Home | About | Donate

Why Is the Radical Right Still Winning?

Why Is the Radical Right Still Winning?

John Feffer

Less than a month ago, the candidate leading in the polls in the Brazilian presidential election was a jailed ex-politician who technically couldn’t even run for office.


And then there is this sort of thing, along with Citizens United, comes the institutionalization of impunity in conflict of interest - fascist much?


We all know that white evangelical protestants are strongly for Trump, but I recently noticed polling showing other white protestants are about evenly divided in viewing Trump. More surprisingly, I thought, catholics held very negative views of Trump and the unaffiliated had extremely negative views of our Creep.

1 Like

Comparing Martin Luther with Trump is a travesty. Stop writing this nonsense please.


Yes, despite Trump and cult 45’s “drain the swamp” mantra, is there any family that has benefits more from the “swamp” culture (that cult 45 allegedly targets) than the Trump family has and does ?

Yes, the Clintons and others that Trump and cult 45 criticize DO benefit from “swamp” culture, but they are boutique players compared to Trump and his billionaire cronies.

Martin Luther, in contrast to Trump, was not wealthy, and a true populist, not a faux populist like Trump.


Either the people of the world have been dumbed down as much as US citizens, or the US has exported it’s large bag of dirty tricks for elections. Remember it matters who’s doing the vote counting and vote suppressing.

1 Like

There is a substantial body of thought that Protestantism arose in order create a form Christianity that was compatible with Capitalism - specifically through the Protestantism’s removal of usury as a sin, and Protestantism’s emphasis on grace (i.e. being “saved”) over physical acts of mercy.

And sure enough, the Wall Street Journal’s endorsement of Bolsonario is telling. This new, neo-fascist right populism, like Martin Luther’s movement did for nascent capitalism, is being used as a vehicle to usher in a new, savage, totally gloves-off form of capitalism.

Among the faith-based left, Catholics tend to dominate - perhaps second only to Jews, while except for Quakers, and some Mennonite sects, Protestants tend to be underrepresented in faith-based left-activism.

(Disclosure: the author of this is a non-practicing Catholic)


I wrote no nonsense. Your post is baffling.

1 Like

This is a slander on Martin Luther. You need to read some responsible historical writing on his life and beliefs.

Why are they still winning? They aren’t. They have the big money, though, and money controls everything including what we are told. They buy elections and own the software. The dollar and every other currency would have to crash before the people could get back the power. And, according to Nostradamus, that is exactly what is going to happen.


Martin Luther was a spot-on reformer of an incredibly corrupt religious system. He was not an apologist for capitalism; in fact he opposed usury which capitalism is based on. I suggest you read some responsible writing about Luther such as the biographies by Bainton and Metaxas. If you want to project Luther’s teachings into the future, read and study the writings of Karl Barth. Though Barth was a Reformed minister, his starting point was Luther, whose inspirations were St. Paul, St. Augustine, and the Rhineland Mystics founded by Meister Eckhart. Barth in his day was a social democrat of leftist leanings, sometimes called “Comrade Pastor.” To equate Trump with Luther or even to suggest that Luther was the founder of today’s neofascism is a slander. You can learn more by studying the writings of Barth’s American disciple William Stringfellow. The “Evangelicals” who support Trump are afflicted with the cancer of Dispensationalism. None of the above were proponents of those ideas. Rather you should seek for the roots of these apocalyptic teachings in Rabbinic Judaism.

There were signs of progressive teachings in the liberation theology of some Catholics a generation ago but these were effectively stamped out by John Paul II and his ilk.

I think you need to take a few steps back and review your premises. You cannot blame Trump, et. al., on Martin Luther.

Richard Cook

1 Like

People cannot even follow a thread and understand who said what or what the article’s topic is. Condolences.

Chill out with the defensiveness. What was written in the article and written in the comments was the long term EFFECTS of Luther’s reforms not any indication he somehow had capitalism in mind. Good grief.

1 Like

Trump is not a long-term effect of Luther’s reforms. Again, please do some research in the authentic sources.

Besides, Trump is not a nationalist. It’s fake, based on Bannon’s program of knee-jerk buzz words. These buzz words appeal to the delusions of the religious right. The religious right is as much Catholic as Protestant, if not more so. Chill out yourself with your attacks on Luther and with your defensive emails. You publish these broadsides and don’t expect readers to say anything or disagree with a single word? That’s pretty elitist.


I want to know whether Bolsonaro’s sudden surge much above what polls predicted, and perhaps many others of these wins, might have something to do with computerized voting systems. Why is this possibility almost never mentioned? That Bolsonaro and others like him indeed surge because of disgust with the status quo, resentful formerly privileged white males, etc but that isn’t enough to give them a WIN–just enough to disguise the vote theft that illegitimately puts these people in power. Also, the fact that the elite control essentially all corporate media but also the algorithms that control access to internet sites, and have individualized targeting systems, might be a factor. I just don’t find it credible that much of the Brazilian electorate says, “I want Lula. Can’t vote for him? Okay then, my next choice is Bolsonaro.”


I’d add that since Luther there has also been the work of Gustavo Guttierez and the Theology of Liberation, which, according to Guttierez, was a theology in support of “…rediscovery of love thy neighbor as the central axiom of Christian life”, and the “preferential option for the poor”.

Though well known in central and south America, it is amazing to me that the distortions of the ultra-right are not challenged with the simple clarity of the principles. It has taken decades for the Vatican to ‘vet’ the work of Guttierez and others, but in 2008 with the Conference of Aparecida, with the grinding of papal process, the final document was issued by Pope Benedict.

The Papacy does not recognize the term “Liberation Theology”, but it doers recognize all of the principles. To me this smacks of institutional survival strategies and results in precisely the fact that Liberation Theology, though aligned with the spiritual intent of the Christ, must be subservient to the institution and is not given the dissemination strength that could be placed by the Papacy.

You seem to not understand how a comment section works. You are replying the wrong things to the wrong people continuously.

Yes, Pope Francis recognized the leaders of " liberation theology " in S. America but said, " I’m not a Socialist ". The Catholic hierarchy is balancing universal outreach by " bullshittin’ the troops " , yet AGAIN. So your point is accurate as far as it goes, imo. FYI- they’re also a powerful worldwide business. They have banking, real estate, insurance, medical and fund investment interests around the globe. Shocking, I know. Right up there with gambling in Casablanca.
As to " the Thing ", a lot of his support comes from evangelical mega-churches who preach " the prosperity gospel " and have evidently found a rich vein of racist, homophobic rubes to mine in Brazil. Just like in America. Shocking, I know.
So it goes…
FYI- On Sundays I like to read the funny papers, listen to music after imbibing a goodly share of The Lamb’s Breath. It’s like going to church but sitting in much more comfy furniture, etc.


The thing is, I NEVER blamed Luther.

1 Like

“But a common denominator is nationalism.”

Conservatism is a common denominator that produces inequality, overpopulation, resource depletion, species extinctions, environmental pollution, anger, suspicion, superstition, racism, misogyny, nationalism, greed, dictatorship, authoritarianism, war, prisons, torture, militarism, lies, theft, murder, etc.

As John Feffer hints, conservatism afflicts both the right and the left. One answers to money, the other to power, much the same thing. Though the right is almost always conservative, the left is not always liberal as some believe.

Conservatism forms autocracies of right and left through bribes and threats to representatives. Representative government can’t be called a democracy, a government by, of and for all the people if it is ruled by the rich and powerful.

Direct democracy is highly immune to manipulation by outside forces.

1 Like