An authentic martyr does not go out, purposefully make a spectacle of themselves, causing problems in order to provoke a response which leads to their own death. An authentic victim is someone who is innocent of harming others, indeed, is someone who has not caused problems which led to people taking action against them in order to stop their terrible actions (especially if such actions are justly unlawful). Sadly, many who cause problems, many who hurt others, many who engage illegal activities, like to play the martyr or victim card, acting like they have done nothing wrong and are being persecuted for their beliefs. Instead of believing them, and assuming that action taken against them indicate the beginning of some nefarious campaign by authorities, people need to study what happened, and discern if the so-called victims really deserve protection. This should be obvious, as it is clear, many, especially abusers, love to play the victim card when they are confronted. This is why, upon hearing reports about a so-called pro-life activist being arrested and charged with assault, er must be careful and not assume that he is innocent of the charges just because people might agree with some of the principles he claims to hold. He wants people to believe he is being persecuted, using his supposed pro-life activity to have people engage governmental authorities as if there is some malicious action being taken, not just against him, but fellow activists; the fact that he alone is being charged, and treated in this fashion, should show that there is no pervasive assault on the rights of such so-called pro-life activists. In reality, it appears that he is suffering the consequences of his actions, actions which run contrary to the rule of law as well as the dignified treatment which should be given to all; we must give the FBI’s explanation due consideration instead of assuming they are in the wrong because of his ideological standpoint.
Sadly, the use of the victim (or martyr) card by those who are the ones abusing others is becoming very common, and is being to get people upset and fight back against their supposed persecutors. Their malice is ignored, or is seen as justified because of the push back they get for their actions. They think they should not be held accountable for what they do, and if anyone dares to make them face the consequences of their actions, they plan to fight back, using as many people they can to take control of the situation so as to punish those who want justice to be served. Not only are their actions reprehensible, they encourage more such actions, more such abuse of the other, while trying to pretend those who oppose them are those who are being hateful (and so deserve what is given to them). We have seen this in the way many African Americans, even recently, have been unjustly killed by police or vigilantes. Everyone but those who were shot and killed were made to be victims. What we see in their justification is very telling: anyone who resists them and their desires, anyone who they do not like, are declared worthy even of death. They indicate, moreover, that if and when they have the power to kill, they have no problem using it – and when they do, they still want to go back and claim to be the victim, because they know, if they can’t keep up the victim card, they risk losing the power and privilege which they have come to possess.
This is why the victim card has become a favorite tactic used by many right-wing politicians. Its use is something we observe from those engaging fascist and supremacist ideologies, and thus, it should not be surprising that these politicians likewise demonstrate connections to fascist and supremacist beliefs and practices. They present themselves as victims, often of some sort of globalist conspiracy, but even if they do not go that far, they look to the other, to foreigners, and use them as scapegoats for the problems confronting modern society. Thus, they often make claims of foreigners taking over their country, destroying so as to rally the public against those supposed outsiders. Of course, if and when they do get power, they engage the hatred which they have fermented, and persecute those whom they have dehumanized, giving justification for their actions similar to those who have shot and killed innocent African Americans in America. It is the same kind of gaslighting which is also done by bullies and sexual predators. Xenophobia, fear and hatred of migrants and refugees, is one of the ways this is at work in Europe. It helps explains recent right-wing victories in Sweden and Italy. What is often ignored is that the same people who tend to support such xenophobia often are the ones who decry so-called identity politics without realizing their own ideology is pure identity politics (and those they claim are promoting it, are only responding to and trying to correct the harm which right-wing identity politics has caused). Thus, Giorgia Meloni’s victory in Italy, paralleling Trump’s 2016 victory in the United States, comes, in part, through her anti-immigration stand, a stand which requires the promotion of a particular group, a particular identity:
She is set to claim victory after targeting immigration, the favorite issue of nativist and populist politicians the world over. Where former US President Donald Trump rose to power promising to build a wall between the US and Mexico, Meloni repeatedly suggested a “naval blockade” to stop the flow of people into Europe from the Mediterranean. 
And, like Trump, and many other right-wing leaders, Meloni claims to be Christian, and uses that claim to appeal to her base, suggesting Christians are being persecuted. That is, she clearly is using the victim card to justify her rise in power, trying to act like Christians are being made victims, getting them to ignore what is really happening and vote for someone who says they will save them from such harm. And, like Trump, Meloni and other such politicians of the far right, while claiming the name of Christian, utterly ignore the Christian faith, especially in regards its social teachings. For, following Scripture, especially Christ’s words in the way Christians are to treat their neighbor, including sojourners, the Christian faith says Christians should treat their neighbor with basic human decency and respect. Instead of fearing and hating migrants, Christians are to love and help them, as Pope Benedict XVI said in 2009:
This leads us to consider that any of our concrete interventions must first be nurtured by faith in the action of grace and divine Providence. In this way also hospitality and solidarity to strangers, especially if they are children, become a proclamation of the Gospel of solidarity. The Church proclaims this when she opens her arms and strives to have the rights of migrants and refugees respected, moving the leaders of Nations, and those in charge of international organizations and institutions to promote opportune initiatives for their support.
The world is one. The countries of the world, though they have their own particular autonomy, do not possesses in themselves absolute power and authority. This is why they can be and are confronted when they abuse human rights. The world forms one interdependent whole, and every country, with the rights they are given, are also given responsibilities with those rights, responsibilities which include the promotion of the common good:
But while the “rights of the nation” express the vital requirements of “particularity”, it is no less important to emphasize the requirements of universality, expressed through a clear awareness of the duties which nations have vis-à-vis other nations and humanity as a whole. Foremost among these duties is certainly that of living in a spirit of peace, respect and solidarity with other nations. Thus the exercise of the rights of nations, balanced by the acknowledgement and the practice of duties, promotes a fruitful “exchange of gifts”, which strengthens the unity of all mankind. 
Differences can and will exist, and those differences can and should be affirmed as good. “Indeed, it is necessary to recognize the legitimate plurality of cultures present in a country, in harmony with the preservation of law and order, on which depend social peace and the freedom of citizens.” Nonetheless, those differences must not be absolutized in such a way as to ignore the common good which is to be had by all, nor are they to be used to create in a given country fear for the other, for those who are different, justifying abuse of the other because they are “not-we”:
From bitter experience, then, we know that the fear of “difference”, especially when it expresses itself in a narrow and exclusive nationalism which denies any rights to “the other”, can lead to a true nightmare of violence and terror. And yet if we make the effort to look at matters objectively, we can see that, transcending all the differences which distinguish individuals and peoples, there is a fundamental commonality. For different cultures are but different ways of facing the question of the meaning of personal existence. And it is precisely here that we find one source of the respect which is due to every culture and every nation: every culture is an effort to ponder the mystery of the world and in particular of the human person: it is a way of giving expression to the transcendent dimension of human life. The heart of every culture is its approach to the greatest of all mysteries: the mystery of God. 
What we see in Europe, by those who often try to claim to be Christian, is resistance to the global order, and the need to work for and protect the good of all. Migrants and refugees are looked upon with disdain, and all kinds of claims are made against them to justify the abuse they receive from those who otherwise claim to be Christian. While those who have power, those who are acting with the greatest disdain to the other, want to claim to be victim, the fact is that they are the ones in power, they are the ones creating and executing the policies which are harming society. As they are the ones with power and privilege, and they are using it to disenfranchise others, we need to reject their claims of victimhood. If they are allowed to continue to make such a claim without being challenge, without indicating how absurd it is, they will continue to gain power used by such scapegoating and use it for more and more evil. They must be resisted. Their claims must be denied under no uncertain terms. They must be seen as for what they are, that is, as the monsters and not the victims, so that people realize the danger society is in if and when they are in charge. And Christians especially must make it clear that though such right-wing politicians like to use Christianity, they are using Christians, having them act contrary to the Christian faith in order to “save” it. Why do Christians think Christianity needs such saving? Do they have no faith? Christ did not give in to the temptation to the will-to-power; it was shown, in Scripture, to be a Satanic temptation. So long as Christian leaders do not speak out against that temptation and those who give in to it, Christianity will become more and more degraded in the public, as more and more people will believe such monsters truly represent Christianity; those who look for peace and justice, then, will feel that Christianity is not for them. Nothing hurts Christian witness like so-called Christians promoting brutal dictatorships and the ideologies which lay behind those dictatorships. They corrupt Christianity from within, making it indeed a “Christless Christianity,” empty of the moral and spiritual authority of Christ – replacing it with the diabolic will to power represented by Satan. And those who are not yet Christian, seeing the salt of Christianity has apparently lost its saltiness, will reject Christianity and look for the truth elsewhere.
 However, how can someone truly be pro-life, if they do not respect the dignity of others? If the claim is correct, and he hurt an elderly man, causing medical injuries, when there no cause for such action, then the person should be seen as representing a standard which is not pro-life, and any prosecution he sufferers should not be seen as persecution but a necessary defense of the dignity of all life.
 How pro-life is this?
 Pope Benedict XVI, “Message For The World Day Of Migrants And Refugees 2010” (10-16-2009). Vatican translation.
 Pope St. John Paul II, “Address To The Fiftieth General Assembly Of The United Nations” (10-5-1995). Vatican translation. ¶8
 Pope St. John Paul II, “Message For The World Day Of Migrants and Refugees 2005.” (11-24-2004). Vatican translation. ¶2.
 Pope St. John Paul II, “Address To The Fiftieth General Assembly Of The United Nations” (10-5-1995). Vatican translation. ¶9.
Stay in touch! Like A Little Bit of Nothing on Facebook.
If you liked what you read, please consider sharing it with your friends and family!