First Word

Christian Incrementalists never tire of telling us that when it comes to election time, we should follow the principle of choosing the lesser of two evils. This principle constitutes the major premise of their syllogism which always concludes that we should vote for the leading Republican candidate. The minor premise is, of course, Rudy, Mitt, and Fred are less evil than Barack, John, and Hillary. Indeed, the premise is actually much stronger. Rudy, Mitt, and Fred are good while Barack, John, and Hillary are bad.

I will leave it to the reader to unpack the almost wholly vacuous nature of the major premise. And there is no need to demonstrate that the minor premise is false since FW has posted several articles showing that there are no genuine differences between leading Republican and Democrat candidates. (Ron Paul excepted.) All are war-mongers, all are controlled by Judaic masters, all are globalists, all are statists, and all are liars.

If we grant that the incrementalist principle is sound, let us consider a hypothetical candidate for President of the US: Mahmoud Ahmadinajad, current President of Iran.

Below are excerpts from his recent speech to the UN. If we supposed that this was the platform he was running on, it would be obvious to any Christian who is not beholden to a political party that he would be a far better candidate than any the Republicans or Democrats are currently running. (Again, excepting Ron Paul.)

A transcription of Ahmadinajad’s speech to the UN can be found here.

Ahmadinejad’s Platform

1) Family and chastity

“In some societies, [the] beloved human has been reduced to a mere instrument of publicity and all the boundaries and protective shields of chastity, purity and beauty have been trampled. This is a colossal betrayal of human society, of succeeding generations and an irreparable blow to the pillar of social coherence, the family.”

2) The Police State

“Human rights are being extensively violated by certain powers, especially by those who pretend to be their exclusive advocates. Setting up secret prisons, abducting persons, trials and secret punishments, without any regard to due process, extensive tappings of telephone conversations, intercepting private mail, and frequent summons to police and security centers have become commonplace and prevalent.”

“The Palestinian people have been displaced or are under heavy military pressure, economic siege, or are incarcerated under abhorrent conditions. The occupiers are protected and praised, while the innocent Palestinians are subjected to political, military, and propaganda onslaught. The people of Palestine are deprived of water, electricity, and medicine for the sin of asking for freedom. And the government that was freely elected by the people is targeted.”

3) Race and culture

“Culture is the manifestation of identity and the key to the survival of nations and the foundation for their interaction with others.”

4) Central banks and international corporations

“While a major part of the natural environment in Asia, Africa, and Latin American is being plundered by the political and economic domination of certain powers, the situation of poverty and depravation [sic] is very alarming.”

5) Truth

“Some powers sacrifice all human values, including honesty, purity, and trust for the advancement of their goals. They propagate skepticism and deception in their relations between states and peoples. They lie openly, level baseless charges against others, act contrary to legal norms and damage the climate of trust and friendship.”

6) International agreements

“Some who were themselves the drafters of international law openly and easily violate it and apply discriminatory policies and double standards to others. They drafted disarmament regulations, but every day test and stock pile new generations of lethal weapons.”

7) Preemptive war

“Some rulers, who superficially appear to be powerful, believe the tools they have at hand can be used at any time and for any purpose, and consequently, threaten others and cast a shadow of insecurity over nations and regions.”

Conclusion

Incrementalists maintain that it is not only acceptable, but morally necessary to vote the lesser of two evils. Thus they demand that we vote for a cross-dresser (Rudy) or a Mormon (Mitt) or an actor (Fred). These freaks, after all, are supposedly less evil than their Democratic opponents. But if we are obligated to vote for freaks such as these, why could we not vote for a Muslim such as Mahmoud? And given that Mahmoud ’s views are not only saner, but far more biblical than those of the freaks, how could we, on Incrementalist grounds, resist the force of this argument?

Thus, if I were an Incrementalist and Mahmoud were running for President against the leading Republicans and Democrats, I would vote for him.