There has been a great deal of speculation as to the effect of the Palin nomination on female voters.  While few expected the hoards of Hillary supporters to flock to Palin (due to the abortion issue), there was an expectation that there would be some response among women; and to some degree there has (read here for an example of the discussion).  However, there has also been a heated debate among Feminists.  I find this debate fascinating because it is, in many ways, right where I live.

Socialist (Gramscian) Neo-Marxism and the “Gender” issue

One of the issues underlying the current debate is philosophical assumptions that dominate the modern American landscape.  I don’t think the average Evangelical has a clue as to the scope of Neo-Marxist thinking in our culture.  For example, as I have conversations with black Christians who adamantly support Senator Obama (which is virtually every black Christian I know), I always ask why (especially in light of his support for black genocide, i.e. abortion).  The response is almost universal.  “This is a monumental step for black people,”  they say, as the look at me incredulously wondering what planet I live on.  Then I ask, “What about Justice Thomas and Dr. Rice?”  The response here is not ‘almost’ universal, it is absolutely universal, “They’re not really black.”  Unless you are black, you may not understand that response.  However, blackness in many ways is defined less by skin color than by the view that blackness is about oppression, victimization, and the struggle to overcome.

Similarly, the current philosophical landscape views women as a victimized, oppressed class struggling to overcome.  Ironically, women are often referred to as “minorities” in America even though they actually outnumber men!  Hence, a woman like Governor Palin is viewed as a non-woman in much the same way Clarence Thomas and Condi Rice are viewed as non-black.  I have lived with this stigma most of my adult life.  My barber calls me and my family “white” because he knows that I am a political and theological conservative.  In fact, most of the black people I know (including my own family) would consider me non-black because I am not a socialist, or Gramscian neo-Marxist (though they would never use those terms).

She’s Not One of Us

South Carolina Democratic chairwoman Carol Fowler summed up the current philosophical quandary well when she said, “The selection of an opponent of abortion rights would not boost McCain among many women.” Fowler knows what we have all come to understand.  Being pro-woman --according to the Gramscian, neo-Marxist construct that dominates modern political thinking-- means being pro abortion.  Why?  Because women are oppressed.  They must have control over the one thing that social engineering cannot change; they must control whether or not they will have children (thus the contraceptive boom in the first half of the 20th century and the abortion boom in the latter half).  And once they have those children , they must control whether or not the children will be allowed to interfere with their career goals (thus the “affordable daycare” boom).

Sarah Palin is a lot of things liberals hate.  She is a staunch supporter of the Second Amendment,  she is in favor of drilling in ANWAR, she even supports the violent sport of hockey (Praise the Lord!).  However, none of that is necessarily a problem.  What women on the left cannot do is give up on abortion.  Ironically, those on the left who chide conservatives for being so-called “single issue voters,” turn out to be much the same.  Also, notice the terms they employ in the abortion debate, “A woman’s right to choose.”  Hence, abortion is cast as a ‘women’s rights’ issue.  Forget the women who don’t get to be born because they are slaughtered in their mother’s womb!  This is about Marxist class warfare (read here for an accessible discussion of Gramscian Marxism).

The Palin Dilemma

The Palin pick presents a dilemma for conservatives and liberals in a number of areas.  Chief among them is the abortion debate.  We all see the problem liberals have.  How do you attack a woman as being anti-woman, or not understanding the issue (especially in light of the recent birth of her son, Trig)?  I must admit I am waiting with bated breath to see what Biden does in the VP debates.  However, few see the trap conservatives have set for themselves.  Conservatives gleefully watch liberals squirm, but instead of ‘beating them at their own game,’ we’ve just acknowledged the superiority of their rules.  We have agreed with them that abortion is about a woman’s right to choose by touting Palin’s ‘decision’ to have Trig, and her daughter’s “tough decision” to go through with her pregnancy.  We’ve agreed with them that it takes a woman to understand the issue.  We’ve agreed with them that this is a pragmatic question as opposed to a theological and philosophical one.  And we’ve agreed with them that the real battle is a battle for cultural hegemony.

Many people have been asking, “Where are the men?”  They want to know why there weren’t strong male candidates ready to step into the fray.  What do you think the press would be saying right now if Senator Palin were a man? Better yet, what do you think will happen the next time the Democrats or the Republicans put up an all white male ticket?  To the Dems it will mean “We’ve taken a step backward.”  To the Republicans it will mean  “We didn’t really mean it in ’08.”  From now on national politics will look like the nightly news.  There will be male/female  teams and black/white teams, not because of the quality or qualifications of the individuals involved, but for fear of being called sexist, racist, or fascist (or for fear that the other guys will have a minority or woman trump card).  People are already arguing that Obama missed a chance to ‘cancel out’ the Palin pick with Senator Clinton!  Welcome to Antonio Gramsci’s beloved cultural hegemony. 

As I experience character assassination, misrepresentation, marginalization and even threats of bodily harm, I continue to be driven by a desire to call my brothers and sisters away from the quest for victory long enough to think more deeply about what is really at stake.  I have been both encouraged and challenged lately on a number of levels by, The Courage to be Protestant, by David Wells.   His comment on ‘culture,’ and how evangelicals approach it are incredibly insightful.  Wells writes:

“In the last two or three decades evangelicals have discovered culture.  That actually sounds more flattering than I intend.  I would welcome a serious discussion about culture.  We should be exploring what it is and how it works, rather than just looking at polls to see what is hot.  A serious engagement with culture, though, is not what most evangelicals are about.”

“What they want to know about culture is simple and easy to unearth.  They want to know what the trends and fashions are that are ruffling the surface of contemporary life.  They have no interest at all in what lies beneath the trends, none on how our modernized culture in the West shapes personal horizons, produces appetites, and provides us ways of processing the meaning of life.  All of that seems like pretty complex and useless stuff.  Pragmatists to the last drop of blood, these evangelicals are now in the cultural waters, not to understand what is there, but to get some movement.  They are there with their surfboards trying to get a little forward motion as each tiny ripple makes its way toward the shore.“ (David Wells, The Courage to be Protestant, Eerdmans, 2008, emphasis added)

Wells is spot on.  As I look at the cultural landscape, I’m afraid we’ve missed it again.  We’re so worried about ‘winning this one’ that we haven’t stopped to think about what we’re losing in the process.  We have no idea that we’ve enshrined the Gramscian Marxist quest for cultural hegemony, thus signaling the success of a diabolical system which ought to make us sick.  I don’t fault people for being excited about McCain’s pick.  From a public policy perspective it gave Christian conservatives someone with whom we could identify in this race (McCain is definitely not that on his own).  I just hope we understand that what we need is a cultural overhaul, and the gospel (not this ticket) is the only answer. 

Therefore, we must not silence or compromise the gospel in an effort to “beat Obama at any cost.”  The Gramscian Marxists know that their success is guaranteed regardless of who wins this one.  What’s worse, their cultural hegemony is so complete that most Christians don’t even know what is happening.  Hence, my goal with these posts goes far beyond a mere election.  I to win the culture, by the grace of almighty God. 

VB