Labels in war are important. One should desire to smear the enemy with a handle that is both accurate, insulting, and demeaning.
For example during the War of Northern aggression the North got away with labeling those who were faithful to the Constitution as “the Rebels.” During the English Civil war the Cavaliers, who were supporters of the Monarchy successfully stuck the label of “Roundhead” on their opponents.
You must understand that during the English Civil war and for a time afterwards, Roundhead was a term of derision, and in the New Model Army it was a punishable offence to call a fellow soldier a Roundhead. The Jews call their enemy “goyim” which is a smear, while at the same time being a accurate level from the Jewish perspective. The word “goy” has so much historical and linguistic baggage that it is obvious that it is a weaponized word. Goy exists in all kinds of combinations that it obvious that it is a slur label put on Jewish gentile enemies. For example there are the obvious slurs – like “goyishe kopf,” or gentile brains, which suggests (generously) a dullard, or “shikker iz a goy,” a gentile is a drunkard. “Goyishe naches” describes the kinds of things that a Jew mockingly presumes only a gentile would enjoy, like hunting, sailing and eating white bread. Examples of the necessity to properly label one’s enemy with a pejorative handle in order to better reveal who they are and why they should be opposed are ubiquitous throughout history (Japs, Krauts, Jacobins, etc).
Now, I have no beef with this. It is what the lovers of their cause should do in order to demonize as much as possible the demonic enemy that is being faced. Jesus Himself did it when he called His enemies “White Washed Sepulchers full of dead men’s bones.” Further, I fully expect my enemy to try and do it to me and that is exactly what they have tried to do by calling me “racist,” or by trying to morph the words “Kinist” and “Racist” to mean the same thing.
Given all this it is not surprising that I do the same thing. When I came up with “R2K” once upon a time it was not meant as a compliment. It has become the short handle to refer to an extreme movement that while claiming to be Reformed because of its appeal to two Kingdom thinking is in all actually not Reformed because it has radicalized Reformed two kingdom thinking into something that nobody Reformed throughout history would have ever recognized.
There have been other attempts to label R2K in a slurred but accurate fashion.
1.) E2K — For awhile people were using this to identify Radical Two Kingdom theology. It stands for Escondido Two Kingdom and its purpose is to hang around the neck of Westminster-Cal (located in Escondido, California) the dubious honor of having invented out of whole cloth Radical Two Kingdom “theology.” E2K, in my opinion, was a gentler and nicer way to say “Radical Two Kingdom,” and so in my opinion did not work as well as R2K, though it did have the advantage of screaming the location of the viper’s den every time it was used. Used enough it is possible that it would cause people to eventually say, “Can anything good come out of Escondido.” And of course, exceptions notwithstanding, the answer is “no.”
2.) Another attempt that has been floated in order to label R2K is “NL2K.” This stands for “Natural Law Two Kingdom,” and gets at the reality that Radical Two Kingdom is Thomistic in its origins and relies on Natural Law to get its Christ denying project off the ground. The problem is that most people don’t understand how wicked Natural Law is when it has gone to seed and so NL2K doesn’t pack enough pejorative punch.
Having said the above, I am not opposed to a better handle on Radical Two Kingdom than R2K if one can be found. Yesterday, a comment was left on Iron Ink hoping to advance just that idea. The beauty of “R2K” is that it is pithy, memorable, and accurate. The lack of the label “R2K” is that it fails somewhat as a entry level insult. Being the person I am, the pejorative side of things is always a stretch for me.
The chap who commented on Iron Ink angling for a new handle for “R2K” used the following admirable reasoning in order to advocate for a more razor edged handle to attach to R2K. I cut and pasted his reasoning for your consideration below. If we can find a better handle to stick on R2K in order to better communicate their heretical and dangerous nature, I’m all for it. I have no pride when it comes to defeating this enemy.
Here is my commenter’s reasoning;
“At some level, Protestantism is fundamentally about wrestling for control of the state. Taking control of the state from Catholics was what made Protestantism.
The best way to undermine R2K is to start alluding to the state as Catholic. “Cathedral” , “Babylon”. As well as smearing R2K proponents with the association.
(Here the idea may be to refer to R2K as B2K {Babylon Two Kingdom} or C2K {Cathedral Two Kingdom}. {B2K = Babylon Two Kingdom has a nice ring to it} — BLM)
Don’t let them call themselves Protestants. Real Protestants seek to control the “state”. Whether, it’s the Armish nation within a nation, or Christian Nationalists changing state law. We need a new label.
There’s been a failure to win the war for the dictionary. Young men filled with hormones create the vocabulary to control the conversation.”
I wonder if since I am willing to let go of R2K if that means I can consider myself a “Young man filled with hormones?”
I finish this entry by offering a few ideas of my own to replace R2K;
1.) Dumb sons of Bitches Two Kingdom = DSOB2K (probably too unwieldy & sexist, after all women can be DSOB2K also.)
2.) Heretical Two Kingdom = H2K
3.) Enemies of Christ Two Kingdom = EOC2K
4.) Retarded Two Kingdom = R2K (Nope … that would be confused w/ R2K)
5.) Anti-Christ Two Kingdom = AC2K
Anyway, were I a rich man, I’d turn this into a contest where someone could win a grand prize for coming up with the perfect language to label R2K and the whole movement.