Propaganda Wishful Thinking Raritan
The past two years or so have seen an alarming departure from the political centre ground in many democracies. Brexit has polarised the UK, where the major parties and indeed the whole population are split into Remainers and Leavers. Even those wanting to leave the EU are divided between so-called hard and soft approaches, such as whether or not to remain in the Customs Union and Single Market after Brexit.
The Conservative Party is the most egregious example of internal division. But the Labour Party is not immune: it’s noticeable that Jeremy Corbyn, the leader of the Labour Party and would-be Prime Minister, remains largely silent about Brexit. He is lucky to be able to hide behind the open warfare in the government and among backbench Conservative MPs.The UK is not alone. Far-right political parties are present in a number of countries, for example in France, Germany and the Netherlands. They promote fear of, and hostility to, immigrants, with talk of national culture being under threat. Muslims are a favourite target.
Propaganda Wishful Thinking Raritan River
Poland and Hungary now have somewhat nationalist governments. Russia and Turkey have succumbed to oligarchy, if not dictatorship. And division in the USA under President Trump has reached poisonous levels. Mr Trump’s erratic behaviour makes it hard to see exactly what he stands for, apart from promoting himself. There is one clear trend in his behaviour, though: he exhibits a worrying enthusiasm for authoritarianism.
His recent clashes with the FBI suggest he wants to move into dangerous ground by interfering with the US legal system.There is one clear victim of these trends: truth, based on evidence, goes out of the window. The Brexit campaign in the UK was marked by lies and half-truths, some issuing from both sides but mainly from the leave campaign. Inconvenient facts continue to be ignored or simply denied. Wishful thinking, bordering on fantasy, has flourished, such as the amount of trade the UK will get with the rest of the world once it has separated from the EU. And the Trump campaign and his subsequent administration have taken untruth to new levels, creating gems such as ‘alternative facts’.Lies and propaganda are the stuff of authoritarians, leading to dictatorship.
I believe we have to take a stand in favour of what I will call the liberal centre, which in my opinion is the basis of democracy. I’ll try to justify it.One view of a liberal society is that people are free to say and do what they want, without fear of reprisals of some form. There are limits to this freedom: individuals should not have liberty at the expense of others. Different opinions must be respected. It’s not easy to draw a line between acceptable levels of liberty and unacceptable actions, such as incitement to violence against individuals or groups.
But we have to try. Making progress will require an acceptance that the world is complicated and that difficult problems are not amenable to simple solutions. Hard evidence and respect for facts are necessary to make progress. An international perspective is required because the world’s big problems, such as climate change, cannot be solved by nations acting alone.But while these freedoms may be necessary attributes of a liberal society, they are not sufficient.
Freedom to hold elections to throw out governments who fail to improve the lot of their citizens is a crucial requirement.This brings me to the need for politics to return to the centre ground. There will always be a wide spectrum of views in any society. It’s not possible to satisfy everyone as some views will be mutually inconsistent. For example, should utilities such as water supply and railways be state owned and run, or left to the private sector? And even two things, each regarded as good in itself, such as freedom and security, may be inconsistent: how far should freedom be limited to combat serious security threats?
The UK and many other democratic countries face this problem today.Polarised societies with widely opposing elements run the risk of ending up with a government representing one extreme or the other. There is a danger of a winner-takes-all attitude, unfortunately all too common in some developing countries but now creeping into democracies. The middle ground is where necessary compromises are made and explained, using evidence to justify policies. A step-wise approach of incremental improvement, where new policies are tested and modified if they don’t work, is needed. This may sound unexciting but we could all do with a bit less of the excitement currently around in our increasingly polarised nations.Notes and sourcesSee for exampleOne notorious example was the promise that the National Health Service (NHS) would get an extra GBP 350 M per week, which was alleged to be the UK’s contribution to the EU budget. Liverpool University’s Professor Michael Dougan, who specialises in European constitutional law, remarked in a lecture given before the referendum that the leave campaign was guilty of ‘dishonesty on an industrial scale’. His lecture is still available atIn 1986, Professor Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University published a paper entitled ‘ On bullshit’, in the Raritan Quarterly Review.
In the paper, he argues that the liar knows what truth is because he knows he is lying. The bullshitter, however, does not have a concept of truth: truth is what is convenient at the time for the bullshitter. This rather fits a number of current leaders. A copy of the paper can be downloaded fromH L Mencken expressed this point amusingly: ‘For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.’For an elegant exposition of this view, see Isaiah Berlin’s 1988 Agnelli Prize lecture ‘ The pursuit of the ideal’, published in a book of his essays entitled ‘ The Crooked Timber of Humanity’. Peter,As you know on March 4th there will be the Italian political elections. We Italians are now debating at full speed about everything. Of course in a way that your blog, aimed at “promoting respect for facts and numbers”, would never endorse (nor understand).Truth is that before Internet idiots existed, but they were either silent or unable to gather together.
Now we live inside a noisy Cloud made by rules, habits, hetics (and Services) invented daily by idiots. Facts, numbers and truth have been replaced by fakes, opinions and Marketing.To put this back on track, in a pure Democracy, sounds extremeky challenging: all the democracies are slow, while the idiots galop at the speed of a click. The only thing that the idiots pay attention to is money.
So money drives. Democracies have not been invented in order to master money, but large Corporations have it as an implicit mission. If the future is inequality, you know where we will end up to (starting from hopelessness down to slavery).You and I spent our working life making technology work. It seems that a large portion of our world did not progress at the same speed mastering facts and numbers. Hopefully you did not start your blog too late.
I know I haven’t posted here in over a year, but I’ve been busy researching and writing. One of the projects I worked on was with my friend H. Michael Marquardt, who co-wrote an article with me on the Origin of the Baptism for the Dead Doctrine, which has been published in the Here is a teaser page, and I would urge you to purchase this issue as it is chock full of many great articles on Mormon History.Stay tuned, I have some really good articles lined up for this year, and will also be posting an extended version of the above article at a future time Posted in Tagged,. Kevin Christensen & Jeremy Runnells (Part II)CONTENTSIntroductionKevin Christensen (FAIRMORMON Apologist) has written a long rambling folksy sounding diatribe about how Jeff Lindsay’s “investigative approach” is far superior to that of my friend Jeremy Runnells, because Lindsay did not come to a negative conclusion about Mormonism. He compares the two men to two “seeds” who have produced different “harvests”. Of course he implies that Lindsay is the good seed, and Jeremy is the bad.Part II: The “Perfect” StrawmanIn this part I will focus on two more sections of Christensen’s article. The first he names,Starting Position and What It TellsChristensen writes,So what does Runnells’s Letter to a CES Director disclose about his conceptual framework and his method?
Start with the very first issue that Runnells raises in his letter, regarding the Book of Mormon translation and ”1769 King James edition errors. An ancient text? Errors which are unique to the 1769 edition that Joseph Smith owned?” He returns to this point in his website response to FairMormon:The presence of 17th century kjv italics and 1769 kjv errors—word for word—in the Book of Mormon is its own damning evidence. These errors totally undermine the claim that Joseph “translated” the Book of Mormon and the claim that the Book of Mormon is the most correct book on earth.According to Thomas Kuhn, ”Anomaly (Abnormality) appears only against the background provided by the paradigm (pattern). The more precise and far-reaching that paradigm (pattern) is, the more sensitive an indicator it provides of anomaly, and hence of an occasion for paradigm (pattern) change.”According to Christensen this issue is just a small anomaly in his Book of Mormon “paradigm”, and therefore Jeremy should basically ignore it, because it is so trivial that it is just a silly anomaly. But what if it isn’t? Acevedo writes, Kuhn also defines an anomaly as “nature’s failure to conform entirely to expectation”, which is what Christensen is trying to apply to Jeremy Runnells via the Book of Mormon.
But Acevedo also writes,Clearly not all anomalies result in progress. The vast majority are ignored.
When an anomaly persists over an extended period of time, the most common effect is that scientists will attempt to alter their instrumentation in a way that makes the anomaly disappear or they will try to make the anomaly fit within the paradigm (i.e. Modify the expectation and thus make the former anomaly seem expected).This seems to be exactly what Christensen is doing and wants Jeremy to do. He is ignoring what he calls an anomaly and trying to make it fit into his Book of Mormon paradigm. But it doesn’t fit. This is when an anomaly becomes a “crisis”.
As Acevedo writes,The forces that can convert an anomaly to a crisis are many, and usually several of them must co-occur. For example, a persistent anomaly may call into question some of the most fundamental tenets of the paradigm. In other cases, the paradigm predicts that an application should be ineffective when long practice has clearly established its utility (or conversely, the paradigm predicts that an application should be effective when practice reliably demonstrates its failure). As a result of such discrepancies, the anomaly becomes more widely recognized (e.g., replicated and confirmed by a broader circle of scientists) and even catches the attention of prominent figures in the field.
The anomaly then becomes “the new fixation point of scientific scrutiny” (Kuhn, 1962/1996, p. 83) and its resolution becomes a shared goal. One of the defining features of a field in crisis is the emergence of multiple divergent attempts to resolve the anomaly. As these attempts multiply, they also become more diversified. Although early attempts may follow the rules of the paradigm closely, the persistence of the anomaly begs “ad hoc adjustments” (p. 83) of the paradigm that are increasingly bold and unruly.
Thus “the rules of normal science become increasingly blurred. Though there still is a paradigm, few practitioners prove to be entirely agreed about what it is. Even formerly standard solutions of solved problems are called into question.(p.
Acevedo, The Oxford Handbook of Exercise Psychology, 297).According to many, there are numerous anomalies in Christensen’s Book of Mormon paradigm. These anomalies are widely recognized, even by the faithful like B. Roberts, who Jeremy discusses in his work. Roberts called one of these anomalies “a menace to the Book of Mormon”. ( Studies of the Book of Mormon, 240, CES Letter, 11).David P. Wright, associate professor of Hebrew Bible and Ancient Near East, (Brandeis University) claims that Grant Palmer:is on absolutely firm ground for his conclusion that the Book of Mormon is not an ancient work and, with this, according to his last two main chapters, that Smith’s visionary experiences were more subjective than tradition claims. ( Dialogue, Vol.
Kevin Christensen & Jeremy Runnells (Part I)INTRODUCTIONKevin Christensen (FAIRMORMON) has written a long rambling folksy sounding diatribe about how Jeff Lindsay’s “investigative approach” is far superior to that of my friend Jeremy Runnells, because Lindsay did not come to a negative conclusion about Mormonism. Even the title is long and rambling:It’s not that I have a problem with lots of information. But Christensen offers little of value here, except a critique of Jeremy that is basically a set of elaborate straw man arguments, arrogant assumptions and the usual dodgy Mormon apologetic responses to critics.In his introduction Christensen calls Runnells “obsessive” and contrasts that with Lindsay’s “boundless enthusiasm”. It is obvious where this is going right from the start.Christensen then compares Jeremy Runnells two years of research (on broad topics of Mormonism) with Lindsay’s twenty as an apologist. (and he calls Jeremy obsessive?) He writes about Lindsay:His website contains an extensive LDS FAQ (for Frequently Asked Questions) which deals with all of the issues that Runnells raises and more. But Lindsay does so both at greater length, over a much broader span of time, consulting a wider range of sources, providing far more documentation, and including far more original research than Runnells.Yes, one would think that someone who has been a Mormon Apologist since 1994 and has had a website for that long would have more documentation and research. This is common sense folks.
Yet it doesn’t stop Christensen from using this against Jeremy. Recently, Jeremy and I completed a 458 page response to Brian Hales’ attacks on him and others. One hopes that this might be enough to satisfy those like Christensen, but he will probably complain that it is too long.Christensen claims in his essay that people are human and they evolve. But he won’t give that to Jeremy in this instance. He is “brittle” (5 times) and “bitter” because he does not accept Mormon apologist spin.
For this to be a really accurate comparison, he needs to give Jeremy another 18 or so years to catch up. CONTENTS:IntroductionIn the diverse world of the Blog-o-sphere we are sometimes linked in ways that might be new to some.
One of these links is called a “pingback”. This occurs when someone links to a Blog Article. Most of the time I don’t bother investigating them, I just approve them and go about my business.
But I recently got a pingback on and the title of the piece that it linked to was,With that title burned into my mind, I set about reading the article that had linked to one of mine, and it was so inaccurate and full of bigotry that I decided to take the time to respond to it. The Author, who goes by the moniker “IrWhitney” or the “Phantom Saint”, starts off by telling everyone to burn any copies of Bruce R.
McConkie’s book, Mormon Doctrine, and then asks his audience to throw another on the pile: Answers to Gospel Questions, by Joseph Fielding Smith.The Phantom claims that the reason that people should burn these books is because they are “officially shameful and embarrassing”. This line of reasoning advocates that anything written by Mormon “Authorities” that is deemed shameful and embarrassing to the Mormon Church should be burned. Now that’ll solve any problems, won’t it?
Propaganda Duel Meaning
It worked for Nazi Germany, didn’t it? Joseph Smith circa 1836It is in the order of heavenly things that God should always send a new dispensation into the world when men have apostatized from the truth and lost the priesthood; but when men come out and build upon other men’s foundations, they do it on their own responsibility, without: authority from God; and when the floods come and the winds blow, their foundations will be found to be sand, and their whole fabric will crumble to dust.Did I build on any other man’s foundation?
I have got all the truth which the Christian world possessed, and an independent revelation in the bargain, and God will bear me off triumphant. (Joseph Smith, History of the Church, Vol. 6, p.479)I don’t think anyone would consider the Curse of Cain doctrine one of those “truths” by any stretch of the imagination. So Joseph got it from God. Brigham Young echoed this in 1855.
Brigham Young, circa 1860The American Government is second to none in the world in influence and power, and far before all others in liberal and free institutions. Under its benign influence the poor, down trodden masses of the old world can find an asylum where they can enjoy the blessings of peace and freedom, no matter to what caste or religious sect they belong, or are disposed to favor, or whether they are disposed to favor any or none at all. It was in this government, formed by men inspired of God, although at the time they knew it not, after it was firmly established in the seat of power and influence, where liberty of conscience, and the free exercise of religious worship were a fundamental principle guaranteed in the Constitution, and interwoven with all the feelings, traditions, and sympathies of the people, that the Lord sent forth His angel to reveal the truths of heaven as in times past, even as in ancient days. This should have been hailed as the greatest blessing which could have been bestowed upon any nation, kindred, tongue, or people. It should have been received with hearts of gratitude and gladness, praise and thanksgiving.But as it was in the days of our Savior, so was it in the advent of this new dispensation. It was not in accordance with the notions, traditions, and pre-conceived ideas of the American people. The messenger did not come to an eminent divine of any of the so-called orthodoxy, he did not adopt their interpretation of the Holy Scriptures. The Lord did not come with the armies of heaven, in power and great glory, nor send His messengers panoplied with aught else than the truth of heaven, to communicate to the meek, the lowly, the youth of humble origin, the sincere enquirer after the knowlege of God.
“Apostle” John TaylorThat is what is called a virtuous kind of an abomination, used under a cloak of philosophy, a species of philosophy imported from France. Hence they call Greeley a philosopher; and, in writing about him, I have called him the same. I believe him to be as dishonest a man as is in existence.These are my sentiments and feelings. I have examined his articles, watched his course, read his paper daily, and have formerly conversed with him a little; but lately I would not be seen in his company. I was thrown in his society in traveling from Boston, and occasionally met him afterwards; but I would not talk to him. I felt myself superior to such a mean, contemptible cur. I knew he was not after truth, but falsehood.This Greeley is one of their popular characters in the East, and one that supports the stealing of niggers and the underground railroad.
I do not know that the editor of the Herald is any more honest; but, as a journalist, he tells more truth. He publishes many things as they are, because it is creditable to do so. But Greeley will not; he will tell what suits his clandestine plans, and leave the rest untold.
I speak of him, because he is one of the prominent newspaper editors in the Eastern country, and he is a poor, miserable curse. ( Journal of Discourses, Volume 5, pp. 118-119)Not only does Taylor’s malice show in this rant towards the blacks as well as Greely, Taylor has to be dishonest to make his point. Instead of speaking to the man, he claims superiority over such a “contemptable cur”. If he had spoken to him, he might have realized that Greely didn’t advocate “free love”.
Or maybe Taylor did speak to him. He lied about polygamy, didn’t he? This arrogance on the part of Taylor spilled over into his religious beliefs, too. Cannon recorded that,Father George Q.
Cannon holds that we who live on the earth now and are faithful, will stand at the head of our lineage and will thus become Saviors as has been promised us. John Taylor was not sealed to his parents though they died in the Church, as he felt that it was rather lowering himself to be thus sealed when he was an apostle and his father was a high priest (Diary of Abraham H. Cannon, Thursday, Dec. Horace GreelyGreely didn’t support the “Free Love” movement at all, he in fact destested it as in 1860 shows:When we were publishing Judge Edmond’s series of articles commending and extolling Spiritualism, I never heard complaints from you or other Spiritualists that we did not comment on and dissent from their inculcations. I do not see why we should do so when it proves to be your bull that is gored and not t’other fellow’s ox. Your letter is arrogant in its tone and sheds no light on the subject; so I have thrown it aside.
I do not take ground for or against what is called Spiritualism, but it is my definite judgment that the abominable sophistry and lechery termed “Free Love” has received decided aid and comfort from Spiritualism. That I don’t like; and it is my sorrowful conviction that there are more adulterers and libertines, harlots and false wives in the country today than there was before or would have been but for the advent of Spiritualism. If there be any truth in Spiritualism, I am afraid the spirits who visit us mainly tenanted bad bodies while on earth and have not improved since. (Horace Greely to M. Townsend, March 1, 1860)Even Brigham Young had more tact when speaking of the blacks, he knew that the word “nigger” was a slur:Ham will continue to be the servant of servants, as the Lord has decreed, until the curse is removed. Will the present struggle free the slave? No; but they are now wasting away the black race by thousands.
Many of the blacks are treated worse than we treat our dumb brutes; and men will be called to judgment for the way they have treated the negro, and they will receive the condemnation of a guilty conscience, by the just Judge whose attributes are justice and truth.Treat the slaves kindly and let them live, for Ham must be the servant of servants until the curse is removed. Can you destroy the decrees of the Almighty? Yet our Christian brethren think that they are going to overthrow the sentence of the Almighty upon the seed of Ham. They cannot do that, though they may kill them by thousands and tens of thousands. ( Journal of Discourses Vol.
10, p.250)And,Brother Taylor says that language cannot express the conduct, the feelings, and the spirit that are upon the people in the States. Well, suppose you take up a labour and swear about them, what are the worst words that can be spoken? ‘Nigger stealing,’ Mobs or Vigilance Committees, and Rotten-hearted Administrators of a Government are three of the meanest and wickedest words that can be spoken. I expect that somebody will write that back to the States, as being treasonable, because spoken by a Latter-day Saint. ( Journal of Discourses, vol. 5, p.127, August 9, 1857)They knew.
In spite of all that Brigham and his apostles said, overthrowing the sentence of the Almighty upon the supposed seed of Ham is exactly what the Federal Government did. And yes, thousands upon thousands died to make that happen. Even Wilford Woodruff showed that he was not not above demeaning the blacks:We had a Great Celebration of the 4 to day as the 4 Came on Sunday. We had a great display of all the Mechanics Artizens tradesmen & Farmers school Children &c & A Long windy speech from Judge Cyrus M.
Hawley on the Nigger Question & severall Edifying speeches from others.( Wilford Woodruff’s Journal, Vol. 6, p.485, July 5, 1869)Cyrus Hawley was a Federal Judge appointed by President Grant.
Of course what he advocated about the blacks would stick in the craw of the racist Mormons. Pope Gregory XVI“The slave trade, although it has been somewhat diminished, is still carried on by numerous Christians. Therefore, desiring to remove such a great shame from all Christian peoples and walking in the footsteps of Our Predecessors, We, by apostolic authority, warn and strongly exhort in the Lord faithful Christians of every condition that no one in the future dare to bother unjustly, despoil of their possessions, or reduce to slavery Indians, Blacks or other such peoples. Brigham Young Circa 1850Those that do bear rule should do it in righteousness. I am opposed to the present system of slavery. The Negro Should serve the seed of Abram but it should be done right.
Don’t abuse the Negro & treat him Cruel.It has been argued here that many of the Jews were Black. Whenever the seed of Judah mingled with the seed of Cane they lost their priesthood & all Blessings.As an Ensample let the Presidency, Twelve Seventies High Priest Bishops & all the Authorities say now we will all go & mingle with the seed of Cane and they may have all the privileges they want. We lift our hands to heaven in support of this.
That moment we loose the priesthood & all Blessings & we would not be redeemed until Cane was. I will never admit of it for a moment.Some may think I I know as much as they do But I know that I know more than they do. The Lord will watch us all the time. The Devil would like to rule part of the time But I am determin He shall not rule at all and Negros shall not rule us.
I will not admit of the Devil ruling at all. I will not Consent for the seed of Cane to vote for me or my Brethren. If you want to know why we did not speak of it in the Constitution it was because it was none of their Business. Any man is a Citizens Black white or red and if the Jews Come here with a part of the p.99 Canaanite Blood in them they are Citizens & shall have their rights but not to rule for me or my Brother. Those persons from the Islands & foreign Countries know nothing about Governing the people.
The Canaanite cannot have wisdom to do things as the white man has. We must guard against all Evil. I am not going to let this people damn themselves as long as I can help it.
(Wilford Woodruff’s Journal, Vol. 4, p.97-99, February 4, 1852)The Negroes could not hold the Priesthood because according to Young they would never rule over the seed of Abel (the whites), and that would be for “all eternity”. The whites would always “be ahead” of the Negroes “for all eternity”. But according to those like the Phantom, Brigham only spoke in ignorance, there was no malice at all to what he said above. Tell that to Jane Manning and Elijah Abel and thousands of others who were denied the blessings reserved only for white people.
Imagine going through this interview with then “prophet” Wilford Woodruff:We had Meeting with several individuals among the rest Black Jane wanted to know if I would not let her have her Endowments in the Temple. This I Could not do as it was against the Law of God. As Cain killed Abel All the seed of Cain would have to wait for Redemption untill all the seed that Abel would have had that may Come through other men Can be redeemed.(Wilford Woodruff’s Journal, Vol.
322, October 16, 1894).Not policy, but the law of God. What was stopping Woodruff from getting his own revelation? He had no problem doing it with polygamy. I guess the plight of the black man wasn’t very high up on his “to-do”list.
Even with Jane Manning knocking on his door.For a great read about how racism is justified by ignorance and stupidity, enjoy the exploits of one Petroleum V. President Lincoln loved his exploits, and used to quote him often.
“in their enthoosiasm five nigger families were cleaned out”I guess the Phantom must think that getting your head cut off for “mingling seed” is an act of love. At least that’s how Brigham Young described it once. (See, Journal of Discourses, )II.
The “Sensible” Ku Klux KlanThe Phantom then tries to enlighten us with, this time against the “lefty’s” or all who advocate Civil Rights and dare to call racism what it truly is:It’s easy for the ignorant and self-interested to paint Mormonism with the Lefty’s favorite tar brush of common racism. In fact, since the Civil Rights Movement set upon the mission of bringing down the LDS church, it is even held that Mormons are close friends with the KKK, the favorite bugaboo of the “enlightened” Left. These slanders, when repeated widely, naturally become the assumptions of rational, fair-minded people as well.
Frankly, Mormonism has given even the most forgiving investigator cause for suspicion. But Mormonism and its attitude toward the Negro, isn’t really a Right-Left, racist/colorblind debate in the usual Christian American sense. (The Phantom Saint). Ku Klux Klan circa 1870So, what kind of racism did the Mormons practice, uncommon racism?
To Phantom, racism just isn’t really racism if Mormon leaders are involved. Because those damn Christians did it first. (It’s all Joanna Southcott’s fault) He then gives us this whopper:Many of the members of the anti-Mormon mob that murder the first President of the Church, Joseph Smith, are members of a secret racist society called the “Knights of the Golden Circle.” After the Civil War the organization is outlawed. A few members of the Knights of the Golden Circle found a new organization called the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan.—1844 (See )I’ll get to the Ku Klux Klan below. But the Knights of the Golden Circle didn’t even come into existence until 1854, ten years after Joseph Smith’s death. I don’t know where BlackMormon got their information from, but they are wrong about this, and many other things.
For more information on the Golden Circle, by the Texas State Historical Association.I just have to sigh when I read this next bit of information that Phantom unloads on the unsuspecting public, that the Church outright rejected the KKK, from the beginning (1868). They later actually lauded what they called “Another Ku Klux Klan”, which was what they deemed the original Ku-Klux Klan, said by them to be full of “sincere men” who “saw no other way of remedying the existing evils that threatened moral and financial ruin.” This sounds just like Joseph Smith’s Danites, who he wrote about in his diary, which said:We have a company of Danites in these times, to put to right physically that which is not right, and to cleanse the Church of very great evils which hath hitherto existed among us inasmuch as they cannot be put to right by teachings & persuasions. (Scott Faulring, An American Prophet’s Record, p. 198).This describes the KKK to a tee. But before I go into that, let’s see some of the Phantom’s quotes that are supposed to enlighten us about how Mormon racism “isn’t really a Right-Left, racist/colorblind debate”:Soon after its formation, an LDS apostle writes that the KKK will prove a “curse” upon America.—1868 (See )There is absolutely no documentation to back up this quote. In fact, in 1868 Mormon “Apostle” George Q.
Cannon claimed that the Klan was less dangerous than other secret societies. (see below)The KKK holds anti-Mormon meetings and, in the south, kills and in some cases tortures Mormon missionaries.—1870s-1890s (See Blazing Crosses, pp.11ff).