Originally posted by checkbaiter
I know I am far from being an "intellectual".
Being intellectual is not all it is cracked up to be. It is not the same as wisdom.
No, I did not know it was said by Bannon, I skipped through much of your post, but I still disagree with it, that is, the predictions.
You on the other hand, and other "intellectuals" here are riding high on your high hors ...[text shortened]... ctly what he campaigned on.
BTW God has a way of confounding the "intellectuals of this world".
Your sneering at "intellectual" effort is well supported in the Bible and indeed was the preferred attitude of the Mediaeval Church in Europe, as also in obscurantist periods of Islam. Happily, both Christianity and Islam - as well as Judaism - also had long periods of intellectual creativity. Arguably, one objective of the Reformation was to reject the authority of Bishops and encourage the faithful to read the Bible in their vernacular translations, though no less arguably, the Puritan interpretation which has infested the USA for centuries does represent a reversion to the most obscurantist attitudes. Fundamentalism in Judaism, Islam and Christiianity is a modern and disagreeable outcome of the fear of intellectual effort.
Nobody invited you to agree or disagree with Bannon. What you were invited to do was grasp the nature of his belief system and the implications of letting such a person loose in world politics, at the helm of the most powerful military machine on the planet. There is a profound difference between a prediction or prophecy on the one hand and a statement of intent on the other hand. When your president appoints someone with these beliefs, you would be well advised to assume that he will do what he says he intends to do. Why, after all, would you expect Trump to suddenly become reticent and listen to reason? He is under no pressure from the American Taliban to do so.
Your use of Blbilical authority to reject intellectual effort is not inherently Christian - many Christians, Jews and Muslims interpret the Bible differently - but it is inherently blasphemous. Instead of enagaging with the debate on these issues, you choose to assert that, regardles of Trump's stated intentions and those of his appointees to high office, you are confident that God will make it all turn out for the best. In other words, your faith relieves you of the responsibility to think for your self and to take responsibility for your opinions and your behaviour - in this case, your political engagement and your vote.
There is a powerful tradition of fatalism in all three of the Abrahamaic religions. Muslims like to invoke the concept that everything that happens is already written.
“The moving hand once having writ moves on. Nor all thy piety nor wit can lure it back to cancel half a line.” ― Omar Khayyám, Rubáiyát of Omar Khayyám
This however represents a submission to God's will, not the presumption to insist that we can neglect our responsibillities - for example as citizens - in the confidence that God will reward our piety with material blessings in this life. I think you will find that it has been God's will to permit some atrocious events in history and I see no good reason that is not blasphemous to argue that He will now prioritise your pathetic ambitions over, for the example, the right of a child born today in Iran to a decent life free from Western violence and intimidation.
Perhaps you would do better to take your head out of your Bible - not because of its defects but because of your defective reading - and turn instead to the Greeks, and their concept of hubris. The American empire is not too big to fail. It is too big to fail without immense harm to the rest of the world alas. We rather need American citizens to take more responsibility for their opinions and their behaviour. That, I am afraid, will require huge effort - aka intellectual work.