Homophobia: Psychopolitical Enmification of Christians as Mentally Diseased

“Of course I am a doctor and I want to preserve life. And out of respect for human life I would remove a gangrenous appendix from a diseased body. The Jew is the diseased body. The Jew is the gangrenous appendix in the body of mankind.”  These words are taken from Robert Lifton’s book, The Nazi Doctors.  They summarize the total enmification (the making into an enemy) of Jews by the Nazi government in the belief that Jewishness personifies physical disease in the body of humanity.  The concept of homophobia, as used by progressives to psychodiagnose Christians, is a variation on the theme of government-sponsored total enmification.  It is the progression from biopolitical enmification to psychopolitical enmification in America.

The Nazis believed that the Jew was physical illness personified.  Pro-sexuality progressivism, which is advanced by the Obama administration throughout the government of the United States, conveys the view that devout Christianity is a form of mental illness called “homophobia,” and that Christian believers are mental illness personified.  While there are no voices in America calling for the killing of devout Christians, an echo of socialist utopianism from the left wing can be detected throughout the government, academia on all levels, and the media that the world will be a better place when Christians are no more.

The vilifications hurled at Christians when they fulfill their religious duty to warn others about the stumbling blocks to heaven have become so hateful that while American Christians will be kept working to pay taxes for the government that has abandoned their defense, Christians appear in the mind of the more extreme elements of progressivism to be lebenswurten leben, "life unworthy to be lived."

Wikipedia’s entry entitled “homophobia” makes the concept seem the greatest boon to humanity since the invention of the wheel.  It articulates the totalitarian fallacy by taking mistreatment and violence against homosexual people out of the precincts of “real enmity” of crime, and transferring it to the category of “objective enmity,” presenting it as a mental disease.  This misunderstanding does damage to the real cause of protecting homosexual people from mistreatment.  The online encyclopedia’s definition and classifications of the homophobias clearly indicate the view that believing the teachings of the Bible on the subject of homosexual behavior is a mental disorder.  It reports that the term was coined by a psychologist, George Weinberg, as a blend of the words homosexual and phobia – “fear or morbid fear.”  The article states Weinberg’s term “describes the concept of a medical phobia.”  The article further states that although “homophobia is usually used in a non-clinical sense,” a case has been made “for its inclusion in the clinical taxonomies of phobias as well as its classification with racism and sexism as intolerant personality disorder.”

The belief systems of the Nazi leaders spawned extensive discussions as to who was and wasn’t a Jew.  Today, pro-sexuality progressives are having the same discussions about who are the homophobic, mentally disordered Christians and who are the acceptable ones.

In the Godless, jealous heart of modernity, there coalesces a hatred against the group that is unconsciously seen as morally brilliant and, indeed, blessed with the benefits of a superior moral consciousness.  For the Nazi that was the Jew, for the dullard Communist the intellectual and artist.  Now for Western progressivism, the “folks” who educated and merchandised Barack Obama, the enemy is the Christian.  Totalitarianism depends on indoctrinating foot soldiers to believe unreasoning, at times idiotic credos, rationalizing what is little more than bitter jealousy against more natural, harmless, gifted, civilized, and spiritually advanced modes of life.

Mikkel Thorup’s essay, "Total Enemies: Understanding “The Total Enemy” through Schmitt, Arendt, Foucault, and Agamben," lays out the short step from the biopolitical and ideological enmification programs of Nazi and Communist regimes to the psychopolitical enmification of Christians by progressivist totalitarianism.

The founder of the modern understanding of politics as enmification process was Carl Schmitt.  He set up the contrast between “conventional enmity” (or just enmity), which leads to war between legally recognized nation states, and totalizing, universalizing enmity as a permanent political movement.  Schmitt introduced the term “enemy of humanity.”  He saw the century of the British naval empire as a bridge between conventional enmification and totalitarian enmification.  But Schmitt was himself a loyal Nazi and exempted his own compatriots from his conclusions, though they were the best examples of his theories who have ever lived.

Psychologists and philosophers of the mid-twentieth century, reacting to the horrors of Nazi and Communist mass murders, developed the theories of totalitarian enmification, which today apply to the American government’s mistreatment of Christians.

Arendt labeled “stateless and totalitarian enmity” or “objective” enmity as that in which the enemy poses no material, physical threat but has been established by the government as “a carrier of tendencies” threatening the well-being of the people.  She identified the total disconnect in there being no actual, physical danger posed by the Jews and their identification as objective enemies of the people.  Similarly, devout Christians pose no actual, physical danger to homosexual-identified people, or anyone else for that matter, and the psychopolitical enmification being carried out against them is in the service of totalitarian state control.

From Mikkel Thorup:

[T]otalitarianism defined its enemies ideologically before it seized power, so that categories of the ‘suspects’ were not established through police information. Thus the Jews in Nazi Germany or the descendants of the former ruling classes in Soviet Russia were not really suspected of any hostile action; they had been declared ‘objective’ enemies of the regime in accordance with its ideology.

The enmification of Christians has been hardwired into American progressivism since the 1960s, decades before the term homophobia was widely used.  Casting Christians as the enemies of freedom, which in progressivism basically means sexual libertinism, is a built-in mechanism to divide and control the American people.  Fear of being perceived as homophobic has therefore become, to use Arendt’s words via Thorup, “an instrument to rule masses of people who are perfectly obedient.”

Michel Foucault is especially associated with the theory of biopolitical enmification, which is the immediate progenitor of the current psychopolitical enmification of American Christians.  In biopolitics, the optimization of organic life is the purpose of government.  In the biopolitical worldview, the government assumes and is given authority to differentiate “[b]etween life to be furthered and increased and life to be hindered, reduced, ultimately killed. ... In the bio-political enmity, the enemy is named in biological and psychological terms and the enemy is found within the social body. The line between the inside, the friends, and the outside, the enemies, is no longer meaningful. The enemy lives among us and the biopolitical state takes it upon itself to single out those who threaten the health of the community.”

This is what American totalitarianism, culminating in the Obama administration, has done to Christians.  The toxic myth that Christians threaten the health of the community due to homophobia has enabled the government to denigrate the role of Christianity in American history and to carry forth dangerous and irrational policies.  One example is the idea that an essential change to the U.S. military to fulfill its mission of protecting the nation should be accomplished by making it more “gay.”  The psychopolitical enmification of Christians has also been extremely debilitating to them.  It is one of the main reasons Christians do not fully assert their Constitutional rights and are doing so little to protect their co-religionists who are being persecuted and slaughtered around the world.

“Of course I am a doctor and I want to preserve life. And out of respect for human life I would remove a gangrenous appendix from a diseased body. The Jew is the diseased body. The Jew is the gangrenous appendix in the body of mankind.”  These words are taken from Robert Lifton’s book, The Nazi Doctors.  They summarize the total enmification (the making into an enemy) of Jews by the Nazi government in the belief that Jewishness personifies physical disease in the body of humanity.  The concept of homophobia, as used by progressives to psychodiagnose Christians, is a variation on the theme of government-sponsored total enmification.  It is the progression from biopolitical enmification to psychopolitical enmification in America.

The Nazis believed that the Jew was physical illness personified.  Pro-sexuality progressivism, which is advanced by the Obama administration throughout the government of the United States, conveys the view that devout Christianity is a form of mental illness called “homophobia,” and that Christian believers are mental illness personified.  While there are no voices in America calling for the killing of devout Christians, an echo of socialist utopianism from the left wing can be detected throughout the government, academia on all levels, and the media that the world will be a better place when Christians are no more.

The vilifications hurled at Christians when they fulfill their religious duty to warn others about the stumbling blocks to heaven have become so hateful that while American Christians will be kept working to pay taxes for the government that has abandoned their defense, Christians appear in the mind of the more extreme elements of progressivism to be lebenswurten leben, "life unworthy to be lived."

Wikipedia’s entry entitled “homophobia” makes the concept seem the greatest boon to humanity since the invention of the wheel.  It articulates the totalitarian fallacy by taking mistreatment and violence against homosexual people out of the precincts of “real enmity” of crime, and transferring it to the category of “objective enmity,” presenting it as a mental disease.  This misunderstanding does damage to the real cause of protecting homosexual people from mistreatment.  The online encyclopedia’s definition and classifications of the homophobias clearly indicate the view that believing the teachings of the Bible on the subject of homosexual behavior is a mental disorder.  It reports that the term was coined by a psychologist, George Weinberg, as a blend of the words homosexual and phobia – “fear or morbid fear.”  The article states Weinberg’s term “describes the concept of a medical phobia.”  The article further states that although “homophobia is usually used in a non-clinical sense,” a case has been made “for its inclusion in the clinical taxonomies of phobias as well as its classification with racism and sexism as intolerant personality disorder.”

The belief systems of the Nazi leaders spawned extensive discussions as to who was and wasn’t a Jew.  Today, pro-sexuality progressives are having the same discussions about who are the homophobic, mentally disordered Christians and who are the acceptable ones.

In the Godless, jealous heart of modernity, there coalesces a hatred against the group that is unconsciously seen as morally brilliant and, indeed, blessed with the benefits of a superior moral consciousness.  For the Nazi that was the Jew, for the dullard Communist the intellectual and artist.  Now for Western progressivism, the “folks” who educated and merchandised Barack Obama, the enemy is the Christian.  Totalitarianism depends on indoctrinating foot soldiers to believe unreasoning, at times idiotic credos, rationalizing what is little more than bitter jealousy against more natural, harmless, gifted, civilized, and spiritually advanced modes of life.

Mikkel Thorup’s essay, "Total Enemies: Understanding “The Total Enemy” through Schmitt, Arendt, Foucault, and Agamben," lays out the short step from the biopolitical and ideological enmification programs of Nazi and Communist regimes to the psychopolitical enmification of Christians by progressivist totalitarianism.

The founder of the modern understanding of politics as enmification process was Carl Schmitt.  He set up the contrast between “conventional enmity” (or just enmity), which leads to war between legally recognized nation states, and totalizing, universalizing enmity as a permanent political movement.  Schmitt introduced the term “enemy of humanity.”  He saw the century of the British naval empire as a bridge between conventional enmification and totalitarian enmification.  But Schmitt was himself a loyal Nazi and exempted his own compatriots from his conclusions, though they were the best examples of his theories who have ever lived.

Psychologists and philosophers of the mid-twentieth century, reacting to the horrors of Nazi and Communist mass murders, developed the theories of totalitarian enmification, which today apply to the American government’s mistreatment of Christians.

Arendt labeled “stateless and totalitarian enmity” or “objective” enmity as that in which the enemy poses no material, physical threat but has been established by the government as “a carrier of tendencies” threatening the well-being of the people.  She identified the total disconnect in there being no actual, physical danger posed by the Jews and their identification as objective enemies of the people.  Similarly, devout Christians pose no actual, physical danger to homosexual-identified people, or anyone else for that matter, and the psychopolitical enmification being carried out against them is in the service of totalitarian state control.

From Mikkel Thorup:

[T]otalitarianism defined its enemies ideologically before it seized power, so that categories of the ‘suspects’ were not established through police information. Thus the Jews in Nazi Germany or the descendants of the former ruling classes in Soviet Russia were not really suspected of any hostile action; they had been declared ‘objective’ enemies of the regime in accordance with its ideology.

The enmification of Christians has been hardwired into American progressivism since the 1960s, decades before the term homophobia was widely used.  Casting Christians as the enemies of freedom, which in progressivism basically means sexual libertinism, is a built-in mechanism to divide and control the American people.  Fear of being perceived as homophobic has therefore become, to use Arendt’s words via Thorup, “an instrument to rule masses of people who are perfectly obedient.”

Michel Foucault is especially associated with the theory of biopolitical enmification, which is the immediate progenitor of the current psychopolitical enmification of American Christians.  In biopolitics, the optimization of organic life is the purpose of government.  In the biopolitical worldview, the government assumes and is given authority to differentiate “[b]etween life to be furthered and increased and life to be hindered, reduced, ultimately killed. ... In the bio-political enmity, the enemy is named in biological and psychological terms and the enemy is found within the social body. The line between the inside, the friends, and the outside, the enemies, is no longer meaningful. The enemy lives among us and the biopolitical state takes it upon itself to single out those who threaten the health of the community.”

This is what American totalitarianism, culminating in the Obama administration, has done to Christians.  The toxic myth that Christians threaten the health of the community due to homophobia has enabled the government to denigrate the role of Christianity in American history and to carry forth dangerous and irrational policies.  One example is the idea that an essential change to the U.S. military to fulfill its mission of protecting the nation should be accomplished by making it more “gay.”  The psychopolitical enmification of Christians has also been extremely debilitating to them.  It is one of the main reasons Christians do not fully assert their Constitutional rights and are doing so little to protect their co-religionists who are being persecuted and slaughtered around the world.

RECENT VIDEOS