Protests in Germany against Merkel
It’s always hard to know what protests represent, because the crowds in the streets are always a very small percentage of a population. The real question is always: how many people sympathize with the protesters, and how many don’t? And what are they prepared to do about it?
With that caveat, I report that a lot of Germans seem angry with Angela Merkel and would like her out:
Merkel’s premiership is hanging by a thread today as thousands gathered to call for her resignation while a key political ally dramatically withdrew his support over immigration policy.
More than 5,000 protested in Berlin and thousands more throughout Germany over the ‘open-door’ policy that many have blamed for four brutal terrorist attacks that left 13 dead over the last month.
The Chancellor faced a fresh wave of fury after it emerged that two recent terror attacks and a third killing were carried out by men who entered the country as refugees.
This outcome was inevitable. The combination of a wave of refugees—many of them young men—from Muslim countries, the inability of Europe to properly vet or track them, and the calls by ISIS and the like for them to attack Europeans in their host countries, have made for an obviously toxic brew. I wonder what on earth Merkel thought would happen as a result of letting in so many refugees. Even though the vast majority of the newcomers are law-abiding, there were always going to be a significant number who would take up the jihad call.
But Merkel is determined to forge ahead. However, the defection of one of her key allies—Horst Seehofer, the conservative premier of Bavaria (where most of the recent attacks took place)—may end up being the straw that breaks the Merkel coalition’s back:
Speaking after a meeting with the Bavarian government in Tegernsee, he added that the solutions to date were ‘too inadequate.’
Stressing he had no wish to start a quarrel with Merkel’s party, Seehofer said it was important to look ‘reality’ in the face.
An axe rampage, a shooting spree, a knife attack and a suicide bombing in the span of a week stunned Germany, leaving 13 people dead, including three assailants, and dozens wounded.
Three of the four attackers were asylum seekers, and two of the assaults were claimed by the Islamic State group.
But to look reality in the face is something that Europe—and the US’s Democratic wing—has been very reluctant to do. You can see the strain in a recent speech by Merkel:
…[I]n a powerful speech on Thursday, Merkel said that she would not allow jihadists to keep her government from being guided by reason and compassion.
‘Despite the great unease these events inspire, fear can’t be the guide for political decisions,’ she said.
‘It is my deep conviction that we cannot let our way of life be destroyed,’ she added.
Critics of Merkel would say that they are the ones being guided by reason and compassion, and that the two must be in the proper balance in which compassion does not overshadow and overwhelm reason. They would also say that it is the entry of so many jihadi- and/or sharia-promoting newcomers that threatens to destroy the German and Western European way of life, not the reduction in the flow of those newcomers.
And although this news involves France, and the perpetrator was not a refugee but a “French national of Algerian origin,” it cannot help Merkel’s cause that, “A French ISIS fanatic who ended up murdering a Catholic priest got through a police investigation to become an airport baggage handler ”˜easily’.” It turns out that, until three months ago, future terrorist Abdelmalik Petitjean had worked full time at busy Chambery airport.
This illustrates the scope of the problem. The more recent refugees who committed the German attacks are a somewhat different phenomenon than someone like Petitjean, who went to school in France (although it’s not clear whether he was born there or in Algeria; I believe it was probably the latter). Petitjean was apparently radicalized recently, probably within the last few months or so, and was known to be an ISIS sympathizer. But even that was not enough to stop him, because the authorities did not know his name:
Security services were searching for him the week prior to the attack, police sources told Reuters, after a foreign intelligence service alerted the French to his plans to conduct an assault.
French intelligence only had an image of Petitjean, with the counter-extremism unit UCLAT sending the photograph to different police units four days earlier on July 22, reading that the man “could be ready to participate in an attack on national territory.”
It added that the unidentified person “could already be present in France and act alone or with other individuals. The date, the target and the modus operandi of these actions are for the moment unknown,” according to a UCLAT flyer obtained by the Associated Press. But authorities never flagged Petitjean after the image’s release and his identity was not known, hampering the search, another source close to the investigation told Reuters Thursday.
Petitjean was only properly identified by name through DNA-testing after he was killed by police. No one who knew him prior to this had sensed that he would become a jihadi; he seemed no more at risk than any other Muslim youth in the country, not especially devout nor especially serious or troubled. This is another pattern for terrorists, what one might call “sudden radicalization syndrome,” which I believe is a very real phenomenon.
Another chilling item is this: “Petitjean was one of 10,000 people that French authorities have marked as radicalized or on the verge of radicalization.” No wonder they can’t follow them all. It makes the growing support for what is called “the far right” in Europe—and in this country, Donald Trump—quite understandable, and every terrorist attack probably only adds to that reaction.
Interesting that Merkel talks about compassion. “A feeling of deep sympathy and sorrow for another who is stricken by misfortune,” according to the definition I found.
That, it would appear, would be directed at the Syrians who are left homeless by social unrest in their country, for example. Or maybe Libyans, whose country was torn apart by Hillary Clinton’s ill-considered attempt to earn national security chops by killing a national leader (who, BTW, was doing pretty much what we wanted him to do).
Leave aside, for the moment, the reasons Libya and Syrian are falling apart — the latest crop of killers in Europe are actually home-grown. Merkel’s use of the word “compassion” is entirely misguided. Why isn’t anyone noting that and calling her out on it.
The truth is, her compassion is seriously misplaced. She ought to be more concerned about Germans than about so-called refugees fleeing their homeland. The only misfortune Petitjean experienced was to follow the wrong religious leader.
Obama plays the same card — that Americans are bigger than to ignore people in need. It’s misplaced. It’s a smokescreen to cover what Merkel and Obama are really doing — bringing in cheap labor and Democrat voters. And in doing so they are ignoring the most important role of national government — the protection of its citizens. The rest is BS and needs to be called that. Constantly.
The bien-pensants and almost all the left-leaning media in Western Europe are far more concerned with castigating the critics of the influx of Muslims as bigoted and xenophobic (or “Islamophobic”) than with accurately reporting on this problem. In England, the Guardian misled its readers for years about the nature and extent of the problem of gangs of Muslim men raping and brutalizing thousands of young English girls; recently, in this country the authorities have been suppressing the facts of the sexual abuse of a very young disabled girl in Twin Falls, ID by Muslim boys accepted as refugees.
The Western leadership knows what it’s doing.
The goal is to dissolve the West’s cultural and national bonds.
The world-view they embrace does not allow them to recognize the Islamic threat, nor can they reject multiculturalism’s deeply flawed premises, so they rationalize it as a problem for the police.
Which ensures that the cancer will grow. Even if tomorrow they ended all Muslim migration into Europe, the much higher Muslim birth rate guarantees that result.
60% of Western Europe and 50% of the U.S. pop. is deeply invested in the Left’s suicidal ideology and they will block any effective response.
That is why Western Europe is doomed and, the United States faces a probable civil war.
“A house divided cannot stand.” A. Lincoln
I have to add a few more levels of complexity to this situation. The TV is now reporting that they expect 30,000 Turks at the pro-democracy/pro-Erogan demonstration in Cologne tomorrow. It is apparently being organized by a pro-democracy umbrella group. The police are trying to provide security in case there arre any counter demos.
This gives you some idea of the path Merkel has to weave between people who want the migration stopped, people who are supporting the human rights compassion agenda, some real right wing groups, especially in the East, Turks who have lived here for 40 years and are pretty well assimilated, and Turks who live in enclaves and don’t want to change. And then you have to take in the politicians who are angling for power. Seehofer from Bavaria is a real populist and has been trying to improve his nationwide standing for years, although his party exists in only one state. The Social Democrats will do whatever it takes to get the chancellorship back. The Greens are the ultimate do-gooders and have a voice in Claudia Roth, an idiot who has been portraying herself as the ultimake Turkey understander for years,. The Left is now opposing immigration so it can hold on to its constituents in the East. And the AfD is trying to win as many voters as possible, but they also have some nutjobs in their leadership.
Add to this, Erdogan himself who has been telling Turks here not to assimilate and is driving very hard bargains about stopping the migration. He is pushing for EU membership and open borders for Turks. Actually, it was Merkel’s party that has been holding that up for years despite pressure from the US and NATO.
Right now, Germans need info from the resident Turkish community to identify radicals, so Merkel has to be careful not to alienate such a huge group. I’m glad I don’t have to deal with this mess.
expat:
Thanks. I figured you’d be weighing in with some inside info.
Thats why, even though Im not religious Im convinced there must be some evil at work. Donald Trump, the loose cannon is our candidate. He makes a mockery of those ideas that are sound and reasonable so it makes them that much easier to ridicule by the left. This is why Europe’s problem will soon be our own and our population will largely sit on its hands rather than come to a rational conclusion, because thinking rationally will now only lead you down the path of bigotry. Its an almost perfect form of self destruction without adding anything to the cool aid.
Apropos to the post:
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2016/07/in-the-immortal-words-of-daniel-pipes.php
Daniel Pipes recently gave an interview to Germany’s Global Review. His observations are pithy as always; here are some highlights:…
GR: In the Western countries many Islamophobic parties and politicians are on the rise. Do you think this will help the spread of Islamism or will these parties help the counter-jihad? Hillary Clinton said that Trump and his anti-Muslim speeches are the best recruiters for the Islamic State. True?
DP: I do not recognize the term “Islamophobe” and do not know what it means except, in the immortal phrase of Andrew Cummins as a word “created by fascists and used by cowards to manipulate morons.”
Your question reverses the sequence of events. Islamist ideology breads Islamist violence, which starts the process and in turn inspires anti-Islamic sentiments. Anti-Islamic views might also inspire more Islamist violence, but that is incidental. The real dynamic here is Islamism creating anti-Islam parties. As Norbert Hofer has shown in Austria, they are approaching 50 percent of the vote and with it, political power. …
“Merkel said that she would not allow jihadists to keep her government from being guided by reason and compassion.”
The way for Germany and the West to do that is establishing safe zones as the initial arresting measure and then moving with resolute power to resolve the problem as the strong horse over there with, on the high end, the OIF Surge+Awakening as the model solution.
But the reasonable and compassionate initial arresting, let alone model resolving solution has been cut off at premise by the stigma successfully attached onto the Iraq intervention – which discredited the strong-horse American leadership of the free world needed for the solution to be viable – by Russian propaganda via the hard Left and alt-Right.
Harry The Exremeist:
“Thats why, even though Im not religious Im convinced there must be some evil at work. Donald Trump, the loose cannon is our candidate. He makes a mockery of those ideas that are sound and reasonable so it makes them that much easier to ridicule by the left.”
Russia is at work, for one. Trump parrots Russian propaganda. Trump’s position on ISIS picks up from Obama and mirrors the position of actors that are using ISIS as leverage to protect and further their interests that are inhumane and inimical to US interests in the region.
Clinton is also removed from strong-horse American leadership of the free world and the model solution to the problem due to her pandering to the Russian propaganda of the Democrat-front Left.
Harry, Eriic, Ex-pat = all A+
Harry,
Trump is apparently incapable of nuance or astute, insightful analysis. Evidently he operates entirely from his instincts.
Latest example, his response to the Muslim-American father’s criticism of him at the DNC convention. He had a marvelous opportunity to school Stephanopoulos and rebut democrat/media criticism, instead he fumbled it.
AesopFan,
Is that 50% to which Pipes refers, Austrian voters fed up with Muslim migration or Muslims as a percentage of Austria’s pop.?
Eric,
Expulsion is the only means by which Europe may avoid it’s destruction. No other means will suffice. Cancers must either be cut out or irradiated.
Geoffrey Britain,
Suppose Trump had said that he wants to protect all Americans, especially those whose families have fought against the radicals. He could have said that these fanatics are killing huge numbers of Muslims around the world and the world has to work together to stop them.
He could have said that we have many religious groups in America and some of them are considered by others to be excessively fundamentalist, But these groups do not go around killing others. The radical islamists do not tolerate any interpretation of any religion but their own. They hide among moderate Muslims and try to corrupt and use their young to advance their own strong man status. They hide and we have not yet figured out how to tell them from the people they hide among. We all have to work together to find them and to protect ourselves and others around the world.
Latest update from Germany: 30,00 Turks are staging a pro-Erdogan demo in Cologne right now. The Constitution Court wouldn’t allow them to show a live video message from Erdogan.
400,000 people in Germany have applied for and been granted small arms permits recently.
There is also trouble in Armenia, and Tunesians are calling for their president to step down.
expat,
Trump should have started by saying, No one who hasn’t lost a child in service to their country can say that they’ve sacrificed as much as have the Khans. That’s as true of Hillary Clinton as myself, so in the context of a political convention, what was Mr Khan’s point?
He claimed that building walls isn’t the answer but offered no alternative means of controlling our borders. So evidently he’s OK with the 15 million illegal immigrants here today being granted amnesty, which Hillary has approved, which would draw another 15 million within a few years. Most of whom, coming from socialist societies, would register as democrats, ensuring one-party control of America. That’s why the democrats support illegal immigration btw…
Mr Khan accused me of sowing division, since in his distorted view, telling the truth is divisive. It’s unfortunate but true that while all Muslims are not terrorists, almost all terrorists today are Muslim. Pew Research reports that 25% of American Muslims support violence as a means to impose Sharia law in America. There are about 3 million Muslims in America today, which means that there are 750,000 Muslim terrorist sympathizers here in the US… right now.
The simple truth that Mr Khan evidently is in denial of is that Islam’s theology, the ideology he embraces is completely incompatible with the Constitution that he wishes to lecture me upon. Nothing in the Constitution makes illegal building a wall or placing a temporary ban upon Muslim migration until we figure out how to vet Muslim migrants. Had Mr Khan actually read the Constitution, he’d know that to be true.
“Muslim Dad Khizr Khan Tells CNN Terror ‘Has Nothing to Do with Islam’
Geoffrey Britain: as to your earlier closer citing Abe Lincoln’s words, I reply:
In Matthew 12:25: “And Jesus knew their thoughts, and said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand.”
As to your later post, about expulsion, I have long thought that ethnic cleansing is a good, pushing multiculti diversity is a bad. Ethnic cleansing need not mean killing, just expulsion. Which is not an insuperable obstacle, despite what we are told ad nauseam. It has been part of human history forever. I just finished a historical biography of Alexander the Great, who leveled cities that opposed him in Greece, today’s Turkey, Iraq and Iran, and sold the inhabitants into slavery. That was about 300BC. Now, that was cleansing his conquered territory!
Why are the Western leaders pursuing their present policies? I would love to see Merkel or Hillary or Blabbermouth or Cummings waterboarded for discovery of their real motives.
Frog:
Victor Davis Hanson on Alexander:
“…his real purpose was largely the quest for personal glory and theft on a continental scale.” Hanson describes the wanton butchery carried out by Alexander under the guise if spreading Hellenistic culture and the “Brotherhood of Man.”
Oh, the good old days.
Generally that approach is frowned upon since the end of the Second World War, with notable exceptions, that are nowadays called genocide.
Be careful what you wish for, and those you hold up as idols.
“The Wars of Ancient Greece” Victor Davis Hanson c. 1997
Frog:
There was a massive continental wide period of “ethnic cleansing” that took place after the Second World War in Europe if you care to remember.
And of course who can forget that highly successful period of ethnic cleansing in the former state of Yugoslavia, and the less successful ethnic cleansing in Rwanda, Zimbabwe, and low level ethnic cleansing in South Africa?
What we need is more of that? All depends who is doing it to whom I suppose.
Expulsion of all American Muslims is not constitutionally achievable. Doing so would tear the country apart. If there’s an answer that resolves the basic incompatibility between Islam and American precepts, it escapes me.
Try asking a different question, if you have painted yourself into a corner don’t cry out for more paint.
Attempted avoidance of the inescapable is a futile endeavor .
The real question, as was the case for me on the so called “anti war” protests in the US 2004-2005, was how many agent provocateurs hired how many of the protesters. In the end, that was almost all of them, although not nearly as many as the MSewerM fictionalized as being protesters.
OM: You intentionally ignore my point that ethnic cleansing is not a recent event. And my further point, that ethnic cleansing need not mean murder a la Serbia, or the examples you cite. I take offense at your implication that I advocate genocide. I advocate displacement. Smaller enemy numbers are better than larger ones inside one’s own nation, no?
I respect VDH but I respect Peter Green on Alexander more. There exist multiple good classical (Greco-Roman) historians beyond VDH. Alexander left his Greek ways behind, and became pretty Persian after conquering Darius and the territory that today is Iraq and Iran. He was an arrogant alcoholic who sought deification and today would be a Democrat.
If you maintain the same set of assumptions when you form your question then you will get the same answer. It’s your conundrum.
When people in the Colonies won their war of independence, the 30% who supported Britain, got exiled to Canada. Or chose to exile themselves to Canada/Australia/Britain.
America will not be capable of exiling Muslims or any other sub group, until America purges or exiles the traitors calling themselves Leftists or Democrats. There is an order to all things, a proper priority and step.
Frog:
Take whatever you want. You intentionally brought the topic to the forum. Things such as “ethnic cleansing” tend to devolve to more brutal solutions historically. Inconvenient. Good to hear you are a proponent on genocide.
American citizens have rights, immigrants have lesser protections. We have to work within a “Constitution” for our fellow citizens.
I did not state that VDH is the end all for scholarship on that period, but provided a citation and quote, most people don’t.
Frog:
Correction:
“Good to hear you are NOT a proponent on genocide.”
“America will not be capable of exiling Muslims or any other sub group, until America purges or exiles the traitors calling themselves Leftists or Democrats. There is an order to all things, a proper priority and step.” Ymarsakar
Absolutely true and that will also tear the country apart. Since we are a nation divided with irreconcilable differences, a path forward that avoids tearing the nation apart may not exist.
The intentional labeling of one thing as another is intellectual dishonesty. Banning further Muslim migration is not genocide, nor would expelling all Muslims be genocidal.
GB:
Ethnic cleansing leads to worse thing Mr. Intellectual Honesty, /s another one of your conundrums.
GB:
You seem to have a problem with upholding protections of the Constitution that apply US citizens that don’t hold your religious beliefs. You had better get to work changing the Constitution and stop wasting your time blogging.
I not only never disputed that ethnic cleansing leads to worse things, I so stated. I also stated that labeling as genocide, the banning of or expulsion of Muslims is dishonest. Banning of Muslims from migrating to the US is NOT unconstitutional. It is not differing religious beliefs to which I object but beliefs fundamentally antithetical to our constitution. Resorting to strawman arguments is a clear sign of both an inability to rebut and simple dishonesty.
GB
What part of “all” Muslims don’t you understand?
“nor would expelling all Muslims be genocidal.”
What part of “US citizens” do you not understand?
Fortunately, you don’t get to choose if the Constitution protects an individual’s religious freedom. That isn’t a strawman. Even if you say it is, Mr. Honesty.
What part of banning NON-CITIZENS from immigrating here do you not understand?
Where in the constitution does it forbid the banning of NON-CITIZENS from immigrating here?
How is expelling Muslims genocidal?
Religious freedom is not a ‘get out of jail card’, when the religion commands as a theological imperative the conversion, death or slavery of ALL infidels? What part of “commands as a theological imperative” don’t you get?
If you can’t disprove the assertion that Islam’s most fundamental tenets command, as a theological imperative, the conversion, death or slavery of ALL infidels then it is you that is effectively advocating the death, forced conversion or enslavement of Americans under the cover of ‘religious freedom’.
GB:
So finally back off and limit the Geoffrey rule to non-citizens. It takes a lot to get you to do that. But it’s a start. You have finally recognized that citizens have rights.
Your latest hobby, is ethnic cleansing, keep denying the history associated with it. Enjoy you ride.
If the person is an American citizen the rules are different. A Satanist can believe all kinds of things I would guess. An atheist can believe in nothing at all. A Hindu can believe….
Fixate on something else Mr. Honesty.
I have not been following this thread and have just now glanced at the latest exchanges, but I think that upon reflection most would concede that “ethnic expulsion” or “cleansing” are not quite the right terms to apply to the hypothetical practice of eradicating Islam from this or that polity.
I suppose as part of a thought problem, one might ask of say, Chaldeans, who in my suggested scenario found a polity outside the orbit and influence of Islam, what mortal obligation they would subsequently have to allow the moral disease of Islam which caused them to flee their homelands in the first place, among them once again.
Of course we allow indigenous “Nazis” and Communists to live in the United States. But I am not sure that we have ever knowingly encouraged their mass migration here … unless they knew something of rocketry …
“Mortal” obligation … geez. “Moral”, of course.
Since the “r” and “t” keys are adjacent and susceptible of a sliding double strike, I’ll use that as an excuse. It has the virtue of possibly even being true.
OM,
That was not ‘backing off’, that was clarifying your misstatements, intentional or otherwise of my positions. And the longer you ‘misunderstand’ or misstate my position the greater the certainty that it is you that is engaged in dishonesty.
Spin Geoffrey spin
You could wile away the hours, communing with the flowers, …if you only had a brain. Talk to your other strawmen.
Neither one people, nor one sentiment. The law must fail.
These are not of course, easy questions in an ultimate sense, since they come down finally to what you are willing to live – and under what daily conditions – and die for.
As I have said before, when I was a small boy my father would tell me – with suitable vagueness – something about foreigners from a particular place striving to go where they were restricted from going, and to see what they were not to see, and to illegally gain knowledge of what was not theirs to possess.
I said something like or to the effect of: “Why don’t you just kill them instead of playing these games?”
He reeled off a list of reasons of course: the practical including the resulting consequences, our own ideals of justice and humanity, and probably something about proportionality … though that never impressed me as much of an argument when you are dealing with what I saw as complete others that might as well have been space aliens.
Muslims, are a bit more problematical. But their is no doubt that the doctrine is totalitarian, the sincere adherents fanatical, and the way of life practiced by these adherents alien and worthless.
A reluctant Muslim may eventually make an adequate American, but a “good” Muslim, a follower of that piece of crap the Koran, is the enemy of the very laws that protect him from casual violence and attribute rights to him which he denies exist for others.
Islam is garbage. We had better face it …
Read this botched edit below:
“But their is no doubt that the doctrine is totalitarian, the sincere adherents fanatical, and the way of life practiced by these adherents alien and worthless.”
as,
“But there is no doubt that their doctrine is totalitarian, the sincere adherents fanatical, and the way of life practiced by these adherents alien and worthless.”
or
“But their doctrine is totalitarian, the sincere adherents fanatical, and the way of life practiced by these adherents alien and worthless.”
I did not take GB or Trum’s position about Muslims to be genocide. Taking away the liberties of American citizens, like some Japanese descendants in WW2 America, was unconstitutional because it lacked due process. The FBI and Hoovers, already knew who the Japanese traitors were. They had already cracked the codes, there was no need to incarcerate all of them into concentration camps. In fact, it would be easier to let them go and then trace the broadcasts, and then make examples of them, or use them to feed false information to the Japanese. The Japanese, codes, again, were already cracked. The FBI could easily listen for “Japanese” communications even before the codes were cracked. Wiretapping didn’t need Constitutional mandates or judge approvals back then.
Holding people in the US, without due process, is problematic. Deporting and exiling them, doesn’t need due process because the process they are “due” is reserved for when they want to come back. It is a problematic issue in general, because forced relocation from disaster spots can also be classified as lacking due process and disrespecting the will of the minority. There are arguments for either side.
The Muslims would know what a real genocide is, and in the Sudan and Africa, where they castrated black slaves and hunted down Christians.
In Matthew 12:25: “And Jesus knew their thoughts, and said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand.”
As to your later post, about expulsion, I have long thought that ethnic cleansing is a good, pushing multiculti diversity is a bad. Ethnic cleansing need not mean killing, just expulsion. Which is not an insuperable obstacle, despite what we are told ad nauseam. It has been part of human history forever. I just finished a historical biography of Alexander the Great, who leveled cities that opposed him in Greece, today’s Turkey, Iraq and Iran, and sold the inhabitants into slavery. That was about 300BC. Now, that was cleansing his conquered territory!
Frog has already abrogated his contract and covenant with Jesus Christ and God, into some kind of false Christian Nationalism.
Wanting to be saved by human conquerors because you fear Islam above all else, is mighty interesting. But it isn’t being a disciple of Jesus the Savior of humanity.
I just wanted to point that out. The thread comments where Frog admitted to what was motivating him, was several blog posts from now.
Christians do not ethnically cleanse. In fact, the Jews who set it up and crucified Christ by reporting Jesus to the Romans as a King of the Jews, wanted to ethnically cleanse Roman authority from the holy lands and temples. Their transgression against the Covenant and the prophecies of Moses, did not lead to the tribe of Israel’s prosperity later on in 75 AD.
How interesting it is to watch mortals fall to weakness and temptation, merely because they are “afraid” of secular enemies. How pathetically self righteous they must feel.
I’m sure the Southern Baptists fell into heresy and apostasy due to similar concerns about the Purity of the “White Aristocrat” slave lords.