¶ Colorado public-education privatization and Christian-nationalist webinar cluster
This source cluster summarizes three A4PEP webinar transcripts that frame Colorado public education as a testing ground where Christian nationalism, privatization advocacy, dark-money networks, and school-board conflict reinforce each other.
These are advocacy-webinar transcripts rather than neutral reported articles. Their value in the repository is twofold: they synthesize existing Colorado public-education conflict into a coherent explanatory frame, and they preserve quoted explanations from Katherine Stewart and other speakers about concepts such as Seven Mountains and dominionism.
- The March webinar presents Colorado as a testing ground where Christian nationalist organizers, privatization actors, and district-level governance fights reinforce each other.
- The June webinar with Katherine Stewart defines Christian nationalism as an anti-democratic political ideology rather than as ordinary religious practice and directly explains Seven Mountains and dominionist ideas.
- The August webinar ties Logan Davis's Advance Colorado reporting to school-board races, charter advocacy, and a broader dark-money ecosystem influencing Colorado public education.
- Across the three webinars, Brad Miller, Lance Wallnau, Andrew Wommack, Truth & Liberty, and Advance Colorado all recur as reference points within one broader explanatory frame.
- 2025-03: the first webinar links Colorado public-school fights to Christian nationalism and billionaire-backed privatization.
- 2025-06: the Stewart webinar expands the conceptual framework around Christian nationalism and dominionism.
- 2025-08: the Logan Davis webinar ties the public-education conflict more tightly to Advance Colorado's dark-money network.
- Colorado as a test case
- Privatization and religious-nationalist overlap
- School boards as leverage points for broader ideological conflict
¶ Evidence limits and open questions
- These are movement-facing educational webinars, so they are strongest as advocacy framing, quoted conceptual explanation, and connective synthesis rather than as stand-alone proof of every factual allegation.
- Specific claims introduced in the webinars should be preferred only when they are also grounded in stronger reported or source-specific material elsewhere in the repository.