mhaze,

Hard to take claims of a harmless “return to base” seriously from someone who just wrote off an entire community as “transgender crazies.” It’s exactly the kind of rhetoric decades of social research have shown to be harmful - linked to higher rates of stress, depression, and suicide among marginalised groups.

//This is about returning the US to its spiritual and conservative base, not retracting social advances.//

You can’t “return to a spiritual and conservative base” without retracting social advances. That’s the contradiction baked into your metaphor. Religious conservatism has consistently opposed the very evidence-based gains in equality that research has demonstrated protect people’s health and wellbeing. To claim you can revive one without rolling back the other is wishful thinking.

//You might want to notice how many of the minority groups are on board with this. They aren't threatened by it.//

Every large-scale study - Pew, Gallup, Ipsos - shows minorities and younger cohorts overwhelmingly support inclusion, not regression. Cherry-picked anecdotes don’t erase the data.

//But people like you are threatened by the changes because they challenged the cosy shibboleths that the left have developed this century. And that's the point.//

Pointing to decades of peer-reviewed research on minority stress isn’t a “cosy shibboleth.” It’s evidence. And pretending it’s just a leftist comfort blanket is how you avoid engaging with that evidence.

//As to Comey...//

A pivot, but irrelevant to the question of whether your “conservative revival” means dismantling social science progress. You still haven’t addressed that directly.

//And since the usual crowd have raised J6...//

Even if FBI agents were present, it doesn’t erase the fact that Jan 6 was a violent attempt to overturn an election. You don’t get to wash away right-wing mobilisation by pointing at the FBI.

That’s the real problem with your “pendulum” story: it only works if we all agree to forget the evidence. The past fifty years of research tell us what marginalisation does, how inclusion protects, and how rhetoric escalates. To revive your “base” is to uproot all of that. That’s not a pendulum swing. It’s an evidence denial project.

Trumpster is this not YOU!

The Trumpster, also known as mhaze, also known as the QAnon Shaman, Q Shaman, and Yellowstone Wolf, is a conspiracy theorist dressed in buffalo horns wearing red white and blue face paint he participated in the January 6 United States Capitol attack. He is a supporter of Donald Trump and a believer and disseminator of the QAnon conspiracy theory.

That certainly sounds like YOU.
p/s Calling yourself the Yellowstone Wolf, now that's rather catchy.

What keeps getting lost here is the way the "conservative revival" argument sidesteps evidence.

Decades of social science are clear: rhetoric that marginalises communities increases stress, depression, and suicide risk, while inclusion reduces harm and improves wellbeing. Instead of addressing that, the research gets relabelled as "woke ideology" or "shibboleths." Evidence is written off as fashion.

When data from Pew, Gallup, or Ipsos shows that minorities and younger cohorts overwhelmingly support inclusion, it gets brushed aside in favour of cherry-picked anecdotes. Statistics are replaced with isolated exceptions, as if one cancels out the other.

The "pendulum" metaphor is another escape hatch. By casting equality gains as just a swing that will naturally reverse, the real-world harm of undoing them disappears. But if history really worked like a pendulum, we’d still be in the Dark Ages. Progress doesn’t endlessly swing back and forth - it ratchets forward when the evidence shows it improves health and strengthens societies.

And the "back to base" slogan assumes the base was where it should be - conveniently, right around the time its advocates grew up. But what if the true "base" was earlier, before civil rights, before suffrage, before the Enlightenment itself? The very idea collapses once you stop treating nostalgia as destiny.

And whenever the pressure rises, the focus drifts - onto side issues or political conspiracies - anything but the actual findings of social research. The point isn’t to engage, it’s to change the subject.

The pattern is consistent: evidence becomes ideology, data becomes anecdotes, regression becomes a pendulum, and "base" becomes whatever era flatters the speaker. That’s not analysis. It’s a strategy for avoiding what the evidence actually says.

The great Selino Zito gets it...http://salenazito.com/2025/09/22/our-counterculture-revolution-is-here-and-it-is-a-revival/

I'm afraid JD never will

Counter-culture or reaction to Charlie Kirk?

From your article mhaze:

“Since the pandemic Millennials and Gen Z have shown significant increases in commitment to Jesus,” the Barna Group study reads, “while Boomers and Gen X, especially women, have remained flat in their commitment levels to Jesus.”

From Google:

"Charlie Kirk had 1.7 million Instagram followers. Today, that number has grown exponentially to over 13.1 million and keeps climbing! This kind of legacy could only come from a man that was driven by his faith in the Lord. His death signified an explosion of movement and growth that the world has never seen before."

So after the Charlie Kirk assassination we have Americas religious youth out making themselves known, yeah ok, so what?
We're talking about millenials and Gen Z, and they're just about on schedule to throw a fit being disillusioned with the world after the way they were raised into it.

Sorry, no offense to Jesus, just I just don't believe he suddenly came back into fashion or that this claimed 'revival' will hold.

He was starting to become more critical of Israel, and his base seemed to be divided, it seems he was friends with Carlson and Owens.
http://mondoweiss.net/2025/09/charlie-kirks-death-has-revealed-israel-is-as-polarizing-on-the-right-as-it-is-on-the-left/

"What people don’t understand is that upwards of 40 or 50 percent of the questions Charlie would receive, the challenges he received… were attacking Israel and attacking Charlie for being so pro-Israel..."

"It is hardly surprising that young conservatives are questioning the U.S. support for war crimes. Israel is conducting what countless human rights authorities, lately a U.N. commission calls a 'genocide'."

Something you should wake up to mhaze.
What Jesus taught and what Israel does are not compatible.
Which is it you support? One or the other?
You can't have your cake and eat it too.

So long as you turn the other cheek at murdered women and kids, all you'll ever be is a fake Christian, not one who follows Jesus teachings.

Your heart and mind belong to Netanyahu, not Jesus.
- And I'm not even religious and I know that.

Look at the Jewish money pouring in, to keep young Christian hearts and minds subverted and focused on Israel, and not Jesus teachings, what chumps.

There will never be any Christian revival without Jesus, you moron.