This is yet another moment in which a member of the activist media makes you wonder whether they are stupid, or if they simply believe their audiences are stupid.
In this episode, an alleged journalist made a rather ridiculous claim about the concept of natural rights and nationalism in America and got thoroughly wrecked on social media for it.
Alleged journalist Heidi Przybyla, during an appearance on MSNBC, claimed that the notion that our rights come from God and not from the state is a hallmark of supposed “Christian nationalists” in America, a pejorative label she attempts to distinguish from those who are simply Christian.
The one thing that unites all of them because there is many different group orbiting Trump, but the thing that unites them as Christian nationalists, not Christians by the way, because Christian nationalist is very different, is that they believe that our rights as Americans, as all human beings don't come from any earthly authority. They don't come from Congress, they don't come from the Supreme Court, they come from God.
Here @MSNBC helpfully makes it clear their disdain for Christians in America.
— Wade Miller (@WadeMiller_USMC) February 23, 2024
She says that if you believe that your rights come from God, you aren’t a Christian, you are a Christian nationalist.
Somehow they seem to not mention that our own founding documents make this… pic.twitter.com/WTLMqcqTzg
Przybyla’s inane comments and her subsequent doubling down on social media reflect a broader trend among progressives in which they apply certain labels to their opposition to demonize them and portray them as dangers to society or even democracy. The term “Christian nationalism” is one of several labels Przybyla’s ilk uses to smear those who are right of center. Others include the term “stochastic terrorist” which is intended to imply that those who disagree with the left are indirectly inspiring political violence. Like the word “racist,” the left doesn’t actually believe their opponents fit his bill, but they use the term anyway as a political tactic.
The term refers to a psychological phenomenon in which someone carries out a violent act against an individual or group due to harsh rhetoric directed against an individual or group. The rhetoric is not necessarily inciteful in nature – there are no outright calls to violence. But the idea is that the words used to demonize other folks can create an environment in which someone might be motivated to physically assault others.
The most popular example leftists are using to apply this term to conservatives is the fracas over the FBI raid of former President Donald Trump’s home. Democrats and their comrades in the activist media have resorted to shaming Republicans into silence when they dare to question the FBI’s investigation and the motivation for the raid by claiming their criticism of the Bureau will inspire violence.
The bottom line is that the Founding Fathers, many of whom were not Christian, much less Christian nationalists, established that our “inalienable” rights were granted to use by our Creator, not government officials. It is a concept Americans on both sides of the aisle have espoused over the nation’s history.
The danger in the type of rhetoric employed by those like Pryzbala lies not only in its tendency to misinform its audience but also in its capacity to divide. By using the Christian nationalist label on such a wide swath of Americans Pryzbala seeks to marginalize and vilify certain segments of the population. The term is not intended to foster understanding of various belief systems, it is to delegitimize and dehumanize those who are not firmly on the left.
Unfortunately, this does nothing to further political discourse; using these labels only makes it harder for Americans to engage in productive political conversations, which seems to be the point. If folks on the left view those on the right as threats and vice versa, it only makes it easier for the powers that be to continue growing their influence at our expense.
