Accusers

Lenny Cacchio has an interesting piece at CEM Network about the "blame game" and the modus operandi of politicians who habitually point the accusatory finger at their opponents. This practice has been going on for centuries. It's a methodology based on hate and desperation. In politics, when ideology can't stand up to sound reasoning and debate, a smear campaign usually results.

Here's a portion of Lenny's piece:

Several years ago I was talking to a friend who had spent some time on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC. He related an incident involving a prominent Congressman. At some social gathering the Congressman was approached by another, they spoke briefly, then separated, whereupon the Congressman turned to those who were around him and proceeded to tick off the man's faults and foibles. I presume he went to the same training as my friend, who learned that if you can't defeat your opponent's ideas, then you attack the individual's character.

Satan is called the "accuser of our brethren" (Revelation 12:10), and I never understood this fully until watching our politicians at work.

In a curious passage in John, Jesus tells his disciples, "Did I not choose you, the twelve, yet one of you is a devil?" (John 6:70 NKJV). The wording is curious because of what Jesus did not say. He did not say, "One of you has a demon." He said, "One of you is a devil." The Greek word is "diabolos", which on one level means "devil". But it means more than that. This same word appears in II Timothy 3:3 where it is translated "false accusers" (KJV) or "slanderers" (NKJV). Literally, "diabolos" means slanderer, and that's exactly what the devil does, and it is exactly what that one disciple did who became a "devil".

When it comes to evaluating people, I'm a bit naive. I tend to trust people too much. But the knowledge of John 6:70 has saved me a lot of grief. We went through a bit of an episode in the office where someone with a little authority began a whispering campaign against certain employees. This was a prelude to eventual termination of the targets. The idea was to share evil reports whether fictional or true with other employees in an attempt to discredit them and to use as an excuse to fire them. It turned out the accuser was guilty of the same things he was accusing the others of doing, and worse. The ruse was less obvious at first, but became clear as we put the pieces together, and the evil was put to a stop before it could go too far.

Be wary of those who are always in the "attack" mode; but maybe more importantly, don't confuse those who are "attacking" with those who are "defending."