Call it by its name: Fox Evangelicalism
October 22, 2018 3:57 PM Subscribe
A disgruntled evangelical scholar examines "The Onward March of Christian Political Power" (earlier, earlier, earlier). He identifies three interlinked factors (personalities, organizations, media) that keep, for example, the War On Christmas alive and tuck Donald Trump and many evangelical leaders into bed together. "This is power. And, as an evangelical myself, I do not think we should have it."
I've been gone from Evangelicalism for a long time, but Trump is what the Evangelicals have hoped for as long as I can remember going to an Evangelical church in America. Not that they'd have copped to it at the time. Not that there weren't the occasional naysayers, a perhaps 10% not persuaded that their faith obligated them to the Republican Party.
posted by wotsac at 5:57 PM on October 22, 2018 [5 favorites]
posted by wotsac at 5:57 PM on October 22, 2018 [5 favorites]
Sometimes members of the flock realize that their good shepard eats mutton and wears wool. Trump, Bush, Reagan, Graham Swaggert and Ted Haggard. Same as it ever was. Black shirts and the brown shirts.
posted by Anchorite_of_Palgrave at 6:00 PM on October 22, 2018 [11 favorites]
posted by Anchorite_of_Palgrave at 6:00 PM on October 22, 2018 [11 favorites]
the problem we have is describing these people as Christians rather than Griftians.
posted by Max Power at 6:09 PM on October 22, 2018 [13 favorites]
posted by Max Power at 6:09 PM on October 22, 2018 [13 favorites]
God wants me to have one more Lear Jet.
Uh- To spread the word.
posted by Max Power at 6:10 PM on October 22, 2018 [2 favorites]
Uh- To spread the word.
posted by Max Power at 6:10 PM on October 22, 2018 [2 favorites]
The hardest part of calling myself Christian these days is dealing with the feeling that I'm lumped in with evangelicals.
Just today I was talking about the idea of running organizations on religious principles, and how I think people should be free to do it. (I don't even think it's that bad of an idea!) And then the rejoinder was, "Well, what if you're running a bakery?"
I don't even know what to say to that. That "religious ideals" translates to "deny people service because you have a problem with how they live their life" speaks to how rotten the very idea of religion is to most people.
Religion to me is a practice and a community that I engage in explicitly to rip up the boundaries between me and the rest of humanity, not to put them up.
Eh. What're you gonna do?
posted by billjings at 6:27 PM on October 22, 2018 [24 favorites]
Just today I was talking about the idea of running organizations on religious principles, and how I think people should be free to do it. (I don't even think it's that bad of an idea!) And then the rejoinder was, "Well, what if you're running a bakery?"
I don't even know what to say to that. That "religious ideals" translates to "deny people service because you have a problem with how they live their life" speaks to how rotten the very idea of religion is to most people.
Religion to me is a practice and a community that I engage in explicitly to rip up the boundaries between me and the rest of humanity, not to put them up.
Eh. What're you gonna do?
posted by billjings at 6:27 PM on October 22, 2018 [24 favorites]
At least the one bright side is that Trump is accelerating the death of evangelicalism. Their system looks completely unpalatable for anyone who isn't already a believer. Considering the mass exodus of their 20somethings, and the big drop in baptisms, I can't see any hope for them in the long term.
Could you say what specific studies you have in mind here? I found this 538 piece arguing that white evangelicals are getting noticeably older on average, but then this piece paints a somewhat different picture, so I'm not sure what to think.
I started looking through an interesting paper "Reconsidering the Role of Politics in Leaving Religion (pdf), but I don't have the energy to read it carefully right now.
posted by Jonathan Livengood at 6:48 PM on October 22, 2018
Could you say what specific studies you have in mind here? I found this 538 piece arguing that white evangelicals are getting noticeably older on average, but then this piece paints a somewhat different picture, so I'm not sure what to think.
I started looking through an interesting paper "Reconsidering the Role of Politics in Leaving Religion (pdf), but I don't have the energy to read it carefully right now.
posted by Jonathan Livengood at 6:48 PM on October 22, 2018
Don’t forget there are many Christians who don’t consider themselves evangelicals. The terms are not synonymous. Some of them even try to live by Jesus’ ideals.
That being said, Constantine was the worst thing that ever happened to the church.
posted by lhauser at 7:23 PM on October 22, 2018 [7 favorites]
That being said, Constantine was the worst thing that ever happened to the church.
posted by lhauser at 7:23 PM on October 22, 2018 [7 favorites]
The hardest part of calling myself Christian these days is dealing with the feeling that I'm lumped in with evangelicals.
It's roughly the same as self-identifying as a Republican in 2018. I mean, there's a chance you might be a decent person, but these days, we'll have to start from a different assumption.
posted by rokusan at 8:06 PM on October 22, 2018 [25 favorites]
It's roughly the same as self-identifying as a Republican in 2018. I mean, there's a chance you might be a decent person, but these days, we'll have to start from a different assumption.
posted by rokusan at 8:06 PM on October 22, 2018 [25 favorites]
Even though I left the church1 a long time ago.... I realized Christianity doesn't work.2 It probably never worked.3
That's like the three steps of awakening right there in a nutshell.
posted by rokusan at 8:08 PM on October 22, 2018 [7 favorites]
That's like the three steps of awakening right there in a nutshell.
posted by rokusan at 8:08 PM on October 22, 2018 [7 favorites]
People who rarely step into a church, don't support one financially, but still identify themselves as evangelical.
Lousy ☧INO's.
posted by straight at 8:41 PM on October 22, 2018 [17 favorites]
Lousy ☧INO's.
posted by straight at 8:41 PM on October 22, 2018 [17 favorites]
I recently had occasion to drive around the campus/compound of the christian broadcasting network (cbn) and regent university - all part of pat robertson's empire. There are plenty of lovely good people that work there or study there, etc, but wow when I drove past all 10 or so of those giant white sattelite dishes , fenced in and up a bit on a grassy knoll to my left, I sure did get that familiar dystopic feeling down in my toes.
posted by elgee at 9:18 PM on October 22, 2018 [6 favorites]
posted by elgee at 9:18 PM on October 22, 2018 [6 favorites]
these evangelicals.. it's got nothing to do with christ. just like it wasnt for many so called christians before them... from the crusades to child abuse scandals to jim crow to to the learjet pastors of today's megachurches. for the most part it's always been about violence and power. the handwringing is tedious and ahistorical.
posted by wibari at 9:20 PM on October 22, 2018 [13 favorites]
posted by wibari at 9:20 PM on October 22, 2018 [13 favorites]
What I’ve experienced in my corner of the Evangelical Christian tradition over the last decade or so has been my slow realization that the childhood indoctrination I received about loving your neighbor, etc. was actually just a front for the accumulation of money and power. Evangelical Christianity’s support of the current president is not remarkable except as the latest and most blatant exemplar of this anti-Christian desire for money and power above all else, and in the name of God. It’s been astonishing to realize that, for these people and organizations, the religious doctrines have always only been a means to an end. I guess I was a dupe and a rube for a long time, and I am pissed that these assholes are doing this, but I guess the Religious Right are just continuing a millennia-long tradition of using Christianity as a tool to get rich and oppress people. Jesus.
posted by sleeping bear at 11:47 PM on October 22, 2018 [9 favorites]
posted by sleeping bear at 11:47 PM on October 22, 2018 [9 favorites]
Museum of the Bible says five of its Dead Sea Scrolls fragments are forgeries
Artefacts will no longer be on display after researchers said they show ‘characteristics inconsistent with ancient origin’
FPP from the beginning of the year: The Museum of the Bible Is a Safe Space for Christian Nationalists, at which point it was evidently already known that they were forgeries, but I think the Museum only admitted this yesterday. Some of their genuine artifacts were spoils of war and looting which had to be returned to the countries of origin and some purchases may have funded terrorist groups.
posted by XMLicious at 1:05 AM on October 23, 2018 [8 favorites]
Artefacts will no longer be on display after researchers said they show ‘characteristics inconsistent with ancient origin’
FPP from the beginning of the year: The Museum of the Bible Is a Safe Space for Christian Nationalists, at which point it was evidently already known that they were forgeries, but I think the Museum only admitted this yesterday. Some of their genuine artifacts were spoils of war and looting which had to be returned to the countries of origin and some purchases may have funded terrorist groups.
posted by XMLicious at 1:05 AM on October 23, 2018 [8 favorites]
handwringing is tedious and ahistorical
Well, wide-brush cynicism isn't exactly a breath of fresh air, either. I think each other us has some right to get disillusioned at their own pace.
It would be nice if the kind of people who rose to leadership positions (religious or no) were dedicated servants of their communities and exemplars of their worldviews' fundamental tenets, but...
posted by ServSci at 4:36 AM on October 23, 2018 [1 favorite]
It's worth remembering that in 1980, an evangelical christian named Jimmy Carter was in the White House, a man so devout that he confessed to committing adultery in his heart by looking at other women with lust, who since has walked the walk and set the kind of example Jesus' words would have christians do, including spending much of his time working to house the poor and cure diseases.
And the so-called "moral majority" abandoned him in droves to vote for the divorced Ronald Reagan.
The hypocrisy isn't new, ifar from it. Now it's just too obvious to ignore.
posted by Gelatin at 6:42 AM on October 23, 2018 [64 favorites]
And the so-called "moral majority" abandoned him in droves to vote for the divorced Ronald Reagan.
The hypocrisy isn't new, ifar from it. Now it's just too obvious to ignore.
posted by Gelatin at 6:42 AM on October 23, 2018 [64 favorites]
It's only hypocritical if you judge by what they profess to believe, rather than what they actually believe.
What I mean is, as a group they're actually quite consistent: traditionalist and authoritarian. Their religion and their politics both reflect it. Once Christianity became an institutional power instead of a radical movement, it became a comfortable home for people like that. The uncomfortable messages about love and charity could be ignored or twisted whenever it's convenient. It's not really faith in Christ; it's faith in the system.
You'll always find some who are still radical, but there's a reason so many of them have to break away from the system - go their way as individuals, or form new movements.
posted by Kutsuwamushi at 7:16 AM on October 23, 2018 [7 favorites]
What I mean is, as a group they're actually quite consistent: traditionalist and authoritarian. Their religion and their politics both reflect it. Once Christianity became an institutional power instead of a radical movement, it became a comfortable home for people like that. The uncomfortable messages about love and charity could be ignored or twisted whenever it's convenient. It's not really faith in Christ; it's faith in the system.
You'll always find some who are still radical, but there's a reason so many of them have to break away from the system - go their way as individuals, or form new movements.
posted by Kutsuwamushi at 7:16 AM on October 23, 2018 [7 favorites]
I mean, that Jesus fellow held a whip and drove a bunch of grifters from the temple by force.
I do feel bad for liberal, left-lewning Christians. They exist, but there are just so many bad apples that have poisoned the whole bunch for far too many people.
Christian, to me these days, is a warning sign, like yellow and black stripes on a bug, or the skull and crossbones on a bottle.
I think this is an extremely reasonable perspective, and I say this as a leftist Christian. I think I've talked about this before but there is a phenomenon I refer to internally as "MLKing" which I believe also happened to Jesus (and my mom thinks also happened to St. Francis of Assisi). Basically, someone had an incredibly, INCREDIBLY radical and powerful message, and it was hugely threatening, so threatening that the state persecuted them and they were killed for espousing it, but the message was bigger than the person so it survived, and when the existing power structure saw that they couldn't quash the message they coöpted and neutered it, so it became "peace on earth, everyone just be nice and polite". But "niceness" is NOT what Christianity is about; Christianity demands absolutely radical acts of love. Something with which I struggle is that I know I'm not living up to the profoundly radical demands of Christianity; I live a comfortable life, even as I'm doing my best to work for justice within that.
I hate that, in Christianity as in other things, powerful forces invested in the status quo managed to strip away the radicalism of the message (and "love one another" is an absolutely radical message, it demands that we believe that all human beings are people) and just leaves the feel-good pablum. I do the activism I do because I believe it's the right thing, and I believe that it's what my religion demands of me, and in fact is just the tip of the iceberg, and it makes me livid to see how this earth-shaking message has been perverted and I hate that I agree that you are right to be extremely wary of those who loudly self-identify as Christians.
posted by Mrs. Pterodactyl at 7:29 AM on October 23, 2018 [53 favorites]
I do feel bad for liberal, left-lewning Christians. They exist, but there are just so many bad apples that have poisoned the whole bunch for far too many people.
Christian, to me these days, is a warning sign, like yellow and black stripes on a bug, or the skull and crossbones on a bottle.
I think this is an extremely reasonable perspective, and I say this as a leftist Christian. I think I've talked about this before but there is a phenomenon I refer to internally as "MLKing" which I believe also happened to Jesus (and my mom thinks also happened to St. Francis of Assisi). Basically, someone had an incredibly, INCREDIBLY radical and powerful message, and it was hugely threatening, so threatening that the state persecuted them and they were killed for espousing it, but the message was bigger than the person so it survived, and when the existing power structure saw that they couldn't quash the message they coöpted and neutered it, so it became "peace on earth, everyone just be nice and polite". But "niceness" is NOT what Christianity is about; Christianity demands absolutely radical acts of love. Something with which I struggle is that I know I'm not living up to the profoundly radical demands of Christianity; I live a comfortable life, even as I'm doing my best to work for justice within that.
I hate that, in Christianity as in other things, powerful forces invested in the status quo managed to strip away the radicalism of the message (and "love one another" is an absolutely radical message, it demands that we believe that all human beings are people) and just leaves the feel-good pablum. I do the activism I do because I believe it's the right thing, and I believe that it's what my religion demands of me, and in fact is just the tip of the iceberg, and it makes me livid to see how this earth-shaking message has been perverted and I hate that I agree that you are right to be extremely wary of those who loudly self-identify as Christians.
posted by Mrs. Pterodactyl at 7:29 AM on October 23, 2018 [53 favorites]
I've been kind of wrestling with the opposite of this. I was a big liberal Jesus nut all through my youth and kept a great amount of reverence for the ideals of humility, equanimity, and especially non-violence after I lost my faith. The beatitudes still gave me something to talk to Christians about, while making me wary of more violent or self-satisfied lefties.
But as the culture war is getting ramped up to sillier degrees and the Xtians are making it clear they're just in it for power and money, I find that I don't have any strong basis for the pacifism at the core of my values. It doesn't work as a hold-over from Chrisitianity, now that the bait and switch has gone through. It doesn't really fit with MLK and Gahndi. Losing pacifism is very unsettling to me, especially as it seems like a bit of a fear/hate response to all those scary trolls on the Trump train, but also seems very reasonable.
Is there any place for Jesus in these wicked times? A feminist sjw, pajama-boy, cuck hippy wants to know.
posted by es_de_bah at 9:16 AM on October 23, 2018 [2 favorites]
But as the culture war is getting ramped up to sillier degrees and the Xtians are making it clear they're just in it for power and money, I find that I don't have any strong basis for the pacifism at the core of my values. It doesn't work as a hold-over from Chrisitianity, now that the bait and switch has gone through. It doesn't really fit with MLK and Gahndi. Losing pacifism is very unsettling to me, especially as it seems like a bit of a fear/hate response to all those scary trolls on the Trump train, but also seems very reasonable.
Is there any place for Jesus in these wicked times? A feminist sjw, pajama-boy, cuck hippy wants to know.
posted by es_de_bah at 9:16 AM on October 23, 2018 [2 favorites]
But as the culture war is getting ramped up to sillier degrees and the Xtians are making it clear they're just in it for power and money, I find that I don't have any strong basis for the pacifism at the core of my values. It doesn't work as a hold-over from Chrisitianity, now that the bait and switch has gone through. It doesn't really fit with MLK and Gahndi. Losing pacifism is very unsettling to me, especially as it seems like a bit of a fear/hate response to all those scary trolls on the Trump train, but also seems very reasonable.
Do you mean you can no longer justify a blanket pacifism in light of the ramping up of violence against the vulnerable? Or that your belief that pacifism can bring about change no longer holds when, to quote Stokely Carmichael, "In order for nonviolence to work, your opponent must have a conscience"?
posted by Kitty Stardust at 10:43 AM on October 23, 2018 [5 favorites]
Do you mean you can no longer justify a blanket pacifism in light of the ramping up of violence against the vulnerable? Or that your belief that pacifism can bring about change no longer holds when, to quote Stokely Carmichael, "In order for nonviolence to work, your opponent must have a conscience"?
posted by Kitty Stardust at 10:43 AM on October 23, 2018 [5 favorites]
It is conservatism's great good fortune that the Left has become by-and-large indifferent if not outright hostile to spirituality.
posted by No Robots at 10:58 AM on October 23, 2018 [1 favorite]
posted by No Robots at 10:58 AM on October 23, 2018 [1 favorite]
Here's what ordained Presbyterian minister Chris Hedges has to say.
posted by Obscure Reference at 11:01 AM on October 23, 2018 [1 favorite]
posted by Obscure Reference at 11:01 AM on October 23, 2018 [1 favorite]
My church and denomination gave full praise to everything Reagan did. And what did they consider the greatest threat to America? Women wearing skimpy clothing on television in shows like Three's Company.
Yeah, it's almost like a man-made institution organized around low-accountability authoritarian leadership was just an instrument for social control and the accumulation of worldly power and wealth all along.
posted by Kitty Stardust at 11:28 AM on October 23, 2018 [6 favorites]
Yeah, it's almost like a man-made institution organized around low-accountability authoritarian leadership was just an instrument for social control and the accumulation of worldly power and wealth all along.
posted by Kitty Stardust at 11:28 AM on October 23, 2018 [6 favorites]
^I wonder how many of my fellow Leftists would be willing to declare that the goal of socialism is create the kingdom of heaven here on Earth.
posted by No Robots at 12:40 PM on October 23, 2018
posted by No Robots at 12:40 PM on October 23, 2018
I've been reccommending copies of Barber's books to my Christian friends. Not my religion, but I think a big part of the problem is that many of these articles deal exclusively with white evangelical Christianity and skip right over the fact that Moral Mondays, Voter Rights, and the Poor People's Campaign down here in the South have African American faith leaders at the forefront.
posted by GenderNullPointerException at 12:53 PM on October 23, 2018 [8 favorites]
posted by GenderNullPointerException at 12:53 PM on October 23, 2018 [8 favorites]
I wonder how many of my fellow Leftists would be willing to declare that the goal of socialism is create the kingdom of heaven here on Earth.
As a non-Christian and non-theist, you're going to have to find a different way of expressing that if you want me to whole-heartedly commit.
posted by Lexica at 3:55 PM on October 23, 2018 [2 favorites]
As a non-Christian and non-theist, you're going to have to find a different way of expressing that if you want me to whole-heartedly commit.
posted by Lexica at 3:55 PM on October 23, 2018 [2 favorites]
Er, yeah... is “not willing to declare that the goal of socialism is create the kingdom of heaven here on Earth” what's being characterized as “indifferent if not outright hostile to spirituality” here?
posted by XMLicious at 4:38 PM on October 23, 2018 [4 favorites]
posted by XMLicious at 4:38 PM on October 23, 2018 [4 favorites]
I care about results, myself. If you're working toward justice, peace, and providing assistance to the needy, I'm happy to have you as an ally. You can believe whatever you like.
It's not like organized atheism has done any better about idiots bleating sheeplike after cult-figure leaders and rioting to keep the oppressed oppressed and the existing power structures supported. Nor about absurd panics and fears about brown people and Islam.
posted by Scattercat at 4:59 PM on October 23, 2018 [5 favorites]
It's not like organized atheism has done any better about idiots bleating sheeplike after cult-figure leaders and rioting to keep the oppressed oppressed and the existing power structures supported. Nor about absurd panics and fears about brown people and Islam.
posted by Scattercat at 4:59 PM on October 23, 2018 [5 favorites]
I wonder how many of my fellow Leftists would be willing to declare that the goal of socialism is create the kingdom of heaven here on Earth.
No halfway decent socialist puts it this way. The goal of socialism is to abolish capitalism. In other words, goal is to move from a social structure of unjust domination and exploitation to one of ordinary unhappiness. However society is organized, people will still be assholes to each other.
posted by demonic winged headgear at 5:12 PM on October 23, 2018 [9 favorites]
No halfway decent socialist puts it this way. The goal of socialism is to abolish capitalism. In other words, goal is to move from a social structure of unjust domination and exploitation to one of ordinary unhappiness. However society is organized, people will still be assholes to each other.
posted by demonic winged headgear at 5:12 PM on October 23, 2018 [9 favorites]
The article says the War on Christmas is a "a fundamentally unserious pseudo-grievance", but really that describes so much of what conservatives say.
US conservatism is at the center anti-choice, and then everything above that a pile of illegitimate pseudo-grievances, scams, memes and bigotries. Those can be negotiated and eroded and broken apart. But abortion cannot.
And because abortion is such a binary and settled issue, and so radicalizing, all that comes after it is the desire for power and to enforce it on everyone else. The teams have been picked, the game is on, and the discourse now is all trash talk. Abortion draws in misogynists and white supremacists just by its nature, but the simplistic morality of it draws in so many more awful people. If you're anti-choice you're so free to do anything you want. I think that's why so many public conservatives act like such gleeful scumbags. It's so morally easy for them. Because what they have embraced is that there is no morality beyond abortion, and that is the same as power. I think that is why young conservatives look like the alt-right now.. They were not created by tumblr or pee cee culture.. they were created by the moral vacuum of right wing politics.
Or something. I'm tired. I just feel like the rot goes deeper than this article wants to think.
(And also: fuck Quillette.)
posted by fleacircus at 11:11 PM on October 23, 2018 [4 favorites]
US conservatism is at the center anti-choice, and then everything above that a pile of illegitimate pseudo-grievances, scams, memes and bigotries. Those can be negotiated and eroded and broken apart. But abortion cannot.
And because abortion is such a binary and settled issue, and so radicalizing, all that comes after it is the desire for power and to enforce it on everyone else. The teams have been picked, the game is on, and the discourse now is all trash talk. Abortion draws in misogynists and white supremacists just by its nature, but the simplistic morality of it draws in so many more awful people. If you're anti-choice you're so free to do anything you want. I think that's why so many public conservatives act like such gleeful scumbags. It's so morally easy for them. Because what they have embraced is that there is no morality beyond abortion, and that is the same as power. I think that is why young conservatives look like the alt-right now.. They were not created by tumblr or pee cee culture.. they were created by the moral vacuum of right wing politics.
Or something. I'm tired. I just feel like the rot goes deeper than this article wants to think.
(And also: fuck Quillette.)
posted by fleacircus at 11:11 PM on October 23, 2018 [4 favorites]
The seller of time-shares and used cars can hope that you like the product, benefit from it, they can be true believers or they can be cynical con-men... either way you bought it. Jesus is the brand mascott for several marketing schemes. People keep buying religion so they keep selling it and it comes in any flavor you like. And like other branded content, they get you started on one service so they can market other commitments to you as well.
posted by Anchorite_of_Palgrave at 11:35 PM on October 23, 2018 [1 favorite]
posted by Anchorite_of_Palgrave at 11:35 PM on October 23, 2018 [1 favorite]
The republican party's christian is a import knock-off version that has become very popular. Its the RC cola of christianty.
posted by Anchorite_of_Palgrave at 11:37 PM on October 23, 2018 [2 favorites]
posted by Anchorite_of_Palgrave at 11:37 PM on October 23, 2018 [2 favorites]
The real war on Christmas is the turning away from the teachings of Christ.
posted by Obscure Reference at 4:13 AM on October 24, 2018 [1 favorite]
posted by Obscure Reference at 4:13 AM on October 24, 2018 [1 favorite]
Here's an article at Patheos summarizing and explaining this year's report from the convention. The title "Downsizing Amid the Ruins" sums it up nicely if you don't want to read the whole thing.
Thanks for posting the link to that author, I'm enjoying reading her blog quite a bit. Lotta interesting stuff in there, and it's returning a tiny sliver of hope to my cold, scared heart.
posted by Caduceus at 4:53 AM on October 24, 2018
Thanks for posting the link to that author, I'm enjoying reading her blog quite a bit. Lotta interesting stuff in there, and it's returning a tiny sliver of hope to my cold, scared heart.
posted by Caduceus at 4:53 AM on October 24, 2018
No halfway decent socialist puts it this way.
The propertyless were the first ones that felt the need and perceived the possibility for change and improvement. At first, their conception of the possibility to change and improve the conditions of existence was very limited. But in time their conception widened and heightened, until in the mind of the great pioneers of the propertyless it attained to a universal scope and sublime height and the idea of a kingdom of heaven on earth was born.--The Philosophy of Marx / Harry Watonposted by No Robots at 10:49 AM on October 24, 2018
Speaking of which... “How about some spiritual Marxism? Anyone?”—the left's supposed indifference and hostility to spirituality is very specifically actually about indifference to kooky stuff you say yourself, isn't it?
posted by XMLicious at 12:52 PM on October 24, 2018
posted by XMLicious at 12:52 PM on October 24, 2018
If you want to find religious/utopian language among Marxists/socialists you'd be better off looking to Ernst Bloch. However, Bloch's concept of a "concrete utopia" is carefully distinguished from something like a "kingdom of heaven on earth."
It's mainly the conservative writer Eric Voegelin who makes the claim that socialists want to "immanentize the eschaton."
posted by demonic winged headgear at 12:52 PM on October 24, 2018 [1 favorite]
It's mainly the conservative writer Eric Voegelin who makes the claim that socialists want to "immanentize the eschaton."
posted by demonic winged headgear at 12:52 PM on October 24, 2018 [1 favorite]
When Christians are really concerned with the emancipation of those who labor and are heavy-laden, and when Marxists retain the depths of the Kingdom of Freedom as the real content of revolutionary consciousness on the road to becoming true substance, the alliance between revolution and Christianity founded in the Peasant Wars may live again—this time with success.—Atheism in Christianity / Ernst Bloch, p. 282.posted by No Robots at 2:27 PM on October 24, 2018
Do you want to keep quoting dead writers about how no really this is fine and we're all ignorant if we think it isn't, or do you want to listen to the actual living people here in this thread who are telling you that overtly religious language like "the kingdom of heaven" is alienating and enough to keep us from wanting to learn more about whatever you may be talking about?
It's 2018. Times change. Language use changes.
posted by Lexica at 3:53 PM on October 24, 2018
It's 2018. Times change. Language use changes.
posted by Lexica at 3:53 PM on October 24, 2018
It probably was not terribly reassuring to non-Christians and many Christians in the past, either:
posted by XMLicious at 4:39 PM on October 24, 2018
Many phenomena and movements I've seen referred to as “spiritual”, including within Christianity, seem quite compatible with the current and past political left. It's apocalyptic religion which is going to be greeted much less enthusiastically.Scholars believe that when it was originally written this phrase was intended to be eschatological with the Kingdom of Heaven referring to the end times.
posted by XMLicious at 4:39 PM on October 24, 2018
From your own link,
posted by XMLicious at 7:25 PM on October 24, 2018The oldest version of the Kaddish is found in the Siddur of Rab Amram Gaon, c. 900.
The hope that God will be King over all the earth, when all idolatry will be banished, is expressed in prophecy and song (Ex. xv. 18; Zech. xiv. 9; Isa. xxiv. 23, Iii. 7; Micah iv. 7; Ps. xxix. 10), and with special emphasis in the later Psalms (xciii.-xcix.). God's Kingdom is spoken of in Ps. xxii. 29 (A. V. 28), ciii. 19, cxlv. 11-13; Ob. 21; Dan. iii. 33 (A. V. iv. 3); Tobit, xiii. 1; Sibyllines, iii. 47-48, 767; Psalms of Solomon, xvii. 3; Wisdom, x. 10; Assumptio Mosis, x. 1; Song of the Three Holy Children, 33; Enoch, lxxxiv. 2. The words "The Lord shall be King" are translated in the Targum, "The Kingdom of God shall be revealed"; and the ancient liturgy culminates in the prayer that "God may establish His Kingdom speedily" (see 'Alenu; Ḳaddish)--"Kingdom of God ('Malkuta de-Adonai')" / Jewish Encyclopediaposted by No Robots at 8:51 PM on October 24, 2018
Ok how’s about: the Jesus-kingdom-of-heaven thing may be a sufficient way to achieve socialist utopian thinking, but it fails to be necessary in any way. Plenty of theism out there to choose from, plenty of socialist economic theories which don’t map very clearly at all to them, plenty of assholes willing to map assholery to literally anything which ensconces whatever they define as power in the age they find themselves living in.
This is a weird argument happening, is what I think this anti capitalist atheist is trying to say.
posted by zinful at 12:59 AM on October 25, 2018 [1 favorite]
This is a weird argument happening, is what I think this anti capitalist atheist is trying to say.
posted by zinful at 12:59 AM on October 25, 2018 [1 favorite]
Atheism in Christianity contends that the raging prophets were more the friends of humanity than the “positivist eunuchs” of official atheism – and the case for prophecy and rage is made amply in this heady, dizzying book.--"Atheism in Christianity by Ernst Bloch" / Owen Hatherley.In New Humanistposted by No Robots at 6:23 AM on October 25, 2018
I don't see people like Barber who ground their social justice work within Christian theology and tradition (specifically for him, an African American ethos of prophetic care), arguing that everyone should do the same. Rather, it's a mandate that if you are Christian you're obligated to engage in coalitions on civil rights and poverty even if you disagree on matters of faith. It's an internal faith conversation and not proselytizing.
And on the other side, I don't think that those of us who are decisively not Christian can either ethically or pragmatically get out of coalition work with Christians.
posted by GenderNullPointerException at 6:59 AM on October 25, 2018 [3 favorites]
And on the other side, I don't think that those of us who are decisively not Christian can either ethically or pragmatically get out of coalition work with Christians.
posted by GenderNullPointerException at 6:59 AM on October 25, 2018 [3 favorites]
A double process is required: reclaim the kingdom of heaven of Earth from the Right, and reclaim the Left from the positivist eunuchs of official atheism.
posted by No Robots at 7:34 AM on October 25, 2018
posted by No Robots at 7:34 AM on October 25, 2018
There's an official atheism?
posted by GenderNullPointerException at 7:43 AM on October 25, 2018 [3 favorites]
posted by GenderNullPointerException at 7:43 AM on October 25, 2018 [3 favorites]
Perhaps "officious" is a better word.
posted by No Robots at 7:45 AM on October 25, 2018 [1 favorite]
posted by No Robots at 7:45 AM on October 25, 2018 [1 favorite]
Maybe it's just where I live, but the idea that "the left" is a single thing that needs to be reclaimed from a spcific religious demographic doesn't match reality.
posted by GenderNullPointerException at 8:08 AM on October 25, 2018 [2 favorites]
posted by GenderNullPointerException at 8:08 AM on October 25, 2018 [2 favorites]
The goal is to unify the Left around the idea of the kingdom of heaven on Earth.
posted by No Robots at 8:21 AM on October 25, 2018
posted by No Robots at 8:21 AM on October 25, 2018
The goal is to unify the Left around the idea of the kingdom of heaven on Earth.
You mean a utopia? Or just a goal of embracing explicit religious framing? I'm pretty sure most Leftists, especially atheists, feel an imperative to build a better world. Atheist leftists tend to recognize that there isn't going to be a "next life" in which thing are better; that we have to make this life into the world we want to see. I'm not sure how mystifying that concept helps, especially when hundreds of years of religious thought have taught believers that their material suffering in this is life buys them rewards that they can only enjoy after their deaths. This framing actively discourages working toward improving this world because the material realm has been inherently designed to test you with suffering.
posted by Kitty Stardust at 8:41 AM on October 25, 2018 [3 favorites]
You mean a utopia? Or just a goal of embracing explicit religious framing? I'm pretty sure most Leftists, especially atheists, feel an imperative to build a better world. Atheist leftists tend to recognize that there isn't going to be a "next life" in which thing are better; that we have to make this life into the world we want to see. I'm not sure how mystifying that concept helps, especially when hundreds of years of religious thought have taught believers that their material suffering in this is life buys them rewards that they can only enjoy after their deaths. This framing actively discourages working toward improving this world because the material realm has been inherently designed to test you with suffering.
posted by Kitty Stardust at 8:41 AM on October 25, 2018 [3 favorites]
Cool. How do you propose to integrate explicitly progressive groups like the Satanic Temple under your one banner, monotheist?
Because that's been one of my personal standards of interfaith solidarity for some time now--if your Christian group can't handle working alongside folks on the left with a sense of humor, often some personal histories of pain from Christianity, and no reason to love Jesus, I bluntly think of you as more of a hindrance than a help.
I have a complicated relationship with progressive Christians. I know y'all exist, but I'm tired of your No True Scotsman defensiveness re: your less compassionate flockmates. They're your PR problem, not mine.
Can you still work with me in all my honesty on projects to make the world better and to care for our neighbors together? Or is the lip service to Jesus more important than the real work of building a better world to you?
If you intend to unite the Left, you better have a good goddamn answer to those questions. On my end, it's my job to reel in those folks who are more concerned with attacking religion than accomplishing humanitarian goals. I'm responsible for those who share my creed, after all.
Are you?
posted by sciatrix at 8:52 AM on October 25, 2018 [7 favorites]
Because that's been one of my personal standards of interfaith solidarity for some time now--if your Christian group can't handle working alongside folks on the left with a sense of humor, often some personal histories of pain from Christianity, and no reason to love Jesus, I bluntly think of you as more of a hindrance than a help.
I have a complicated relationship with progressive Christians. I know y'all exist, but I'm tired of your No True Scotsman defensiveness re: your less compassionate flockmates. They're your PR problem, not mine.
Can you still work with me in all my honesty on projects to make the world better and to care for our neighbors together? Or is the lip service to Jesus more important than the real work of building a better world to you?
If you intend to unite the Left, you better have a good goddamn answer to those questions. On my end, it's my job to reel in those folks who are more concerned with attacking religion than accomplishing humanitarian goals. I'm responsible for those who share my creed, after all.
Are you?
posted by sciatrix at 8:52 AM on October 25, 2018 [7 favorites]
I'm calling out the monotheism of Christianity, I should add, explicitly because the whole "unite everyone under the same creed or at least identify their beliefs (forcibly or otherwise) with my monotheistic One God" aspect of Christianity is coming across loud and clear in this "unite the Left" concept. I don't like that aspect explicitly because I believe that it encourages diverse groups of people to suborn their interests, perspectives, and histories under one hegemonic concept of what it means to be progressive--and erase the context of that overarching hegemonic belief and its origins.
posted by sciatrix at 8:57 AM on October 25, 2018 [3 favorites]
posted by sciatrix at 8:57 AM on October 25, 2018 [3 favorites]
@Kitty Stardust: We need an ideal to underpin and invigorate our praxis. This is it. It must be seized and secularized. "Ordinary unhappiness" is not a great slogan for motivating the masses.
@sciatrix: I have indicated with whom I share my creed. They are not Christians in any conventional sense. They are Jews who, in the midst of extreme personal and community anguish, formulated a programme to serve mankind in mapping out a future.
posted by No Robots at 8:57 AM on October 25, 2018
@sciatrix: I have indicated with whom I share my creed. They are not Christians in any conventional sense. They are Jews who, in the midst of extreme personal and community anguish, formulated a programme to serve mankind in mapping out a future.
posted by No Robots at 8:57 AM on October 25, 2018
My apologies; in a thread about conservative Christianity, I came in with a particular sort of bias. The point about the monotheism does still stand, however: your framework is seriously something that is going to hit a lot of people with religious trauma, and those raised outside monotheistic paradigms, in a way that is not at all positive.
How do you intend to handle that?
When I build coalitions with people who have very different worldviews from mine--and who think about the world differently from me--I am clear with them on the mutual goals that we have from this collaboration, and that I do not expect them to wholeheartedly agree with everything I think. I focus on respectful dialogue and shared goals, and the understanding that our two groups may or may not conflict in the future. I do not pretend that we are somehow the same group because we are working together on a particular shared goal, but I also do not act like we are bitter rivals: we are simply two groups of people, different but united for the moment. I honor differences and try not to emphasize them, but I remember where those differences are--I do not generally make a point of insulting Christianity, for example, when I am dealing with people who are being respectful to me.
It raises are hell of a lot fewer hackles than pretending that we are "really" identical groups does, I can tell you that. By respecting people's sore spots and disagreements, I can avoid pushing on them and creating conflicts where none need to exist. By focusing on shared mutual goals, I can encourage many people who feel very differently on some points to come together to create tangible manifestations of our shared compassion for others. This is basic coalition building. It is not the tack you personally are taking here, and I note how much the thread has started to bristle since you came in and started trying to unify it.
Secularizing ideals that are, at root, specific to particular religious beliefs is not actually antithetic to the accusation I just made. I don't believe the same as you do, and more to the point, I don't want to. You seem to keep saying over and over again that if you can just make your ideals palatable enough, you can unite us all in believing them. I am telling you that this practice is not helping you make friends and achieve tangible goals. It is creating discord, not ameliorating it.
posted by sciatrix at 9:12 AM on October 25, 2018 [6 favorites]
How do you intend to handle that?
When I build coalitions with people who have very different worldviews from mine--and who think about the world differently from me--I am clear with them on the mutual goals that we have from this collaboration, and that I do not expect them to wholeheartedly agree with everything I think. I focus on respectful dialogue and shared goals, and the understanding that our two groups may or may not conflict in the future. I do not pretend that we are somehow the same group because we are working together on a particular shared goal, but I also do not act like we are bitter rivals: we are simply two groups of people, different but united for the moment. I honor differences and try not to emphasize them, but I remember where those differences are--I do not generally make a point of insulting Christianity, for example, when I am dealing with people who are being respectful to me.
It raises are hell of a lot fewer hackles than pretending that we are "really" identical groups does, I can tell you that. By respecting people's sore spots and disagreements, I can avoid pushing on them and creating conflicts where none need to exist. By focusing on shared mutual goals, I can encourage many people who feel very differently on some points to come together to create tangible manifestations of our shared compassion for others. This is basic coalition building. It is not the tack you personally are taking here, and I note how much the thread has started to bristle since you came in and started trying to unify it.
Secularizing ideals that are, at root, specific to particular religious beliefs is not actually antithetic to the accusation I just made. I don't believe the same as you do, and more to the point, I don't want to. You seem to keep saying over and over again that if you can just make your ideals palatable enough, you can unite us all in believing them. I am telling you that this practice is not helping you make friends and achieve tangible goals. It is creating discord, not ameliorating it.
posted by sciatrix at 9:12 AM on October 25, 2018 [6 favorites]
@Kitty Stardust: We need an ideal to underpin and invigorate our praxis. This is it. It must be seized and secularized. "Ordinary unhappiness" is not a great slogan for motivating the masses.
I don't know, universal health care, fairly compensated & constructive work; mutual respect for difference, self-determination, secure housing, education, and civic comity would go a long damn way toward relieving my ordinary unhappiness. There are already plenty of valid secular concepts of leftist ideals. "Kingdom of Heaven on Earth" doesn't have a specific meaning to mean. A. Why do we need a monarch? A kingdom must have a king. No thanks. B. What's Heaven? For most English-speakers, that implies a belief in a Christian afterlife, which I don't accept as true. C. The concept of "Heaven on Earth" is often used to describe a too-good-to-be-true situation that cannot be marred by imperfections. Even in the best, most ideal society, individual humans will still encounter grief, anger, sadness, and fear. Trying to blow smoke up people's asses about being able to totally eliminate these experiences won't help. I think leftists would like to mitigate as much human misery as materially possible, but it's unrealistic to expect to wave away all negative human experiences.
posted by Kitty Stardust at 9:17 AM on October 25, 2018 [4 favorites]
I don't know, universal health care, fairly compensated & constructive work; mutual respect for difference, self-determination, secure housing, education, and civic comity would go a long damn way toward relieving my ordinary unhappiness. There are already plenty of valid secular concepts of leftist ideals. "Kingdom of Heaven on Earth" doesn't have a specific meaning to mean. A. Why do we need a monarch? A kingdom must have a king. No thanks. B. What's Heaven? For most English-speakers, that implies a belief in a Christian afterlife, which I don't accept as true. C. The concept of "Heaven on Earth" is often used to describe a too-good-to-be-true situation that cannot be marred by imperfections. Even in the best, most ideal society, individual humans will still encounter grief, anger, sadness, and fear. Trying to blow smoke up people's asses about being able to totally eliminate these experiences won't help. I think leftists would like to mitigate as much human misery as materially possible, but it's unrealistic to expect to wave away all negative human experiences.
posted by Kitty Stardust at 9:17 AM on October 25, 2018 [4 favorites]
You can try to sell people on policies and coalition building, and you may enjoy some success. But you will always be pushed back by those who appeal to ultimates, even if those ultimates are spurious. George Orwell put it well:
As for the whole question of monotheism, the writers to whom I have referred are quite clear that the God of Judaism has nothing to do with subsequent Christian distortions, but is rather the principle of an all-inclusive Absolute. This is developed fully in the work of Spinoza.
posted by No Robots at 9:29 AM on October 25, 2018
I do not want the belief in life after death to return, and in any case it is not likely to return. What I do point out is that its disappearance has left a big hole, and that we ought to take notice of that fact. Reared for thousands of years on the notion that the individual survives, man has got to make a considerable psychological effort to get used to the notion that the individual perishes. He is not likely to salvage civilization unless he can evolve a system of good and evil which is independent of heaven and hell. Marxism, indeed, does supply this, but it has never really been popularized. Most Socialists are content to point out that once Socialism has been established we shall be happier in a material sense, and to assume that all problems lapse when one’s belly is full. The truth is the opposite: when one’s belly is empty, one’s only problem is an empty belly. It is when we have got away from drudgery and exploitation that we shall really start wondering about man’s destiny and the reason for his existence. One cannot have any worthwhile picture of the future unless one realises how much we have lost by the decay of Christianity.What Orwell missed is that the Christian heaven after death is a corruption of the Jewish idea of the Kingdom of Heaven on Earth.
As for the whole question of monotheism, the writers to whom I have referred are quite clear that the God of Judaism has nothing to do with subsequent Christian distortions, but is rather the principle of an all-inclusive Absolute. This is developed fully in the work of Spinoza.
posted by No Robots at 9:29 AM on October 25, 2018
Can you make a case for your arguments in your own words without reaching into the mouths of dead men, or are you reduced to relying on quotes and self-satisfied claims of victory?
posted by sciatrix at 9:32 AM on October 25, 2018 [3 favorites]
posted by sciatrix at 9:32 AM on October 25, 2018 [3 favorites]
Mod note: No robots, that's as may be, but it's time for you to take a big step back and let the thread be about something other than you. Don't fall off, mind.
posted by restless_nomad (staff) at 10:06 AM on October 25, 2018 [2 favorites]
posted by restless_nomad (staff) at 10:06 AM on October 25, 2018 [2 favorites]
I just came across a ½-hour television bit called Human Zoos being broadcast on EWTN, which covers its eponymous subject and eugenics-related topics. I noticed a curious focus on blaming scientists in general and assertions that particular venerable museums and institutions in the present day were attempting to conceal their supposed involvement in the eugenics movement... then at the end it appeared to suddenly skip about eighty years of history to apparently attempt to blame our present proliferation of racist nationalist, neo-Confederate, and neo-Nazi sentiment on said museums and institutions, and maybe Charles Darwin too? It wasn't really clear.
The credits rolled and of course it was produced by the Creationist Discovery Institute with nearly every name suffixed by "/Fiverr" and a long list of public domain and social media sources.
It appears to have been released some time near the beginning of the year but just about a week ago the Discovery Institute's Wikipedia page was blanked with a rather unbelievable copyright violation claim: if the text was indeed copied from a single 2005 NYT article someone wasted an enormous amount of time collecting and formatting citations to other sources, most of which are dated after the publication of the alleged copyvio source.
posted by XMLicious at 11:14 PM on October 27, 2018
The credits rolled and of course it was produced by the Creationist Discovery Institute with nearly every name suffixed by "/Fiverr" and a long list of public domain and social media sources.
It appears to have been released some time near the beginning of the year but just about a week ago the Discovery Institute's Wikipedia page was blanked with a rather unbelievable copyright violation claim: if the text was indeed copied from a single 2005 NYT article someone wasted an enormous amount of time collecting and formatting citations to other sources, most of which are dated after the publication of the alleged copyvio source.
posted by XMLicious at 11:14 PM on October 27, 2018
Al Jazeera English's Fault Lines: “Church of Trump”
(content warning: violent speech against gays and women) They find a hardware store in Tennessee with a “No Gays Allowed” sign and a Christian flag on its front door. The store's owner speaks to the journalists and expresses predictably execrable views. They also cover “Project Blitz”, an operation to introduce “religious freedom” bills around the country during the last year-plus based on a report and model legislation from the Congressional Prayer Caucus Foundation.
posted by XMLicious at 8:00 AM on November 5, 2018
(content warning: violent speech against gays and women) They find a hardware store in Tennessee with a “No Gays Allowed” sign and a Christian flag on its front door. The store's owner speaks to the journalists and expresses predictably execrable views. They also cover “Project Blitz”, an operation to introduce “religious freedom” bills around the country during the last year-plus based on a report and model legislation from the Congressional Prayer Caucus Foundation.
posted by XMLicious at 8:00 AM on November 5, 2018
« Older Horror setup story: unfrozen undead want back in... | Ornate Birds and Sea Creatures Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by Thorzdad at 5:13 PM on October 22, 2018 [18 favorites]