected, only three — Nigeria, Pakistan and Afghanistan — are among the top 10 in the Open Doors World Watch List, which identifies countries where Christians are most severely persecuted. The worst offenders on that list, such as North Korea, Somalia and Yemen, are not among the U.K.’s current priorities.

Smith acknowledged the gap and said that countries like Eritrea and Yemen remain within his scope through ongoing advocacy. He stated that the strategy’s targeted nature does not prevent the U.K. from acting in other cases, including on behalf of prisoners of conscience.

He referred to the Ahmadiyya community in Pakistan, who are not recognized as Muslims by the state and whose mosques are often desecrated, and the repression of Baháʼís in Iran and Christians in North Korea.

FoRB, Smith explained, is not merely about religious belief but about the health of societies. “Religious intolerance and persecution can fuel instability and conflict,” he said. He added that protecting belief rights is crucial to preventing future crises, especially in countries grappling with war or sectarian divisions.

The U.K. government’s FoRB strategy involves five strands.

First, it aims to uphold international standards through bodies such as the U.N. and the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe. Second, it will embed the issue into targeted bilateral diplomacy, encouraging individual missions to raise FoRB in foreign capitals. Third, the U.K. will strengthen international coalitions working on religious freedom. Fourth, the Foreign Office will incorporate FoRB into its mainstream human rights programming. The fifth strand involves collaboration with civil society groups working on interfaith respect and awareness.

Speaking at the briefing, Lord Collins of Highbury, minister for human rights, said the U.K. has long believed that rights and the rule of law strengthen global prosperity and resilience. He said his office had already written to British heads of mission directing them to embed human rights, including FoRB, into all areas of diplomatic work.

He cited the recent release of two individuals — Nigerian atheist Mubarak Bala and Cuban Pastor Lorenzo Rosales Fajardo — as examples of successful British-supported advocacy.

“Only by working together can we build a world where everyone, everywhere, can live with dignity, free to believe — or not believe — without fear,” Lord Collins said.

In April, during a debate, Smith said Britain’s diplomatic stance is informed by its own history, moving “from persecution to pluralism,” which he said provides credibility to advocate abroad. He described the U.K. as “uniquely well placed” to act in support of religious liberty, citing its legacy of legal rights and peaceful pluralism.

The role of FoRB envoy was created following a 2019 report by then-Bishop of Truro Philip Mounstephen, which found that Foreign Office staff lacked awareness of global religious persecution. The report led to recommendations that religious freedom be formally integrated into U.K. foreign policy.

Smith argued that defending FoRB not only benefits persecuted communities but also those who engage in repression. He said FoRB could unlock new opportunities and freedoms for their nations to flourish, and reaffirmed his commitment to press the U.K. government to act.

Meanwhile, Christian Today noted that new research by Jersey Road PR has found that mainstream U.K. media rarely report on attacks against Christians globally.

“Hurtful to the Community”: Critics Force Removal of Republican Symbol from “Political Pattie’s”


By: Jonathan Turley | September 30, 2024

Read more at https://jonathanturley.org/2024/09/29/hurtful-to-the-community-critics-force-removal-of-republican-symbol-from-political-patties/

In a new sign of the intolerance of our Age of Rage, liberal activists in D.C. have forced a politics-themed bar in Washington, D.C., “Political Pattie’s,” to remove the GOP political symbol from its building. The GOP pachyderm will be packed away to protect the sensibilities of Democrats. The appearance of the elephant was too triggering for liberals and boycotts were being threatened.

According to The Washingtonian, “Political Pattie’s,” the red elephant was removed before the opening because it “was hurtful to the community.” No party symbols will be shown so that D.C. customers feel safe or at least satisfied in the space.

In a statement, owners Andrew Benbow and Sydney Bradford explained that “soon after our logo was painted on our building’s facade, we realized that the representation of the red elephant was hurtful to the community.” While both Benbow and Bradford support Vice President Kamala Harris in the 2024 election, they were hoping to encourage discourse and “promote unity,” according to Roll Call. Democrats would have none of it. They will also now repaint the word “Political” on the sign in blue to help maintain the apparent safe space for liberals.

The owners added “We view the online backlash that we’ve recently received to be mean spirited, especially considering our original and continued intent to be a space that is welcoming to ALL people, including members of the LGBTQ community.” Yet, they yielded to that threatened cancel campaign.

Roughly half of this country is Republican or conservative according to presidential voting patterns. Yet, many Democrats cannot tolerate even the inclusion of both symbols for the political parties. They will now be able to eat and drink in the same type of echo chamber where they receive news and discuss politics. The “hurt” will be gone with the reference to alternative viewpoints.

Tag Cloud