Tag Archives: Christian nationalism

MAGA’s Road To Gilead

Given the Trump administration’s daily effort to elevate White “Christians” over people of color, it can be easy to overlook its equally rabid effort to return women to third or fourth-class citizenship–to return us to powerless and submissive possessions of our fathers and husbands.

Suddenly, opinions that once would not have been uttered publicly–opinions that would have marked their holders as deeply unwell residents of the modern world–are spewing forth from the mouths of people who have been allowed to occupy some of the highest positions in American government.

A recent newsletter from Lincoln Square focused on the effort to strip the nation’s women of our rights as citizens, in the name of a perverted “Christianity.” It reported on a recent endorsement by Pete Hegseth, the inept drunkard who currently heads the Department of Defense, of his pastor Doug Wilson’s belief that women should not have the right to vote.

As the author of the essay wrote,

In a way, Hegseth performed a public service by bringing to wider attention the “Christian nationalist” movement that is gaining strength and has much support in the Trump Cult. As the title of the CNN report indicates, it seeks “Christian” domination of America. All of us need to know what they mean by that. Pastor Wilson is a flat-out nutter who envisions an America that is a “Christian nation” the way Saudi Arabia is an “Islamic nation.” The ultimate goal is replacing secular democracy with a government ruled by “Christ the King.” Jesus presumably being unavailable for such a role that rejects his most important teachings, it would mean “Donald the King” or perhaps “Doug the King.

This movement is all about reverting women to what was for thousands of years considered to be their proper place of inferiority and submission. Indeed, as I explain in the book manuscript on which I am currently working, An Agreed-Upon Fiction: The Creation of the ‘Inferior’ Sex — How It Misshaped History and the Present, the whole authoritarian enterprise is based on a Foundational Lie that arose more than five thousand years ago. I call it Male Monocreationism: the assertion that men have all reproductive power and women merely provide a place in which men’s creations grow. “Women are the kind of people that people come out of,” Wilson said in the CNN interview.

The article quoted Wilson’s book, in which he wrote “A man penetrates, conquers, colonizes, plants. A woman receives, surrenders, accepts. This is of course offensive to all egalitarians, and so our culture has rebelled against the concept of authority and submission.”

I’m sure that there has always been some number of men who find this “philosophy” comforting–some subset of men who have found themselves unable to operate in a world that doesn’t afford the males of the species automatic dominance. (There are the Incels, for example–men who can’t get dates, let along amorous partners.) These are not healthy humans; they are clearly threatened by the realities of a modern world in which intellect rather than brute strength gives entree to civic and economic equality.

It’s one thing to recognize that society has always harbored such men; it is far more troubling when they feel able to announce their beliefs publicly, and frankly terrifying when people in positions of power publicly embrace them.

MAGA isn’t just waging war on democracy and the Constitution. At its core, it’s an effort to destroy modernity, to return us to a time of superstition and ignorance in which its members felt more comfortable. MAGA’s Christian Nationalists want to return us to a past in which women, LGBTQ+ folks, non-Whites and non-faux-Christians were all subservient to straight White “Christian” males.

And they’re through pretending otherwise.

Comments

Framing

The most important thing I learned in law school can be summed up with the adage “he who frames the issue wins the debate.” The most consequential move a lawyer–or any debater–can make is to define what the argument is all about. (Our idiot-in-chief clearly does recognize that, at least at some subconscious level, since his response to any and all accusations is always to insist that the real issue is whether the accuser is “fake.”)

What reminded me of that old law school conclusion was a recent article in the New York Times, citing a communications professor from Texas A&M, one Jennifer Mercieca. According to the article, her recent book addresses that issue– what she calls “frame warfare.” Mercieca argues that the power to name things is the power to define reality, and she identifies that tactic as Trump’s most potent. As she points out, it’s a tactic that goes hand in hand with his constant assertions that fly in the face of facts and evidence. Redefinitions of reality, she writes, have been central to his success.

As Mercieca explains frame warfare, “What you call a thing determines the contours of the debate around it — or precludes debate altogether. Did you borrow a car without permission, or did you steal it? Was the crush of migrants at the Mexican border an invasion or a humanitarian crisis?”

The importance of framing is obvious in the fulminations of America’s White Christian Nationalists. One of the most obvious examples is the debate about abortion. “Christian” paternalists focus on the “sin” of terminating a pregnancy–on the propriety of the decision being made by a pregnant individual. Civil libertarians insist that the issue is really who decides? In our frame, we ask: is this a decision government should have the authority to make, or is it a decision properly made by the  individual woman? As I used to tell my students, the Bill of Rights is essentially a list of things that government is prohibited from deciding–what prayer you say (or whether you pray at all), what political opinions you hold, whether you have a right to travel without offering justification to authority…

Back when Republicans could credibly claim to be proponents of limited government, many weighed in on the side of  individual liberty. (I remember–back in the day– being part of a group called Republicans for Choice.) Barry Goldwater famously said that government didn’t belong in either your boardroom or your bedroom. (That belief also led him to support gay rights–he even got an award from PFLAG.)

Rather obviously, if we decide that the role of government is to require people to live in accordance with God’s will, we have to decide whose version of that will government should enforce. “Christian” nationalists are fine with giving government that power, so long as they get to be the arbiters of what is “godly.’ They also talk a lot about religious liberty–for them. They aren’t so solicitous about religious liberty for adherents of other (wrong) religions. Their version of religious liberty turns out to be their liberty to use government to impose their particular religious beliefs on those who don’t share them.

It isn’t just the “Christian” nationalists whose framing is perverse. It’s also MAGA. 

Just what makes America great? Or more properly, since “again” is a prominent part of that slogan, what DID make America great? If you listen to Trump’s base, it’s pretty clear that their version of “greatness” requires the social dominance of straight White males. 

Over the past several years, Americans have stopped debating policy–after all, policy debates require evidence, consideration of past experience ….FACTS. It requires respect for people who come to the conversation with a different–but rreality-based– perspective. The reason we can no longer engage in civil discourse is that MAGA has framed control of government as a fight between the resistance of those of us who live in the real world and their right-their need– to impose their “alternate reality”–their preferred frame– on the rest of us.

I think the proper frame for the culture war we are fighting is this: Both MAGA and the “Christian” nationalists want to take America back to a time that never was.

Comments

Out Of The Closet

Gay folks came out of the closet several years ago. These days, it’s “Christian” Nationalism that is emerging, “out and proud.” A number of “Christian” congregations (note quotation marks) have decided to ignore that “woke” stuff in the Sermon on the Mount–not to mention biblical admonitions about widows, orphans and strangers–and have chosen to refashion religion as political ideology.

I’ve previously written about the book published in 2023 by Tim Alberta, titled “The Kingdom, the Power and the Glory,” in which Alberta–himself a very devout Evangelical–shared his horrified observations of that transformation, and the thousands of Evangelical churches that have essentially jettisoned theology for the political ideology of the MAGA movement. 

Here in my city of Indianapolis, just a couple of weeks ago, the Sure Foundation Baptist Church recently advocated for the death penalty for LGBTQ+ individuals. The pastor, Stephen Falco, suggested they should kill themselves. (He made these remarks during a “Men’s Preaching Night,” and his “sermon” was streamed online.) 

Talking Points Memo recently reported on an Idaho church that has moved to Washington, D.C., where it “ministers” to MAGA movers and shakers like Pete Hegseth and assorted Republican operatives. Pastor Jared Longshore opened the initial service by declaring that “The option before you is quite plain. It is Christ or chaos, Christ or destruction.”

According to the reporter who wrote the piece, the church in D.C. is part of a growing, international network of churches that someone named Doug Wilson founded. It is called the Communion of Reformed Evangelical Churches (CREC).

I attended what the CREC called the “planting” of a D.C. church on Sunday after spending months growing increasingly fascinated with Wilson and his influence on the New Rightthat is ascendant in Trump’s Washington. America is full of people with big, apocalyptic visions and hardline views on how the country can redeem itself. But Wilson is a rare bird: along with the CREC, he’s built a small, theocratic empire in Moscow, Idaho, far away from D.C. And yet, through his own sermons, those of affiliated pastors like Longshore, and a publishing house, Christ Kirk (also known as Christ Church) has managed to bridge the geographic divide and gain a following among right-wingers across the country. It’s spawned what some call the “Moscow Mood” — a postmillennialist view that the Christian right should employ a new level of aggression in fighting to dominate the culture, and use the government to enact policies in accordance with its religious teachings…

Planting a church in the nation’s Capitol follows naturally from the organization’s vision: just as a member must incorporate their religious belief into every aspect of their personal life, so too must they fight for the group’s favored ideas in politics and culture: banning homosexuality, embracing more patriarchal family structures, ending abortion, and removing female soldiers from combat roles. In a phone interview after the sermon, Longshore told TPM that he wants a Christian government in the most direct sense: all government officials must “acknowledge that Christ is Lord and then actually listen to what he is telling them to do.” That would include the need to “execute the wrath of God against the wrongdoer,” he said. 

Members of this church–like so many of those described by Alberta– are self-described “warriors” of the Christian right. They believe they are fighting a war against modern America. Those members see themselves, as the author of the report notes, as “underdogs, besieged on all sides by a secularism that’s violent and bent on destroying the remnants of a Christian America that they’re trying to revive.” That victimization mentality has persisted, even while the influence of the Christian right as grown. (The author lists the end of Roe, the hard-right, Christian SCOTUS majority, and rising church attendance among young men.) They believe they exist within what Longshore, in his sermon, described as “a lapsed nation, a fallen nation, a nation that was Christian to the core, nearly to a man when it was founded.” (Accurate history wasn’t his strong suit.)

 In a conversation after the sermon, Longshore told TPM’s reporter that the problem he sees is the “emphasis on democracy.” Democracy, he said, leads to falsity: people start “trusting the mind of man to determine how things should go,” while “ultimately God is the one who has spoken.”

And of course, we know who speaks for God…

When I encounter “religious” people so devoid of anything remotely resembling loving-kindness or humility, I always think of that quote by Anne Lamott: “You can safely assume you’ve created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do.”

Comments

The Stakes

Remember that old song lyric, “What’s It all about, Alfie?”

Those of us who are appalled and confused by the administration’s daily abuses of the Constitution and rule of law can be forgiven for losing sight of “what it’s all about.” As usual, Heather Cox Richardson has provided context–and an answer. She points to the obvious: Trump’s economic policies are designed to transfer wealth to the already-obscenely-wealthy from the rest of us–then provides context: “From 1981 to 2021, American policies moved $50 trillion from the bottom 90% of Americans to the top 1%.”

But just enriching the already-rich is only one part of the overall goal. Richardson points to the administration’s gutting of a government that “regulates business, provides a basic social safety net, promotes infrastructure, and protects civil rights and to replace it with a government that permits a few wealthy men to rule.”

The CBO score for the Republicans’ omnibus bill projects that if it is enacted, 16 million people will lose access to healthcare insurance over the next decade in what is essentially an assault on the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare. The bill also dramatically cuts Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Plan (SNAP) benefits, clean energy credits, aid for student borrowers, benefits for federal workers, and consumer protection services, while requiring the sale of public natural resources.

It gets worse. (I know, you’re thinking “how much worse can it get?” Trust me.)

Richardson is only one of the observers who pinpoints the real “mover and shaker” behind this assault on constitutional government–Office of Management and Budget director Russell Vought. Vought is determined to decimate those parts of the government that are inconsistent with the Christian Nationalist goals outlined in Project 2025, the production of which he directed. As Richardson reminds us,

Vought was a key author of Project 2025, whose aim is to disrupt and destroy the United States government order to center a Christian, heteronormative, male-dominated family as the primary element of society. To do so, the plan calls for destroying the administrative state, withdrawing the United States from global affairs, and ending environmental and business regulations.

Racism is, of course, an essential element of Christian Nationalism, which works to elevate the civic and social dominance of (certain) White Christian males. Vought founded the Center for Renewing America (CRA), which focuses on combating its (utterly phony) version of “critical race theory.” The organization’s affiliated issue advocacy group, American Restoration Action, has a similar mission: to “renew a consensus of America as a nation under God”.  Both groups hope to provide the “ideological ammunition to sustain Trump’s political movement after his departure from the White House.”

It is worth noting that the administration’s war on education and empirical knowledge is an essential element of the Christian Nationalist plan to de-secularize America. The assaults on science, on research, on academic freedom are an indispensable part of the movement to substitute theocracy for a country that respects the intellectual liberties protected by the First Amendment. In service of that goal, Christian Nationalists have worked diligently to redefine “religious freedom” to mean the right of fundamentalist Christians to impose their beliefs on others, and to redefine “free speech” to mean privileging opposition to the “woke” values they abhor.

One of those “woke” values is education.

In my own Red state of Indiana, where performative “Christians” dominate the legislature and self-identified Christian Nationalists hold statewide offices, the assault on education has been unremitting. The voucher program that pretends to honor “parental choice” sends millions of Hoosier tax dollars to religious schools, in what is a dishonest work-around of the Establishment Clause while starving our public schools. More recently, steady assaults on Indiana University–a once-storied and highly respected academic institution–have ranged from political interference with its latest choice of a president–allowing the post to go to an less distinguished (but presumably more well-connected) “dark horse” candidate, to legislation threatening curriculum considered “liberal,” to the more recent and appalling substitution of far-right political operatives (including the odious Jim Bopp) for the choices of alumni on the university’s board of trustees.

Thanks to those assaults–and Indiana’s ban on abortion–Indiana University is losing many of the students who formerly enriched intellectual life on campus.

America is at an inflection point. What is at stake isn’t simply our global dominance (which Trump has already discarded), but our essential domestic identity. America hasn’t been seen as the “City on the Hill” because we embraced fundamentalist religion, but because we aspired to protect individual liberty and civic equality.

We didn’t always live up to those aspirations, but we can ill-afford to replace them with a Taliban-like theocracy.

Comments

The Victim Card

Along with the dread I feel with every Trumpian assault on the Constitution and rule of law is a constant, nagging question: how can the MAGA base ignore the threats to their own liberties and livelihoods? How can they look at this pathetic, corrupt,  mentally-ill man and his bizarre collection of incompetents and conspiracy theorists and say “Yes! Those are the people I want in charge of the economy and country?”

I’m not the only person who has mulled over that question, and–while there is never one simple answer to a complicated reality–I’m pretty sure that grievance (along with a healthy dose of ignorance) is a major factor. By “grievance,” of course, I mean the extensive racism encouraged by the Christian Nationalists who constantly play the victim card.

White Christian Nationalists are constantly told by their leaders and pastors that this country was supposed to be theirs by right–that America was supposed to be a Christian nation. Not just any Christians, of course–White male fundamentalist Christians. MAGA’s devotion to Trump is rooted in his permission to hate those “others” who have infringed upon their rights, upon his obvious agreement that equal treatment for Brown and Black folks, Jews, Muslims  and “uppity” women constitutes discrimination against White Christian males and simply cannot be tolerated.

What the MAGA base supports is the administration’s frantic efforts to stamp out DEI and purge official websites of evidence that non-Christian, non-White, non-male individuals have served the country with distinction. MAGA applauds the replacement of competent minority folks with embarrassing and grossly unfit Whites. It cheers the assaults on education, and especially Trump’s attacks on the universities that turn out those hated and increasingly diverse “elites.”

The irony is visible to anyone not in the cult. The aggrieved Whites who used to complain that women and minorities were “playing the victim card” are the ones now playing victim. 

A recent article in The New Republic gives the game away, reporting on the first meeting of Trump’s “Task Force to Eradicate Anti-Christian Bias in the Federal Government.” As the article noted,

Those attending didn’t seem to be bothered by the fact that no evidence of such widespread bias exists. That’s because they weren’t there to solve a problem but to create one. The Task Force claimed to be standing up for “religious liberty,” but its real goal is to amplify the persecution complex of the Trump administration’s Christian nationalist allies and base—and then to use groundless claims of religious discrimination as the basis for the suppression of dissent.

Lest we miss the real purpose of this charade, an incident the following week illuminated the fact that–as the article put it–“the Trump administration has zero interest in promoting “religious liberty.”

As the Reverend William Barber and other faith leaders opposed to Republican budget cuts gathered to pray at the Capitol Rotunda, they were swiftly surrounded by Capitol Police officers, one wearing a “crime scene” vest. The press was expelled from the building, and the pastors were arrested.

You would think that a Task Force concerned with anti-Christian bias would take an interest. But the administration appears to have nothing to say. The problem for the Reverend Barber and his fellow pastors is that they would seem to be the wrong kind of Christians. Right-wing pastor Sean Feucht has “filled the US Capitol Rotunda with worship time and time again for the last 4 years,” in his own words, and yet he has never been arrested or detained. He, apparently, is the right kind of Christian.

As most sentient Americans know–and as the article pointed out– attacks on Christians in the U.S. are infrequent– unlike attacks on other religious groups. Assaults on Jews, Muslims, and Sikhs have always been far more numerous, and their incidence has climbed dramatically during the Trump years. “The Task Force’s exclusive focus on Christian victims exposes its rhetoric about defending “religious liberty” as transparently insincere.”

As the essay points out, for members of the MAGA cult, “anti-Christian bias” is indistinguishable from efforts to protect individual rights against discrimination by people who identify as Christian. In other words, efforts to prevent these particular “Christians” from discriminating against people of whom they disapprove is labeled anti-Christian bias. To MAGA, “religious freedom” now means “privilege for conservative Christians alone, including the freedom to harass or discriminate.”

Equality before the law is seen as anti-Christian.

When Christian Nationalists are prevented from dictating the terms of the civic culture, they consider themselves victims. And so long as Trump feeds their perceptions of victimhood, so long as he supports their theocratic aspirations, nothing will shake their loyalty.

Comments