Watchman on the Tower: Ezra Taft Benson and the Making of the Mormon Right

[Fether]

10 hours ago, Teancum said:

See I think this is a problem. Benson was headstrong, outspoken, ignored council and the leadership pretty much lets him get away with it the outcome is no surprise. Yet right wing extremist now use Benson's views as revelation from God.

This is a major issue for sure. I remember growing up, and until only a few years ago, I wrestled with a lot of things older leaders said that seemed to be products of their time. Things that we no longer teach today. This goes all the way back to Brigham Young.

I think the church leadership is slowly getting better and better at not letting their personal views get muddied in with what they preach at the pulpit. I think this is one reason we see fewer and fewer opinion based conversations with the brethren published. I also get the feeling that they are extremely careful and restrictive with what they say in more private meetings.

I once asked Elder Gong a specific question about an LGBTQ issue my wife was having. I asked him because I knew he had experience with it in his family. He gave the traditional “we just need to love them” which didn’t address my question at all. I knew he had insights on it from his life, insights that would help my wife, but he just gave the basic Sunday school answer you would expect to get from any faithful Latter-day Saint.

If this was on purpose, I get why they do it… I just wish it wasn’t so 

Edited January 7, 2022 by Fether

[Duncan]

I find this really, really dumb or hypocritical but this online magazine that, to me, is very, very right wing, but they talk about how bad socialism and communism is and yet they are advertising a cruise to Russia!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! What is this nonsense?! 

https://latterdaysaintmag.com/are-communism-and-socialism-really-all-that-bad/

[Calm]

3 hours ago, Duncan said:

I find this really, really dumb or hypocritical but this online magazine that, to me, is very, very right wing, but they talk about how bad socialism and communism is and yet they are advertising a cruise to Russia!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! What is this nonsense?! 

https://latterdaysaintmag.com/are-communism-and-socialism-really-all-that-bad/

This is my brother in law.  We don’t always agree on politics, if you are wondering.  

They did a cruise travel agency just a few years after Russia opened up.  They advertised specifically to entrepreneurs and business persons to take a trip down the Volga.  The cruise also was offered to entrepreneurs and businesspeople from Russia.  The idea is the foreigners would do tours of the towns during the day while lessons on starting businesses, marketing, etc were held for the Russians on the ship and in the evening the two groups would mingle with the hope Russian businesses could become partners as well as also a lot of charitable work was done.  Most of the Russians at that time were there on ‘scholarship’.  
 

My husband teaches entrepreneurship, so he was hired a couple of times, I went with him once.  It was a very interesting trip.  Everyone seemed to be enjoying themselves.  The tour guides were usually Russian college kids.

After a few years the mob moved in and stole the business from them.  The US embassy told them they could do nothing and if my in laws went back to Russia they would most likely be assassinated.  Another friend of ours partnering with Radisson Hotels and the mayor of Moscow was killed (the mayor was hooked up with the mob and he was fighting back in court when they tried to push him out).  Apparently it has been long enough there is no longer a risk.

The idea of people who were taking the trip back then after the fall of the Soviet Union was hoping to show Russians a better way than the corruption they had experienced under communism.  I assume it is similar at this point, promoting a better way, trying to work with Russians to give them the tools they need to be successful while networking for the visitors as well as the tourist stuff.

I praised Canada to him while we were living there though he has probably forgotten that as we have been back in the US for almost 20 years. It is true there are some services that get delayed, but both my surgeries were almost as fast as my surgery in the US and our daughter’s week in the hospital when diagnosed with diabetes and all her treatment cost us a few hundred dollars and was very little paperwork.  Otoh, she could not get a pump there until an adult while she got it here the first time she met her doctor (age 13).  However, we were never concerned she might not be able to afford insulin and other necessities where we were quite nervous down here when she turned 26 and the insurance company wanted to dump her (the university finally insisted the keep her on our policy). 
 

There were things I loved about Canada and hated in the US and the reverse is true as well.  But most of the time I saw either approach as working middling well for us in the higher income bracket.  We are materially much better off here, but I also worry more about something going wrong.  If the school hadn’t forced the insurance to continue her on our policy, we were told it might take a couple of years for her to get aid as she had never worked and was kind of in a limbo area. That wouldn’t have happened in Canada.  If I was lower income, I would definitely prefer living in Canada with our health issues.

Edited January 7, 2022 by Calm

[The Nehor]

4 hours ago, Duncan said:

I find this really, really dumb or hypocritical but this online magazine that, to me, is very, very right wing, but they talk about how bad socialism and communism is and yet they are advertising a cruise to Russia!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! What is this nonsense?! 

https://latterdaysaintmag.com/are-communism-and-socialism-really-all-that-bad/

The far right has a weird love affair with Russia and some other authoritarian states for the last few years.

[Teancum]

15 hours ago, Chum said:

God uses some seriously flawed people. That's the miracle.

Or maybe the people that are flawed are just people and God is not using them at all.

[The Nehor]

7 minutes ago, Teancum said:

Or maybe the people that are flawed are just people and God is not using them at all.

 

[Calm]

8 hours ago, The Nehor said:

The far right has a weird love affair with Russia and some other authoritarian states for the last few years.

Mark’s interest in Russia has been going on for much longer than that.  “Love affair” is not the least how I would describe how he views Russia and other authoritarian states.  (Though I don’t remember what his view was in the past on Yeltsin and his predecessor in terms of the attempts at reform, so he may be positive in regards to those). Hates the government in many ways and perhaps neutral in others.  Don’t think I have ever heard him say the US should imitate Russia in any way.  They did developed good friendships with many of the people who worked for them as far as I could see (tour guides, translators, etc) as they often helped them visit the US, gave them support to start their own businesses, help with medical and family needs iirc.  He got to put his interest in Russia in action when the Soviet Union fell and he only took a break when he had a contract put out on him (according to the US Embassy in Moscow and I know the circumstances and was there for some of them so I know the assassination threat was not an exaggeration to make him and his wife more interesting).  They didn’t make a big deal of it as far as I could tell and just shifted their travel locations and style to a more global approach. Starting doing the Ukraine after their son went there on his mission.
 

 As far as I know he is into no conspiracy theories, I have never heard him repeat one and he isn’t one to not share what he is thinking.  He has also never said anything even close to relating to white supremacy around me or reported by anyone else, as far as I can tell his allegiance to the Republican Party is primarily based on economic policies.

His dad had been a career military man, a prisoner of war in Asia and my guess is that experience of his family had a dramatic effect on his worldview and politics and the role he believes America needs to play.  They lived in several places around the world while he was growing up and he has been traveling all the time I have known him (40 years).  He has not lived an insulated life.  Not saying he doesn’t have a very strong perspective that I strongly disagree with at times and I think he ignores too much in the Republican party and emphasizes loyalty too much (I see the influence of the military there) and he is definitely not a moderate, but assuming he is one of the more extreme cases would be quite wrong.

Edited January 8, 2022 by Calm

[smac97]

On 1/6/2022 at 9:58 AM, Teancum said:

I just finished reading this boo.  Has anyone else here read it?  It is a great book.  I kne ETB was very political and very extreme right wing.  But I did not realize how far he took it nor that he had presidential aspirations.  It seems that politics almost took precedence over his apostolic calling.  It also seems he has had a huge impact on the political views of so many church member in the US and especially in the west.  It seems pretty certain he was a right wing extremist.  The dominance of the Republican party among Latter day Saints can likely be laid at his feet as can so much of the right wing extremism among church members today. They all rely on his sermons extensively.

It amazes me how much influence and lasting impact, and not always for good, that one strong willed LDS leader can have and leave on the church. ETB did it politically.  McConkie and Joseph Fielding Smith did it in regards to dogmatic doctrine.

I've never read any of Pres. Benson's political messages.   He was the prophet of my childhood, but I hardly had any interest in politics during his tenure.  Then I went into the Army in 1991, then on a mission in 1993, and didn't really start to pay attention to politics until the 1996 presidential compaign.  

I feel like I've developed my political philosophies mostly through experience and observation, not through reading "political" materials.  I've never listened to Rush Limbaugh, or Sean Hannity, or Glenn Beck, or Fox News.  I satiate my need for news and politics by reading aggregator websites and blogs.  I've been studying law for over 20 years, so that has a big impact on me as well.

Over time my political philosophy has coalesced around a few core tenets.  I am a big fan of the Constitution.  I think "originalism" is better than "living document" approach to it.  I'm in favor of less government as opposed to more.  Strong constraints on federal power.  Fewer taxes as opposed to more.  Robust First Amendment protections.  A more "Free Market" approach to economics as opposed to socialism.  A healthy, but still conditional, social "safety net," but generally not long-term reliance.  A very strong military ("Si vis pacem, para bellum"), but broadly averse to military interventionism/adventurism. 

I did not arrive at these conclusions because of Ezra Taft Benson.  My parents, ardent Latter-day Saints, hardly spoke of politics, and certainly never taught me anything about ETB's political inclinations.  

I'm not a particularly big fan of either political party, but one of them seems to hew a bit closer to my political preferences.  But that's the main point: I didn't derive my political preferences from that political party. 

Thanks,

-Smac

[Teancum]

7 hours ago, Fether said:

Normalizing LGBTQ, elective abortion, and anything else that is against our teachings.

And are there right wing positions that are against the LDS Church's teachings?

[smac97]

16 hours ago, Teancum said:

See I think this is a problem. Benson was headstrong, outspoken, ignored council and the leadership pretty much lets him get away with it the outcome is no surprise. Yet right wing extremist now use Benson's views as revelation from God.

Which is rather ironic given that one of his "fourteen fundamentals in following the prophet" is "{t}he living prophet is more important to us than a dead prophet."

I have long been grateful that the Latter-day Saints, broadly speaking, are not really into the "cult of celebrity" mindset.  We do seem to prize and venerate Joseph Smith in a singular sense, largely because we view him as being a dispensation head like Moses or Abraham.  But he's long dead.  In my lifetime I have recollections of Presidents Kimball and Benson during my childhood, virtually no recollections of Pres. Hunter (I was on my mission for the entirety of his brief tenure as president of the Church), and in my adulthood I've experienced Presidents Hinckley, Monson and now Nelson.

In other words, there have only been two transitions that have had a potential effect on my outlook on the prophet (President Hinckley to President Monson, and President Monson to President Nelson).  In each instance I've contemplated and appreciated the efforts and contributions of these men, then raised my arm to the square and sustained their successor.

As between Pres. Benson and Pres. Nelson, the latter is more important and relevant to us in 2022.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited January 7, 2022 by smac97

[Fether]

10 minutes ago, Teancum said:

And are there right wing positions that are against the LDS Church's teachings?

Absolutely, but they are more on the fringe.

Edited January 7, 2022 by Fether

[Teancum]

20 minutes ago, smac97 said:

I've never read any of Pres. Benson's political messages.   He was the prophet of my childhood, but I hardly had any interest in politics during his tenure.  Then I went into the Army in 1991, then on a mission in 1993, and didn't really start to pay attention to politics until the 1996 presidential compaign.  

I feel like I've developed my political philosophies mostly through experience and observation, not through reading "political" materials.  I've never listened to Rush Limbaugh, or Sean Hannity, or Glenn Beck, or Fox News.  I satiate my need for news and politics by reading aggregator websites and blogs.  I've been studying law for over 20 years, so that has a big impact on me as well.

Over time my political philosophy has coalesced around a few core tenets.  I am a big fan of the Constitution.  I think "originalism" is better than "living document" approach to it.  I'm in favor of less government as opposed to more.  Strong constraints on federal power.  Fewer taxes as opposed to more.  Robust First Amendment protections.  A more "Free Market" approach to economics as opposed to socialism.  A healthy, but still conditional, social "safety net," but generally not long-term reliance.  A very strong military ("Si vis pacem, para bellum"), but broadly averse to military interventionism/adventurism. 

I did not arrive at these conclusions because of Ezra Taft Benson.  My parents, ardent Latter-day Saints, hardly spoke of politics, and certainly never taught me anything about ETB's political inclinations.  

I'm not a particularly big fan of either political party, but one of them seems to hew a bit closer to my political preferences.  But that's the main point: I didn't derive my political preferences from that political party. 

Thanks,

-Smac

Great!  But your personal experience does not have any impact on the fact the Benson's radical right wing views have had a heavy impact on the LDS CHurch in the political views of its members as well as even to day fostering  right wing extremism.  

[Teancum]

14 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Which is rather ironic given that one of his "fourteen fundamentals in following the prophet" is "{t}he living prophet is more important to us than a dead prophet."

I have long been grateful that the Latter-day Saints, broadly speaking, are not really into the "cult of celebrity" mindset.  We do seem to prize and venerate Joseph Smith in a singular sense, largely because we view him as being a dispensation head like Moses or Abraham.  But he's long dead.  In my lifetime I have recollections of Presidents Kimball and Benson during my childhood, virtually no recollections of Pres. Hunter (I was on my mission for the entirety of his brief tenure as president of the Church), and in my adulthood I've experienced Presidents Hinckley, Monson and now Nelson.

In other words, there have only been two transitions that have had a potential effect on my outlook on the prophet (President Hinckley to President Monson, and President Monson to President Nelson).  In each instance I've contemplated and appreciated the efforts and contributions of these men, then raised my arm to the square and sustained their successor.

As between Pres. Benson and Pres. Nelson, the latter is more important and relevant to us in 2022.

Thanks,

-Smac

I am not sure how this even begins to address the impact that an LDS leader that is head strong and outspoken and is not reigned in can have on the Church. Do you deny Benson did not and still does not impact the political views of so many Latter day Saints?  You should read the book.  It is not overtly negative.

[Calm]

Duncan and other Canadians here…do you know of any shutdown of hospitals in 1993?  I was there and don’t remember it and neither does my husband, but I was sleep deprived with a three year old who hadn’t taken a nap since she was 9 months old and kept me up quite a bit of the night each night until she was 5, so my memory isn’t the best and he just doesn’t remember stuff that isn’t important to him.  I had surgery sometime in 93 or 94, nonurgent and still had it within a month of the doctor’s appt, excellent treatment and hardly cost anything at all.  I remember hearing some horror stories about Ottawa though can’t remember the timing, but provinces shouldn’t be clumped together if that is what he is mistakenly doing.

And Mark is ignoring how Americans go to Canada to get their meds.  I would like to see competing numbers for those going north vs those coming south and see which is larger.

https://kutv.com/news/get-gephardt/americans-are-traveling-to-canada-to-save-money-on-medication

Not likely to go to any family reunions in the near future since I am avoiding the car even more these days and talking conservative politics around my daughter isn’t going happen, so can’t invite him over for dinner to debate him, so unfortunately by the time I see him next I will have forgotten that I wanted to ask him if he had calculated the American pharmacy tourist into his calculations.   

Edited January 8, 2022 by Calm

[The Nehor]

24 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Which is rather ironic given that one of his "fourteen fundamentals in following the prophet" is "{t}he living prophet is more important to us than a dead prophet."

When that talk was given President Benson was president of the quorum and the next in line. President Kimball was not in good health. If you looked at it cynically (and some at the time did) you could come to the conclusion that it was self-serving and preparing the ground for overturning what the previous dead prophets had said.

That never happened and of course those who tend to follow the caricature of President Benson they love generally go with one of two answers as to why current prophets are silent.

1. Declare that the church is either in some degree of apostasy (and that degree varies from full apostasy to being just a little off).

2. Declare that the church leaders know more than they are saying and are hiding it out of cowardice or as some kind of tactical ploy while the ‘true saints’ know what to do and will lead the rest through the crisis.

[smac97]

6 minutes ago, Teancum said:

I am not sure how this even begins to address the impact that an LDS leader that is head strong and outspoken and is not reigned in can have on the Church.

Okay.

6 minutes ago, Teancum said:

Do you deny Benson did not and still does not impact the political views of so many Latter day Saints?  You should read the book.  It is not overtly negative.

I have lived in Utah County for virtually my entire adult life.  I can count on one hand, with a few fingers left over, the instances of someone quoting or referencing ETB in a political context.  So I guess the "so many Latter-day Saints" thing is a bit of an unproven assumption.

Per this review:

Quote

“Reining in the Apostle” recounts the largely unsuccessful attempts by other General Authorities to muzzle Elder Benson. Part of the challenge was that President McKay was also a staunch conservative and an anticommunist, having even delivered some anticommunist addresses in general conference. But McKay’s views were not as conservative as Benson’s, and he did not like personal confrontations. Harris argues that Benson took advantage of this situation by either asking McKay’s permission to speak at Birch events or quoting McKay’s sermons in his own, then going beyond what the prophet would have endorsed while implying that endorsement. This tactic led senior Apostle Harold B. Lee to observe that “as long as McKay ‘can be quoted,’ Benson’s ‘militant diatribe following the John Birch line’ would continue” (84). After McKay’s death, the new First Presidency of Joseph Fielding Smith, Harold B. Lee, and N. Eldon Tanner warned Benson “not to discuss in general conference the John Birch Society, socialism, the welfare state, ‘secret combinations,’ ‘Gadianton Robbers,’ or anything conveying a government conspiracy” (86). Harris says that “Benson’s Birch crusade was temporarily interrupted when Harold B. Lee became church president in 1972” (87), but after Lee died unexpectedly, “Benson resumed his aggressive partisanship” (88). Spencer W. Kimball, who succeeded Lee and who had been called to the apostleship at the same time as Benson, tried with varying degrees of success to rein in Benson, who was now President of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles and next in line to the Presidency. Finally, after Benson delivered a particularly controversial 1980 devotional address at Brigham Young University, Kimball asked “Benson to apologize to the Quorum of the Twelve but they ‘were dissatisfied with the response,’” so Kimball “instructed Benson to apologize again . . . to a combined meeting of all the general authorities.” Apparently, Benson took this lesson to heart. He never again “spoke exclusively in public about politics or communism” (103).

The final chapter, “Remaking Benson,” discusses the years of Benson’s presidency, which lasted from November 1985 until May 1994. Because Watchman on the Tower is an examination of Benson’s political views, it glosses over some of his more memorable ecclesiastical endeavors, including his emphasis on reading the Book of Mormon, and focuses instead on what he did not do. As Church president, Benson did not engage in any appreciable political discourse, and as his health waned, counselors Gordon B. Hinckley and Thomas S. Monson assumed active leadership and promoted a more moderate image for the Church. But that does not mean that Benson’s earlier fiery political rhetoric became irrelevant. Harris traces some of the influence Benson’s speeches and writings have had on various ultraconservatives—from Glenn Beck to Cliven Bundy and his sons—even after Benson’s death.

So sure, there are "ultraconservatives" on the right, just as there are "ultras" on the left.

But how numerically significant are these folks in the Church, and how many of them trace their political inclinations to ETB's rhetoric?

Thanks,

-Smac

[smac97]

24 minutes ago, Teancum said:

Great!  But your personal experience does not have any impact on the fact the Benson's radical right wing views have had a heavy impact on the LDS CHurch in the political views of its members as well as even to day fostering  right wing extremism.  

Well, I'll probably need to read the book.  I live in the heart of Utah County, and I just don't hear people referencing ETB.  

Moreover, I have to wonder if there is a chicken-or-the-egg scenario going on.  Do "ultraconservatives" derive their political views from the writings of an apostle from half a century ago?  Or do some of them simply invoke ETB's writings to bolster their political viewpoints that were already there?

Thanks,

-Smac

[Teancum]

7 hours ago, Bob Crockett said:

The drift to the right started with Reed Smoot.   

Yes.  And Benson solidified it.  Utah was a New Deal state supporter.

[smac97]

13 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

When that talk was given President Benson was president of the quorum and the next in line. President Kimball was not in good health. If you looked at it cynically (and some at the time did) you could come to the conclusion that it was self-serving and preparing the ground for overturning what the previous dead prophets had said.

That never happened and of course those who tend to follow the caricature of President Benson they love generally go with one of two answers as to why current prophets are silent.

1. Declare that the church is either in some degree of apostasy (and that degree varies from full apostasy to being just a little off).

I think I'm in the Church, come what may.  I believe any member of the Church can be led astray, including leaders (witness the many who apostasized in the early days of the Church).  I also reject the notion of inerrancy (though I note that it is quite possible for a church leader to make a mistake, or even many mistakes, and yet not be "astray").  

However, I subscribe to the position that the Church and its leaders, collectively, will not be led astray.  

I believe in the prophecy found in Daniel 2 and in how it has been interpreted.  

I agree with Wilford Woodruff that "The Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as President of this Church to lead you astray. It is not in the programme. It is not in the mind of God."  I think that's right.

I believe in The Book of Mormon, in its testimony of Jesus Christ, and of the implications that are associated with the prophetic mantle involved in its production, preservation, and transmission to us.

I believe the sentiment expressed here (attributed to Joseph Smith): "‘I will give you a key that will never rust, —if you will stay with the majority of the Twelve Apostles, and the records of the Church, you will never be led astray."

The Church is not perfect.  But it is, in my view, overwhelmingly good.  I love it a lot.  

13 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

2. Declare that the church leaders know more than they are saying and are hiding it out of cowardice or as some kind of tactical ploy while the ‘true saints’ know what to do and will lead the rest through the crisis.

This sort of self-serving mindreading is how we end up with Julie Rowe, Chad Daybell, and their ilk.

"Sustaining the Brethren" has to mean something.  A big part of that is letting them speak for themselves, and not gilding the lilly.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Duncan]

45 minutes ago, Calm said:

Duncan and other Canadians here…do you know of any shutdown of hospitals in 1993?  I was there and don’t remember it, but was sleep deprived with a three year old who hadn’t taken a nap since she was 9 months old and kept me up quite a bit of the night each night until she was 5, so my memory isn’t the best.  I had surgery sometime in 93 or 94, nonurgent and still had it within a month of the doctor’s appt, excellent treatment and hardly cost anything at all.  I remember hearing some horror stories about Ottawa though can’t remember the timing, but provinces shouldn’t be clumped together if that is what he is mistakenly doing.

And Mark is ignoring how Americans go to Canada to get their meds.  I would like to see competing numbers for those going north vs those coming south and see which is larger.

https://kutv.com/news/get-gephardt/americans-are-traveling-to-canada-to-save-money-on-medication

Not likely to go to any family reunions and talking conservative politics around my daughter isn’t going happen, so can’t invite him over for dinner to debate him, so unfortunately by the time I see him next I will have forgotten that I wanted to ask him if he had calculated the American pharmacy tourist into his calculations.   

I have never, ever heard of any hospitals being shut down! I remember 1993 and it didn't happen.  I know, at least here, in the 90's they fired a lot of nurses and there was a big thing about that but that was a provincial government thing but they never shut down any hospitals. 

[Teancum]

26 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Well, I'll probably need to read the book.  I live in the heart of Utah County, and I just don't hear people referencing ETB. 

I do not live in UTah but I sure have a lot of LDS friends the reference Benson frequently to defend their right wing views.  And I see a lot of right wing LDS sites on FB that do the same.  I think you would enjoy the book.

26 minutes ago, smac97 said:

 

 

 

Moreover, I have to wonder if there is a chicken-or-the-egg scenario going on.  Do "ultraconservatives" derive their political views from the writings of an apostle from half a century ago?  Or do some of them simply invoke ETB's writings to bolster their political viewpoints that were already there?

Thanks,

-Smac

I think Benson had a huge impact on the right wing and republican political view of Latter day Saints. If you read the book you will see there was much more of a political plurality among church members before him.  But sure, some right wing extremists may be that way anyway and just use his views to bolster their opinions.  But ha gave them plenty to draw from.

[Duncan]

I think Pres. Oaks' talk from 1992 is fantastic and should be repeated. I like points 17 and 19

https://speeches.byu.edu/talks/dallin-h-oaks/strengths-can-become-downfall/

[The Nehor]

36 minutes ago, smac97 said:

I have lived in Utah County for virtually my entire adult life.  I can count on one hand, with a few fingers left over, the instances of someone quoting or referencing ETB in a political context.  So I guess the "so many Latter-day Saints" thing is a bit of an unproven assumption.

I think you are a statistical outlier.

I have never lived in Utah or Idaho and I would have to do more than go barefoot or wear sandals to count how often I heard quotes used this way. Happened in meetings, informal conversations, chatting with fellow missionaries, online, everywhere. That is not even counting the times where I recognize that someone is paraphrasing something ETB said. My dad generally leans slightly right and would complain about the catastrophic mindset of many people who would use ETB’s writings and quotes. Of course the weirdness of using quotes about an imminent communist threat decades later to say there is an imminent communist threat is often lost on those who use the quotes. 

[smac97]

1 minute ago, Teancum said:

I do not live in UTah but I sure have a lot of LDS friends the reference Benson frequently to defend their right wing views. 

Okay.  That has not been my experience in Utah County.  At all, really.

And again, 

1 minute ago, Teancum said:

And I see a lot of right wing LDS sites on FB that do the same.  I think you would enjoy the book.

I question how reflective social media content is of the real world.  

1 minute ago, Teancum said:

Quote

Moreover, I have to wonder if there is a chicken-or-the-egg scenario going on.  Do "ultraconservatives" derive their political views from the writings of an apostle from half a century ago?  Or do some of them simply invoke ETB's writings to bolster their political viewpoints that were already there?

I think Benson had a huge impact on the right wing and republican political view of Latter day Saints. If you read the book you will see there was much more of a political plurality among church members before him. 

I think the political divide has become much more acute in recent decades.  JFK could not survive in today's Democratic Party.  And before that, the Republican Party's first political platform condemned "those twin relics of barbarism — polygamy and slavery."  And later, in 1888, the  party declared, "The political power of the Mormon Church in the Territories as exercised in the past is a menace to free institutions too dangerous to be longer suffered."

In other words, political parties and ideologies are pretty organic.  They evolve and change over time, such that individuals and groups may end up shifting political allegiances as party ideologies change.

1 minute ago, Teancum said:

But sure, some right wing extremists may be that way anyway and just use his views to bolster their opinions.  But ha gave them plenty to draw from.

The many Latter-day Saints of my acquaintance have a variety of opinions about things, but most lean conservative.  But I don't think they are conservative because they have been reading Ezra Taft Benson's writings from a half century ago.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Teancum]

2 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Okay.  That has not been my experience in Utah County.  At all, really.

And again, 

I question how reflective social media content is of the real world.  

I think the political divide has become much more acute in recent decades.  JFK could not survive in today's Democratic Party.  And before that, the Republican Party's first political platform condemned "those twin relics of barbarism — polygamy and slavery."  And later, in 1888, the  party declared, "The political power of the Mormon Church in the Territories as exercised in the past is a menace to free institutions too dangerous to be longer suffered."

In other words, political parties and ideologies are pretty organic.  They evolve and change over time, such that individuals and groups may end up shifting political allegiances as party ideologies change.

The many Latter-day Saints of my acquaintance have a variety of opinions about things, but most lean conservative.  But I don't think they are conservative because they have been reading Ezra Taft Benson's writings from a half century ago.

Thanks,

-Smac

Read the book. It is really good and again not overtly critical.  I think you will enjoy it. And it is clear that President Benson was a fascinating man.