Showing posts with label elections. Show all posts
Showing posts with label elections. Show all posts

Monday, October 01, 2018

Evangelicals Represent the Greatest Conservative Force in the Brazilian Elections


Evangelicals Represent the Greatest Conservative Force in the Brazilian Elections

By Julio Severo
After the U.S. Big Media, including the right-wing Fox News, said that Brazilian evangelicals are a powerful conservative influence in the elections (see the report: Evangelicals Can Put a Right-Wing Candidate in Brazil’s Presidency), now is Europe’s turn. Reuters, a London-based service that was the first international news service in the world, has published the headline “Brazil’s evangelicals say far-right presidential candidate is answer to their prayers.”
In this Sept. 2, 2018 photo, evangelicals raise their hands in prayer as they listen to a song during a service at the Assembly of God Victory in Christ Church in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. (AP Photo/Leo Correa)
Besides, Deutsche Welle, of Germany, said in a headline “Brazil’s growing evangelical movement to shape election.”
Why do evangelicals have huge conservative impact in the Brazilian elections, but not in the European elections?
The explanation may come from an uncommon source: Marilena Chaui, a Brazilian Marxist philosopher. She stated in 2016 that the main opposition to socialism in Brazil is the Prosperity Gospel, known in Brazil as Prosperity Theology. What is destroying the left-wing hegemony in Brazil is, as she said, a “day-to-day, meticulous operation that has been done in the ideological realm to convince people through the Prosperity Gospel…”
So it is no wonder that the main leader leading evangelicals in the political conservative wave in Brazil is Silas Malafaia, an Assemblies of God minister who has espoused important tenets of the Prosperity Gospel. The Assemblies of God is the major evangelical denomination in Brazil.
Neo-charismatics, or neo-Pentecostals, are the overwhelming majority of the conservative leaders among evangelicals in Brazil.
Because Europe has an overwhelming majority of Protestants who are Lutheran and Presbyterian, there is no such conservative force in elections or in their internal battles to halt socialism and other evil ideologies in their midst.
In Brazil the traditional Protestant churches suffer the same spiritual malady. The Evangelical Church of Lutheran Confession in Brazil (ECLCB, the largest Lutheran denomination in Brazil) adheres to Liberation Theology and its Protestant version, Theology of Integral Mission, similar to the Social Gospel. The Presbyterian denominations in Brazil have for decades embraced, in a lesser or larger measure, Theology of Integral Mission, loved by many of their ministers, including Caio Fábio, a former minister who was a Presbyterian superstar who eventually got involved in sex and political scandals with powerful left-wing leaders.
While Pentecostals and mainly neo-Pentecostals are recognizing the evils of socialist administrations in Brazil, the Lutheran church remains recalcitrant. In fact, the president of ECLCB has sent a letter to all Lutheran ministers in Brazil threatening to sue any Lutheran member who shares my articles denouncing Liberation Theology in his denomination.
The Catholic Church in Brazil is not much different from the Lutheran denomination. Its most prominent leaders do not support conservative candidates.
By conservative I mean stances against the homosexual agenda, abortion and supportive of life and family. Socialist candidates, even when they are Catholic or Protestant, have a hard time to embrace such stances.
Over one year ago, The Nation, the oldest progressive magazine in the United States, had already recognized the conservative impact of Brazilian evangelicals in a headline titled “Amid Crisis in Brazil, the Evangelical Bloc Emerges as a Political Power.”
The Prosperity Gospel is a neo-Pentecostal theology imported from the United States, the largest capitalist and Protestant nation in the world. Even though there may be some exaggerations in its teaching, its basic message is that the source of health, prosperity, job, marriage and happiness is God, while progressives, both Protestants and Catholics, tend to believe that government should be such source, and Christian Marxism (Liberation Theology, Theology of Integral Mission, Social Gospel, etc.) exerts its pressure to make the government to be a provider of people’s needs, despising God’s role as the ultimate Provider.
Rodrigo Constantino, a Brazilian conservative writer, published an article titled “Democracy and the Prosperity Gospel,” written by Claudir Franciatto, who said,
“While the large part of the Brazilian society that is not evangelical restricts itself to call ministers, bishops and apostles of neo-Pentecostal (charismatic) churches ‘thieves’… [those ministers, bishops and apostles] are bringing to Brazil — secretly and imperceptibly — certain ‘Anglo-Saxon spirit’ of courage, pioneerism and positive individual attitude, which shaped a nation like the United States. This spirit was and is very necessary.”
Franciatto added,
“Neo-Pentecostal ministers do not stimulate members to pray and remain sitting on their pews, but to act — within and outside the church.”
This action outside the church is largely conservative and capitalist.
The Catholic Church, ECLCB and other traditional Protestant denominations in Brazil hate much more the Prosperity Gospel, which is not embraced by them, than they hate Liberation Theology and Theology of Integral Mission, which are embraced by them. They prefer any other option, including occultist, than facing an evangelical reality different from their particular “evangelical” delusion.
Yet, who is leading the conservative revolution in Brazil are not Catholics or traditional Protestants. Neo-charismatics, or neo-Pentecostals, are leading it.
Even though Brazil is the largest Catholic nation in the world, the Catholic Church has not the conservative force that neo-Pentecostals, who inherited such force from the United States, have to stem the socialist tide in Brazil.
Venezuela may be a hard lesson to Brazil. With a population 96% Catholic and a Catholic Church largely supportive of Liberation Theology, Venezuelans elected about 20 years ago socialist Hugo Chavez, who promised to take care of their needs. He promised to turn the Venezuelan government in the provider of the Venezuelans’ needs. Today, Venezuelans are starving. If Venezuela had a significant neo-Pentecostal population, they would resist the socialist revolution embraced by the Venezuelan Catholic Church.
The reality in Latin America is: the more Catholic a nation is, the more socialist or inclined to socialism it is. Cuba, Bolivia and Venezuela have all a common denominator: a massive Catholic population. In the Cuban case, they had a massive Catholic population during the communist revolution in the 1950s. Even today, Cuba is largely Catholic: 85% of its population is Catholic.
As the Latin American example shows, Catholicism seems naturally to facilitate socialism. So it is not hard to understand why in the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s while the KGB supported the Catholic Church, the CIA supported Pentecostal movements.
In Brazil Catholics are now some 60% of the population and evangelicals, whose overwhelming majority is Pentecostal and neo-Pentecostal, are some 30%.
If Brazil were 96% Catholic as Venezuela is, the Brazilian people would be starving under socialism.
Other difference is sensitivity to pro-life and pro-family values. For decades, the Catholic Church, backed by the Lutheran and other traditional Protestant churches, has consistently supported socialism in Brazil. Pentecostal and neo-Pentecostal churches supported it — but much inconsistently —, because of the bad influence of former Rev. Fábio. Yet, when neo-Pentecostals saw socialists in the government advocating abortion and homosexuality, they changed course. Meanwhile, the Catholic Church, the Lutheran Church and many Presbyterians did not learn from their sins: They have largely kept their course loyal to socialism even after they saw their favorite socialists promoting abortion and homosexuality.
The Catholic Church and ECLCB have never learnt from their bad experiences with socialism. Meanwhile, neo-Pentecostal televangelists learnt the hard way. But they did.
In spite of the neo-Pentecostals’ weaknesses, especially in theology, Brazilians should praise God for neo-Pentecostals and the Prosperity Gospel they brought from the United States. They are saving Brazil from the socialism of Catholic Venezuela and the secularization of Europe, where its traditional churches, both Catholic and Protestant, are powerless to resist evil forces.
This is the difference of neo-Pentecostal churches: They seek power from God and use it to influence the society. They do it while antagonized by socialists, secularists, Catholics and traditional Protestants.
It is this power that the Big Media in Europe and in the United States is seeing in action right now in Brazil.
This power is in action even in the United States, where President Donald Trump, who was brought up as a Presbyterian, has as his advisers Paula White and other adherents of the Prosperity Gospel. In fact, the same evangelical power that helped Trump in the United States is helping Jair Bolsonaro in Brazil, even though he is a Catholic. Evangelicals are now the dominant conservative power in the United States and Brazil. And the same left-wing forces attacking in the U.S. elections are also attacking in the Brazilian elections.
If Bolsonaro is going to win or not, I do not know. But I know for sure that in the next elections, in the next years, the evangelical power will be increasingly bigger, including in politics. Brazil is going to have, sooner or later, a neo-Pentecostal president.
Where traditional Protestants and Catholics are failing badly and even losing to socialism, secularism and occultism, charismatics are advancing and conquering, even in politics. I do not agree with everything of their theology, but I cannot deny that they are impacting positively where no one else is having similar impact.
Thank God for charismatics, Pentecostals and neo-Pentecostals and their love to seek God’s power and spiritual gifts!
Recommended Reading:

Friday, September 21, 2018

Facebook is building a “fake news war room” inside its headquarters to fight against conservative information during the upcoming US and Brazilian elections


Facebook is building a “fake news war room” inside its headquarters to fight against conservative information during the upcoming US and Brazilian elections

By Julio Severo
In a report titled “Facebook is building a ‘fake news war room’ inside its California headquarters to co-ordinate its battle against the spread of misinformation during the upcoming US and Brazilian elections,” DailyMail said, “Facebook officials are ramping up their efforts to stop the spread of ‘fake news.’”
It is very easy to identify what Facebook considers fake news and misinformation: conservative views.
Conservatives have been Facebook’s favorite victims for censorship.
When there is almost no one complaint from the left-wing Facebook users of censorship of their views, complaints from the conservative movement are widespread.
“Google and Twitter and Facebook, they’re really treading on very, very troubled territory and they have to be careful. It’s not fair to large portions of the population,” President Donald Trump said last month, according to Fox, noting that his administration has “literally thousands and thousands of complaints coming in” about the tech companies’ practices.
There is pro-left bias and anti-conservative bias on Facebook. Last year, for example, Facebook hired Joel Benenson, a chief adviser to Barack Obama and the chief strategist of Hillary Clinton.
What Facebook is promising now is more censorship of conservatives, especially in their free choice to use Facebook to spread their conservative ideas. Such pressure is provoking a result: 1 in 3 conservatives have left or considering leaving Facebook.
I can speak by my own experience. In the last 14 months, Facebook has imposed on my profile 30-day blocks several times. In a report about censorship, WND has included my case in its headline “‘Free speech issue of our time’: Tech giants trigger conservative revolt.”
The DailyMail report said,
The firm has revealed it will have a fully-functioning “war room” up and running at its Menlo Park Campus in time for the US and Brazil elections.
Facebook executives claim the company has several teams currently working to improve its response to any attempts designed to manipulate Facebook's content to favour any specific candidate or party.
The Brazilian general elections are scheduled to be held on October 7 to elect the President and Vice President, the National Congress, state and Federal District Governors and Vice Governors, state Legislative Assemblies and Federal District Legislative Chamber.
The United States midterm elections are due to be held on November 6 2018. It will see all 435 seats in the House of Representatives and 35 of the 100 seats in the United States Senate contested.
Facebook’s alleged worry is that its platform was used to elect Trump. I wonder if Facebook would be worried if its platform had been successful, as it tried to do, in electing the left-wing Hillary Clinton.
Facebook wants the public to believe, as William Murray said, that “a handful of ‘Russian trolls’ leaving comments on Facebook pages altered the results of the 2016 elections!”
Facebook is using the excuse of Russian trolls — Russians and their current conservatism — as scapegoats to increase its censorship of conservatives.
So Facebook kills two birds with one stone: It blames Russia for interfering in the U.S. elections and distracts attention of its own efforts to help elect left-wing candidates.
Regardless of Russian conservatism, most Facebook users are conservative. This is the only explanation for the fact that, in spite of Facebook’s massive pro-left bias, the majority’s will prevailed. Untold numbers of users have been put in the Facebook jail for just saying that homosexuality is perversion. Facebook had even removed my quotation of Leviticus 18:22, where God said, “Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable.”
Most voters of Trump were evangelical, and this is the reason Facebook has imposed so much censorship on conservative evangelicals. Likewise, the main voting base of a promising right-wing candidate in Brazil is evangelicals.
Facebook’s war room is not against fake news. It is against conservative news. It is against evangelicals in the U.S. and Brazil.
Facebook’s battle is not against misinformation. It is against conservative and evangelical information.
I know by experience, because I am evangelical and I have been under censorship and 30-days blocks from Facebook.
If it could, Facebook would send all American and Brazilian evangelicals to virtual Gulags. The first step has already been taken: Relentless censorship of evangelical views of the homosexual agenda.
The left is rife with fake news and misinformation. If Facebook were serious about fighting such threats, it would impose on left-wing extremists the same censorship it has been imposing on conservatives for years.
Recommended Reading:
Recommended Reading on Facebook censorship:
Another Recommended Reading:
Recommended Reading on the U.S. Left against Julio Severo:

Wednesday, February 21, 2018

Proved: Russian Trolls Did in the U.S. Presidential Election… What the U.S. Does in the Elections of Other Nations


Proved: Russian Trolls Did in the U.S. Presidential Election… What the U.S. Does in the Elections of Other Nations

By Julio Severo
According to the indictment by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, Russia meddled in the 2016 U.S. presidential election: through internet trolls!
There is much deliberate confusion regarding this meddling. But one thing is definitely clear: The American and global Left was solidly behind their candidate Hillary Clinton. For them, anyone or any nation hindering Clinton’s victory committed an “unpardonable” sin. And what did American investigation show? That Russian trolls acted definitely against Clinton, who lost the election.
Patrick J. Buchanan, a former adviser to President Ronald Reagan and former Republican presidential candidate, said, “One imaginative Russian troll urged Trumpsters to dress up a female volunteer in an orange prison jump suit, put her in a cage on a flatbed truck, then append the slogan, ‘Lock Her Up!’”
Russians committed the “unpardonable” sin, and now Democrats and Republicans, U.S. left-wingers and right-wingers want to make Russia pay for allegedly helping Donald Trump win, as if the heavy sanctions Obama imposed — and not discontinued by Trump — on Russia were not enough.
Often, I think that U.S. left-wingers and right-wingers use to attack Russia as a scarecrow to distract the American public and the world. While both sides keep us distracted, they can advance any agenda they share. And there is a shared agenda: the neocon ideology.
While Mueller’s indictments confirm that Russian trolls meddled in the U.S. election, what explains the left-wing and right-wing hysteria against Russia?
In this point, I agree with Rev. Chuck Baldwin, who said “The War Party Marches On.” This party is comprised by both the Democratic Party and the Republican Party. The Neocon Party, which is above all parties in the U.S., needs a scarecrow.
Socialists accuse Russia, because their candidate lost. But conservatives, especially neoconservatives (neocons), are also accusing Russia.
If the alleged Russian meddling through trolls is an act supreme hostility, why during his 2016 campaign, did candidate Trump say, “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing”? He was referring to emails on Clinton’s private server that she said she deleted, according to an Associated Pres report.
Trump made such daring public request because it was clear, for him, that Russia was against Clinton.
Now he is showing dissatisfaction with the alleged Russian meddling in the U.S. elections, but he seems to ignore the U.S. meddling in the elections of other nations. John Perkins, in his book “Confessions of an Economic Hit Man,” has said that U.S. intelligence agencies have rigged elections in other nations for decades.
According to Joseph Farah, WND (WorldNetDaily) chief, even Israel did not escape from U.S. meddling in Israeli elections. Farah said, “Barack Obama used U.S. taxpayer money openly to influence the election of its best ally in the Middle East, Israel.” He added, “The late Sen. Ted Kennedy actually asked for the Soviet Union’s help in defeating Ronald Reagan’s re-election effort in 1988. Where were the scowls of outrage back then?”
If Democrats could ask Soviet Union to help defeat a Republican candidate, why cannot a Republican candidate ask a conservative Russia to help defeat a Democrat candidate? It was what Trump did in 2016.
In his WND article titled “Is that Russia troll farm an act of war?” Patrick J. Buchanan said:
As for Russian trolling in our election, do we really have clean hands when it comes to meddling in elections and the internal politics of regimes we dislike?
Sen. John McCain and Victoria Nuland of State egged on the Maidan Square crowds in Kiev that overthrew the elected government of Ukraine. When the democratically elected regime of Mohamed Morsi was overthrown, the U.S. readily accepted the coup as a victory for our side and continued aid to Egypt as tens of thousands of Muslim Brotherhood members were imprisoned.
Are the CIA and National Endowment for Democracy under orders not to try to influence the outcome of elections in nations in whose ruling regimes we believe we have a stake?
“Have we ever tried to meddle in other countries’ elections?” Laura Ingraham asked former CIA Director James Woolsey this weekend.
With a grin, Woolsey replied, “Oh, probably.”
“We don’t do that anymore, though?” Ingraham interrupted. “We don’t mess around in other people’s elections, Jim?”
“Well,” Woolsey said with a smile. “Only for a very good cause.”
Indeed, what is the National Endowment for Democracy all about, if not aiding the pro-American side in foreign nations and their elections?
Did America have no active role in the “color-coded revolutions” that have changed regimes from Serbia to Ukraine to Georgia?
When Republicans discuss Iran on Capitol Hill, the phrase “regime change” is frequently heard… in 2009, Republicans denounced President Obama for not intervening more energetically to alter the outcome [in Iran].
When China, Russia and Egypt expel NGOs, are their suspicions that some have been seeded with U.S. agents merely marks of paranoia?
The U.S. role in the overthrow of Premier Mossadegh in Iran in 1953, and of Jacobo Arbenz in Guatemala in 1954, and of President Ngo Dinh Diem in Saigon in 1963 are established facts.
So when the U.S. does exactly what it condemns in other nations, it is correct and democratic. But no nation is entitled to copy U.S. actions. Journalist Glenn Greenwald said about “the most vivid distillations of American Exceptionalism” in his Twitter account: “the US has the full, unfettered right to do exactly what we demand other nations don’t do because — unlike them — we’re Good, so it’s done for Good ends, not Bad ones.”
In my Twitter account, I answered him: “Sad, but true. Only evangelical Christians, who made a difference in the birth of America, can also make a difference today against neocons’ interference and discrepancy in the US foreign policy.”
The U.S. government, under left-wing and right-wing presidents, makes a big fuss over minimal meddling in the U.S. election (even internet trolls are a supreme crime against the U.S., according to neocons), but both sides heavily meddle, with covert CIA operations through NGOs and other ways, in the elections of other nations.
As Jesus said,
“And as you wish that others would do to you, do so to them.” (Luke 6:31 ESV)
Instead making fuss over Russian trolls and using Russia as a scarecrow for the sake of neocon policies, America under Trump should prosecute Obama for creating ISIS, which committed genocide of Christians in Syria and Iraq. Trump himself said in 2016 that Obama created ISIS. So Obama and Hillary Clinton were accomplices of genocide of Christians. By the U.S. law, which condemns accomplices of mass murders, would not both deserve capital punishment for aiding and abetting the genocide of Christian through ISIS?
America under Trump should prosecute Obama and Clinton for provoking Russia since Putin passed in 2013 a law banning homosexual propaganda to children and teens.
America under Trump should prosecute Obama and Clinton for overthrowing the Ukrainian government in 2014 and imposing sanctions on Russia in the aftermath of U.S. interference in Ukraine.
America under Trump should prosecute Obama and Clinton for using the U.S. government to promote Islam, abortion and the homosexual agenda around the world.
The U.S. should stop using Russia as a scarecrow and deal with Obama’s and Clinton’s crimes.
Trump should discontinue Obama’s left-wing legacy of sanctions and other unconservative actions against a more conservative Russia.
Russia could retaliate Obama’s and Hillary Clinton’s mischiefs through nuclear attack. Who can blame them for using internet trolls to vent their complaints against Clinton?
Recommended Reading: