Jump to content

DezNat (Deseret Nation) = White Nationalism? - Part 2


Recommended Posts

16 hours ago, teddyaware said:

It’s proof alright because the proof is on the video. I’m not going to watch it again for you. If you’re interested enough to want to know, watch the video. Otherwise, all the best.

I think for those that don't want to watch the whole way through they could start watching at the 30:00 mark because that's where it is all brought together when the one asks, "Are we DezNats?" The answer was yes and no. They were more just trying to stay in line with the teachings of the church. 

Link to post

At the very beginning of the video, Kwaku says they both suck (Deznat and Progmos).  How is that aligning himself with Deznat?

Around the 30 minute mark, it appears they are saying the progmos classify anyone who does not agreed with them immediately and voice a desire “to burn” whatever is the current target of criticism as one monolithic group and since they believe in allowing for revelation from the prophets in God’s time, they accept that they would be seen as Deznat by progmos.  But they seem to be complimenting Deznats mostly on their humor and not identifying with them. Cardon Ellis specially says he is ?not (typo?) identifying with them. 
 

It comes across as a rejection of progmos, not acceptance of Deznats to me....which is in line with what Hanna told me about Kwaku’s view about Deznat. 
 

Right at the end the discussion is how Deznats are Love God and Progmos are Love one another and how they are both wrong because it is both. 
 

I don’t see any alignment with Deznat, they just see them as less destructive and more entertaining than progmos because they see progmos as destroying testimony, etc. 

Edited by Calm
  • Like 1
Link to post
40 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

A quick rundown of the deznat tag right now shows...

Bless you for your service so we don’t have to look...

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
3 hours ago, Calm said:

Right at the end the discussion is how Deznats are Love God and Progmos are Love one another and how they are both wrong because it is both.

DezNat v. Progmo on Twitter is an example of our polarized and degraded public discourse.  Sure, trolling the other side is fun but at the end of the day I don't see how being mean or edgy on Twitter is consistent with loving God, or loving each other.

Also, probably a distinction without a difference. But I don't believe loving God and loving one another are separated.  Loving God is loving each other and loving each other is loving God.  I don't think you can love God and hate people.  I don't think you can hate people and love God.

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
20 hours ago, teddyaware said:

Does Kwaku’s response, “My 2nd trip to LA in one week. When you write/film a new show taking down the CES Letter you gotta do it right. Can’t wait for you guys to see it 💛” seem like he’s mad at Robert?

image.jpeg

You seem to be missing a basic understanding how of Twitter works. In the example above Kwaku tweeted first and then Robert Quote Tweeted(a type of reply) with the N word. 

Phaedrus

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
On 12/8/2020 at 12:13 PM, rongo said:

I don't know that we really can. The lines are really blurred between racist language and "okay" racist language (because it's used by that race, people who are woke, or whatever). I think the larger issue being exposed is bigger than racism (it encompasses racism within it), and that is the slide of crudity and crassness in LDS culture. 

Am I wrong in thinking that the line has shifted with swearing and crudity, to where a different standard is accepted or tolerated by even "upstanding" people (compared to years past)? Looking at movies that "mainstream" church members are okay with, for example, compared with what members would have thought 20-30 years ago. Or music. 

I think a big part of the problem with the DezNat and Kwaku-style social media personalities is a) their lack of a filter (even when they're aware that the boomers feel they need to be more careful, they see that as . . . boomerism) and b) their lack of long-term cause-and-effect thinking. This reflects youth and young adults in general, but racist language, crude jokes, outrageousness for effect, etc. are part and parcel what people are reacting negatively to. While they feel they are "just keeping it real," but they are ineffective communicators except within their own echo chamber communities. 

And yet I’ve seen dozens of inactive members come back to Church because of the deznat hashtag content. I’ve seen many decide to go and leave on missions because of it.

I know people who are being baptized and supported by a community of Saints in a time when we can’t meet in our wards. 
 

I saw the deznat community raise $40,000+ for a young sister who lost her husband in a tragic accident a couples months ago.

I know of at least 2 absolutely stellar podcasts come out of it.

I think it’s a lot more effective than you realize. 
 

The deznat style is extremely effective. It’s why kwaku, despite some issues with the tag, has been effective in his videos.

I don’t know if you guys have talked about the Reddit response to the CES letter videos kwaku made but the exmormons there were completely melting down. Some were expressing doubt whether the decision they made to leave the Church was correct. 
 

People can complain about style from here to Jerusalem. But the fact is too many of us are refusing to actually fight back and defend our beliefs. I don’t mean violently fight. But fight nonetheless. We are too worried about being seen as nice or the right style that we aren’t trusting the Lord and putting ourselves out there.


The Lord said He would thresh the nations with the “weak and foolish” of the world. Not the “nice & scholarly”

 

maybe we don’t need to be nice. Maybe we can fight for our beliefs. Maybe we don’t have to say the perfect things or make the perfect argument. Maybe all it takes is for us to open our mouth and trust the Lord

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
On 12/8/2020 at 12:23 PM, strappinglad said:

Anytime someone says or writes " N-word " or for that matter " F-word " my mind tries to stifle the actual word but rarely succeeds .It is kind of like using the word " shoot" or the word " freaking " . Does it somehow make us " better " ? 

I’m thinking we need to stop filtering ourselves and just say what we are trying to say.

how many times are we filtering out the Spirit?

 

Link to post
On 12/8/2020 at 1:33 PM, teddyaware said:

I carefully examined the Twitter link you provided and there’s nothing there that indicates Kwaku himself had anything negative to say about the Deznats. To be clear, there is someone on there who had something negative to say who goes by the screen name of Kavitiko, but Kavitiko and Kwaku are two different people (since both of these names start with a K and have a second K it’s easy to see why Nofrear made an understandable mistake). 

Kwaku and some of deznat have disagreements.

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
On 12/8/2020 at 6:20 PM, webbles said:

Based off the tweet you shared, Robert wasn't trying to communicate with Kwaku.  He was sharing to the people who are listening to him (Robert) what Kwaku said.  And he (Robert) was adding his own commentary.  It is possible that Kwaku hasn't even seen what Robert wrote.

I’m 100% certain Robert and kwaku don’t get along.

Robert is pretty much a troll 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
10 minutes ago, Avatar4321 said:

I don’t know if you guys have talked about the Reddit response to the CES letter videos kwaku made but the exmormons there were completely melting down. Some were expressing doubt whether the decision they made to leave the Church was correct. 
 

I saw them. They are quite interesting if for real. (I tend to be cautious when everyone has an alias).

Link to post

Felt like I should add a couple of deznat user podcast. You’ll zero white nationalist nonsense.

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-narrow-gate/id1509551645?i=1000472330431
 

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/spiritual-arson/id1527950386?i=1000488920350
 

both are really good. Spiritual Arson is really really good imho

 

Link to post
14 minutes ago, Avatar4321 said:

And yet I’ve seen dozens of inactive members come back to Church because of the deznat hashtag content. I’ve seen many decide to go and leave on missions because of it.

I know people who are being baptized and supported by a community of Saints in a time when we can’t meet in our wards. 
 

I saw the deznat community raise $40,000+ for a young sister who lost her husband in a tragic accident a couples months ago.

I know of at least 2 absolutely stellar podcasts come out of it.

I think it’s a lot more effective than you realize. 
 

The deznat style is extremely effective. It’s why kwaku, despite some issues with the tag, has been effective in his videos.

I don’t know if you guys have talked about the Reddit response to the CES letter videos kwaku made but the exmormons there were completely melting down. Some were expressing doubt whether the decision they made to leave the Church was correct. 
 

People can complain about style from here to Jerusalem. But the fact is too many of us are refusing to actually fight back and defend our beliefs. I don’t mean violently fight. But fight nonetheless. We are too worried about being seen as nice or the right style that we aren’t trusting the Lord and putting ourselves out there.


The Lord said He would thresh the nations with the “weak and foolish” of the world. Not the “nice & scholarly”

 

maybe we don’t need to be nice. Maybe we can fight for our beliefs. Maybe we don’t have to say the perfect things or make the perfect argument. Maybe all it takes is for us to open our mouth and trust the Lord

I would think that spiritual progress is more like being more Christlike, which is not the same as returning to church or going on a mission. 

If people are being better versions of themselves, great. On the other hand if they're leaning harder into fundamentalism and believing that one church is the only righteous path? Then what kind of church will they be creating?

When the group is the most important thing, character becomes less important.

Link to post
33 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

I would think that spiritual progress is more like being more Christlike, which is not the same as returning to church or going on a mission. 

If people are being better versions of themselves, great. On the other hand if they're leaning harder into fundamentalism and believing that one church is the only righteous path? Then what kind of church will they be creating?

When the group is the most important thing, character becomes less important.

Do you know a righteous path other than the covenant path with Jesus Christ?

Because I don’t 

Link to post
18 minutes ago, Avatar4321 said:

Do you know a righteous path other than the covenant path with Jesus Christ?

Because I don’t 

Can you respect others' sincere belief in other paths being righteous? Can you accept the possibility that other righteous paths can exist?

Link to post
4 hours ago, Avatar4321 said:

And yet I’ve seen dozens of inactive members come back to Church because of the deznat hashtag content. I’ve seen many decide to go and leave on missions because of it.

I know people who are being baptized and supported by a community of Saints in a time when we can’t meet in our wards. 
 

I saw the deznat community raise $40,000+ for a young sister who lost her husband in a tragic accident a couples months ago.

I know of at least 2 absolutely stellar podcasts come out of it.

I think it’s a lot more effective than you realize. 
 

The deznat style is extremely effective. It’s why kwaku, despite some issues with the tag, has been effective in his videos.

I don’t know if you guys have talked about the Reddit response to the CES letter videos kwaku made but the exmormons there were completely melting down. Some were expressing doubt whether the decision they made to leave the Church was correct. 
 

People can complain about style from here to Jerusalem. But the fact is too many of us are refusing to actually fight back and defend our beliefs. I don’t mean violently fight. But fight nonetheless. We are too worried about being seen as nice or the right style that we aren’t trusting the Lord and putting ourselves out there.


The Lord said He would thresh the nations with the “weak and foolish” of the world. Not the “nice & scholarly”

 

maybe we don’t need to be nice. Maybe we can fight for our beliefs. Maybe we don’t have to say the perfect things or make the perfect argument. Maybe all it takes is for us to open our mouth and trust the Lord

I am not sure I want people coming back to church because they think it embraces nationalism.

Link to post
10 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

I am not sure I want people coming back to church because they think it embraces nationalism.

An important element that you’re leaving out of your thought process on this is that the Constitution of the United States is the only system of government on the earth that’s inspired of God, and that by being loyal to the Constitution of the United States, and loyal to the United States itself, one is being loyal to the designs and will of God. In fact, in the Doctrine and Covenants the Lord himself commands his people to to befriend, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. People who think as you do are going to have a tough time convincing patriotic American Latter-Day Saints that they don’t have a sacred responsibility to uphold and defend the United States as a land established by God himself as a bulwark of liberty in a world that’s rapidly throwing away the sacred principle of the God given sovereign rights of men.

Link to post

Here's an interesting development:

Quote

Senator Mike Lee (R) blocked legislation to create a Latino and women's history Smithsonian museums on Thursday, citing that the United States does not need "'separate but equal' museums for hyphenated identity groups."

Lee argued that by creating more Smithsonian museums was a larger issue than just funding and believes that the new museums "weaponize diversity" and will push people apart rather than unite them.

"The Smithsonian Institution should not have an exclusive Museum of American Latino History, or a Museum of Women’s History or a Museum of American Men’s History, or Mormon History, or Asian American History. American history is an inclusive story that should unite us," Lee said in his remarks.

I think Sen. Lee makes an interesting and reasonable philosophical point.  

But his point is not altogether correct.  He said the Smithsonian "should not have an exclusive Museum of American Latino History ... or Asian American History."  Well, why not?  The Smithsonian already has the National Museum of African American History and Culture and the National Museum of the American Indian.

Is the camel's nose already in the tent?  If we already have a "National Museum of African American History and Culture" and a National Museum of the American Indian, why not open ones for Latino-Americans?  And Asian-Americans?  And women?

But then, would we be collectively okay with the Smithsonian opening a "National Museum of European-American History," even though this is the largest panethnic group in the United States?

And what about a "National Museum of Men's History?"  Would that by okay?

Thanks,

-Smac

 

Edited by smac97
Link to post
6 hours ago, Meadowchik said:

Can you respect others' sincere belief in other paths being righteous? Can you accept the possibility that other righteous paths can exist?

Christ said there was one “I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.” John 14:6

So again, what other righteous path is there?

Link to post
3 hours ago, The Nehor said:

I am not sure I want people coming back to church because they think it embraces nationalism.

You don’t want people coming back to the Church because it embraces loyalty to the Kingdom of God?

why not?

Link to post
3 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Here's an interesting development:

I think Sen. Lee makes an interesting and reasonable philosophical point.  

But his point is not altogether correct.  He said the Smithsonian "should not have an exclusive Museum of American Latino History ... or Asian American History."  Well, why not?  The Smithsonian already has the National Museum of African American History and Culture and the National Museum of the American Indian.

Is the camel's nose already in the tent?  If we already have a "National Museum of African American History and Culture" and a National Museum of the American Indian, why not open ones for Latino-Americans?  And Asian-Americans?  And women?

But then, would be be collectively okay with the Smithsonian opening a "National Museum of European-American History," even though this is the largest panethnic group in the United States?

And what about a "National Museum of Men's History?"  Would that by okay?

Thanks,

-Smac

 

I agree it is an interesting discussion but I’m a little confused what it has to do with the thread. I’m sorry 

Link to post
1 minute ago, Avatar4321 said:

Christ said there was one “I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.” John 14:6

So again, what other righteous path is there?

From the January 1988 Ensign:

Quote

In 1975, I received a letter from a young man who was investigating the Church. He was involved with a popular Hindu group in America and felt that he had found considerable truth in Hinduism. He told me that he was having trouble gaining a testimony of the restored gospel because of the problem of “diluted truth.”

In answer, I wrote, “By ‘diluted truth,’ I suppose you mean that it seems strange to you that elements of truth can be found in more than one church or religious movement. … Why, then, if [the Latter-day Saints] claim to have the only true church, is it so easy to see that other religious movements also have truth in them?”

Continuing, I wrote, “We should never be surprised to find truth anywhere. … The Light of Christ is in and upon all men, and all men who are honest have the right to enjoy the rewards of their goodness.”

I quoted Doctrine and Covenants 130:20–21: “There is a law, irrevocably decreed in heaven before the foundations of this world, upon which all blessings are predicated—

“And when we obtain any blessing from God, it is by obedience to that law upon which it is predicated.”

I then told him that “if anyone obeys any eternal principle he will automatically reap the reward for living that law. God will give any and all men his or their reward.” We as Latter-day Saints do indeed believe that there is truth in many religions and philosophies. Many good and great religious leaders have walked the earth. Through their teachings, they have raised the spiritual, moral, and ethical awareness of their people.

When we speak of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as the only true church, we mean that it is the only organization authorized to administer the ordinances of salvation. We mean that it is the only organization led by Jesus Christ, through the earthly ministries of prophets and Apostles. Although the Church teaches the true doctrines of salvation, we do not mean that it is the only teacher of truth.

Ever since the early days of the Church, various General Authorities have expressed the Church’s position toward non-Christian religions: we should not only be tolerant of their beliefs, but we should also respect them. On 15 February 1978, for example, the First Presidency, consisting of President Spencer W. Kimball and his counselors, President Marion G. Romney and President N. Eldon Tanner, issued an official statement regarding the Church’s position toward other religions. The statement reads:

“Based upon ancient and modern revelation, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints gladly teaches and declares the Christian doctrine that all men and women are brothers and sisters, not only by blood relationship from mortal progenitors, but also as literal spirit children of an Eternal Father.

The great religious leaders of the world such as Mohammed, Confucius, and the Reformers, as well as philosophers including Socrates, Plato, and others, received a portion of God’s light. Moral truths were given to them by God to enlighten whole nations and to bring a higher level of understanding to individuals.

“The Hebrew prophets prepared the way for the coming of Jesus Christ, the promised Messiah, who should provide salvation for all mankind who believe in the gospel.

“Consistent with these truths, we believe that God has given and will give to all people sufficient knowledge to help them on their way to eternal salvation, either in this life or in the life to come.

“We also declare that the gospel of Jesus Christ, restored to his Church in our day, provides the only way to a mortal life of happiness and a fullness of joy forever. For those who have not received this gospel, the opportunity will come to them in the life hereafter if not in this life.

“Our message therefore is one of special love and concern for the eternal welfare of all men and women, regardless of religious belief, race, or nationality, knowing that we are truly brothers and sisters because we are the sons and daughters of the same Eternal Father.”

This statement declares that (1) all human beings are children of God and therefore brothers and sisters, (2) the only way to obtain a fulness of joy is through the gospel as restored to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, (3) everyone will have the opportunity to accept the gospel, if not in mortality, then in the life to come, and (4) “great religious leaders of the world” (those specifically listed in the statement, as well as many others), have received “a portion of God’s light.” Certainly, Mohammed raised the religious consciousness and ethical awareness of his nation as well as that of many beyond its borders. Confucius gave the people of East Asia a higher ethical standard than existed throughout most of the world.

Of course, there is much in other religions that we cannot accept or condone. In them, truths are frequently found side by side with superstition, sorcery, and error. Within many religions, one may find ethics, doctrines, or beliefs that are clearly of worth and that contain eternal truths. At the same time, one may find incorrect doctrines and possibly even practices inspired by the powers of darkness. The phrase “buyer beware” is certainly appropriate in the study of religions.

Simply put, the world is better because good people of all races, nations, kindreds, and tongues have recognized truth and appropriate ways of living and have endeavored to share those truths. Those truths, in turn, have helped to prepare the way for the restored gospel. With regard, then, to the religions of the world—Christian or not—we as Latter-day Saints need to cultivate an attitude of friendship and goodwill toward all people of all religions. “Our message,” as the First Presidency stated, “is one of special love and concern for the eternal welfare of all men and women.”

Thanks,

-Smac

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...