Features » May 16, 2006

Saving Secular Society (cont’d)

A parishioner sings a song of worship in the 7,000-seat Willow creek community church during a Sunday service in South Barrington, Ill.

And while I support liberal struggles for economic justice—higher wages, universal health care, affordable education, and retirement security—I don’t think economic populism will do much to neutralize the religious right. Cultural interests are real interests, and many drives are stronger than material ones. As Arendt pointed out, totalitarian movements have always confounded observers who try to analyze them in terms of class.

Ultimately, a fight against Christian nationalist rule has to be a fight against the anti-urban bias built into the structure of our democracy. Because each state has two senators, the 7 percent of the population that live in the 17 least-populous states control more than a third of Congress’s upper house. Conservative states are also overrepresented in the Electoral College. According to Steven Hill of the Center for Voting and Democracy, the combined populations of Montana, Wyoming, Nevada, North and South Dakota, Colorado, Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, Arizona, and Alaska equal that of New York and Massachusetts, but the former states have a total of nine more votes in the Electoral College (as well as over five times the votes in the Senate). In America, conservatives literally count for more.

Liberals should work to abolish the Electoral College and to even out the composition of the Senate, perhaps by splitting some of the country’s larger states.(A campaign for statehood for New York City might be a place to start.) It will be a grueling, Herculean job. With conservatives already indulging in fantasies of victimization at the hands of a maniacal Northeastern elite, it will take a monumental movement to wrest power away from them. Such a movement will come into being only when enough people in the blue states stop internalizing right-wing jeers about how out of touch they are with “real Americans” and start getting angry at being ruled by reactionaries who are out of touch with them.

After all, the heartland has no claim to moral authority. The states whose voters are most obsessed with “moral values” have the highest divorce and teen pregnancy rates. The country’s highest murder rates are in the South and the lowest are in New England. The five states with the best-ranked public schools in the country—Massachusetts, Connecticut, Vermont, New Jersey and Wisconsin—are all progressive redoubts. The five states with the worst—New Mexico, Nevada, Arizona, Mississippi and Louisiana—all went for Bush.

The canard that the culture wars are a fight between “elites” versus “regular Americans” belies a profound split between different kinds of ordinary Americans, all feeling threatened by the others’ baffling and alien values. Ironically, however, by buying into right-wing elite-baiting, liberals start thinking like out-of-touch elites. Rather than reflecting on what kind of policies would make their own lives better, what kind of country they want to live in, and who they want to represent them—and then figuring out how to win others to their vision—progressives flail about for ideas and symbols that they hope will appeal to some imaginary heartland rube. That is condescending.

———————————————-

One way for progressives to build a movement and fight Christian nationalism at the same time is to focus on local politics. For guidance, they need only look to the Christian Coalition: It wasn’t until after Bill Clinton’s election exiled the evangelical right from power in Washington that the Christian Coalition really developed its nationwide electoral apparatus.

The Christian right developed a talent for crafting state laws and amendments to serve as wedge issues, rallying their base, and forcing the other side to defend seemingly extreme positions. Campaigns to require parental consent for minors’ abortions, for example, get overwhelming public support and put the pro-choice movement on the defensive while giving pro-lifers valuable political experience.

Liberals can use this strategy too. They can find issues to exploit the other side’s radicalism, winning a few political victories and, just as important, marginalizing Christian nationalists in the eyes of their fellow citizens.

Progressives could work to pass local and state laws, by ballot initiative wherever possible, denying public funds to any organization that discriminates on the basis of religion. Because so much faith-based funding is distributed through the states, such laws could put an end to at least some of the taxpayer-funded bias practiced by the Salvation Army and other religious charities. Right now, very few people know that, thanks to Bush, a faith-based outfit can take tax dollars and then explicitly refuse to hire Jews, Hindus, Buddhists or Muslims. The issue needs far more publicity, and a political fight—or a series of them—would provide it. Better still, the campaign would contribute to the creation of a grassroots infrastructure—a network of people with political experience and a commitment to pluralism.

Progressives could also work on passing laws to mandate that pharmacists fill contraceptive prescriptions. (Such legislation has already been introduced in California, Missouri, New Jersey, Nevada, and West Virginia.) The commercials would practically write themselves. Imagine a harried couple talking with their doctor and deciding that they can’t afford any more kids. The doctor writes a birth control prescription, the wife takes it to her pharmacist—and he sends her away with a religious lecture. The campaign could use one of the most successful slogans that abortion rights advocates ever devised: “Who decides—you or them?”

———————————————-

In conjunction with local initiatives, opponents of Christian nationalism need a new media strategy. Many people realize this. Fenton Communications, the agency that handles public relations for MoveOn, recently put together the Campaign to Defend the Constitution, a MoveOn-style grassroots group devoted to raising awareness about the religious right. With nearly 3.5 million members ready to be quickly mobilized to donate money, write letters or lobby politicians on behalf of progressive causes, MoveOn is the closest thing liberals have to the Christian Coalition, but its focus tends to be on economic justice, foreign policy and the environment rather than contentious social issues. The Campaign to Defend the Constitution intends to build a similar network to counter Christian nationalism wherever it appears.

Much of what media strategists need to do simply involves public education. Americans need to learn what Christian Reconstructionism means so that they can decide whether they approve of their congressmen consorting with theocrats. They need to realize that the Republican Party has become the stronghold of men who fundamentally oppose public education because they think women should school their kids themselves. (In It Takes a Family, Rick Santorum calls public education an “aberration” and predicts that home-schooling will flourish as “one viable option among many that will open up as we eliminate the heavy hand of the village elders’ top-down control of education and allow a thousand parent-nurtured flowers to bloom.”)

When it comes to the public relations fight against Christian nationalism, nothing is trickier than battles concerning public religious symbolism. Fights over crèches in public squares or Christmas hymns sung by school choirs are really about which aspects of the First Amendment should prevail—its protection of free speech or its ban on the establishment of religion. In general, I think it’s best to err on the side of freedom of expression. As in most First Amendment disputes, the answer to speech (or, in this case, symbolism) that makes religious minorities feel excluded or alienated is more speech—menorahs, Buddhas, Diwali lights, symbols celebrating America’s polyglot spiritualism.

There are no neat lines, no way to suck the venom out of these issues without capitulating completely. But one obvious step civil libertarians should take is a much more vocal stance in defense of evangelicals’ free speech rights when they are unfairly curtailed. Although far less common than the Christian nationalists pretend, on a few occasions lawsuit-fearing officials have gone overboard in defending church/state separation, silencing religious speech that is protected by the First Amendment. (In one 2005 incident that got tremendous play in the right-wing press, a principal in Tennessee wouldn’t allow a ten-year-old student to hold a Bible study during recess.) Such infringements should be fought for reasons both principled, because Christians have the same right to free speech as everyone else, and political, because these abuses generate a backlash that ultimately harms the cause of church/state separation.

The ACLU already does this, but few hear about it, because secularists lack the right’s propaganda apparatus. Liberals need to create their own echo chamber to refute these kind of distortions while loudly supporting everyone’s freedom of speech. Committed Christian nationalists won’t be won over, but some of their would-be sympathizers might be inoculated against the claim that progressives want to extirpate their faith, making it harder for the right to frame every political dispute as part of a war against Jesus.

The challenge, finally, is to make reality matter again. If progressives can do that, perhaps America can be saved.

———————————————-

Writing just after 9/11, Salman Rushdie eviscerated those on the left who rationalized the terrorist attacks as a regrettable explosion of understandable third world rage: “The fundamentalist seeks to bring down a great deal more than buildings,” he wrote. “Such people are against, to offer just a brief list, freedom of speech, a multiparty political system, universal adult suffrage, accountable government, Jews, homosexuals, women’s rights, pluralism, secularism, short skirts, dancing, beardlessness, evolution theory, sex.” Christian nationalists have no problem with beardlessness, but except for that, Rushdie could have been describing them.

It makes no sense to fight religious authoritarianism abroad while letting it take over at home. The grinding, brutal war between modern and medieval values has spread chaos, fear, and misery across our poor planet. Far worse than the conflicts we’re experiencing today, however, would be a world torn between competing fundamentalisms. Our side, America’s side, must be the side of freedom and Enlightenment, of liberation from stale constricting dogmas. It must be the side that elevates reason above the commands of holy books and human solidarity above religious supremacism. Otherwise, God help us all.

Reprinted from Kingdom Coming by Michelle Goldberg. Copyright © 2006 by Michelle Goldberg. With permission of the publisher, W.W. Norton & Company, Inc.

• Help In These Times publish more articles like this. Donate today!
• Subscribe today and save 40% off the newsstand price!

• subscribe to print magazine

• stay in touch with our email newsletter

  Subscribe to our regular weekly e-mail newsletter. It's packed with updates on recent and upcoming stories, events, campaigns and things every progressive should be informed about.

   

• email this article to a friend

  Your Name Your Email Recipient Email

  Personal message Thought you might be interested in this article from In These Times.

   

  Please help us prevent spam by verifying the word you see in the image above

  Send to multiple recipients. Just separate each email address with a comma.

• Reader Comments

  In this article it is mentioned that combined a few red states have 7 more electoral votes than Massachusetts and New York.  It goes on to state that these red states have an “unfair” advantage because Mass & NY have a bigger combined population.  Do these population counts include non-citizens, i.e. immigrants?  The last time I checked, the electoral college must represent citizens, not just gross number of people in some area.

  I don’t see how the electoral college can really be argued against, it is a pretty simple formula.  If you have more citizens, you get more votes.  Where is the harm in that.  Oh, NOW I remember!  The Democrats are also the party that adamantly oppose voter IDs for registration, thus making it harder for non-citizens (dare I say illegal immigrants) to vote.  This is the “victim” class Dem policies mostly appeal to, hence your “base.”  I understand it would be nice for Dems for them to have disproportionate weight in our electorate, but keep dreaming.

  As for the Senate, it was debated EXTENSIVELY at our founding as to the makeup of the legislature (New Jersey & Virginia Plans).  The only plan that guarenteed that the smaller states would not be consistently roled by the larger ones and their interests and simultaneously guarentee that larger states would have their say was the construction of the bicameral legislature.  This is something that should never be screwed with, it is undoubtedly a wise and fair system.

  In conclusion, just because you “better than everyone else” urbanites haven’t gotten your way in the last 15 or so years doesn’t mean its time to knock all the pieces off the board and go home.  Here on the other side, we were patient with the absolute failed welfare state for 50+ years before we finally had our chance to change policy.  We didn’t want to remake representation.  Now it is your turn.  I did not say I agree with the nuttiest of the right, as they are pretty nuts.  But I think our democratic apparatus is sufficient to buffer against truly extreme views from becoming completely dominant.

  Recently Newt Gingrich proposed an interesting concept, open “townhall” style debates throughout the country, venues large and small where both parties would come together for open (unmoderated) debate.  No media asking questions, no 30 second sound bites just a true test point-for-point on ideas.  Just like they did before the days of television, and during the foundation of this nation.  I hope this happens.

  Posted by Hyjinx22 on May 16, 2006 at 2:46 PM

  Excellent piece.  Another avenue that absolutely needs to be advocated and pursued by those of us who profess to be “main-stream” traditional Christians is to challenge the beginnings of extreme fundamentalism in our own churches when it rears its ugly head.  Don’t let your own church be hijacked by the fanatics.  If you believe in true Christian values, respect the beliefs of others,and advocate the necessity of separation of church and state in a healthy democracy, volunteer to serve on your church’s boards, and help to steer policies away from the fanatics.  Challenge those who would advocate bigoted, narrow views of false Christianity.  Those people are no more Christian than Osama is a Muslim.  Unfortunately, all too many people are more than willing to take on the role of “sheep” while those who profess to be shepards of the faith are instead the wolves.

  Posted by bootsrey on May 16, 2006 at 3:10 PM

  The bottom line is that the US is one crisis away from foundering.

  Posted by electriclady281 on May 16, 2006 at 3:16 PM

  Hijinx22

  First let me thank you for including your IQ in your name. It helps me tailor my response to ensure you understand. LOL

  It is absolutely idiotic that Wyoming’s electoral vote reflect only 166,000 voters, and each of California’s electorial votes represent 616,000. We know the reasons why the electoral college was created, but not every original idea our founding fathers had was a good one. Several have been modified or completely replaced. The electoral college is one such idea that has outlived its usefulness. Either it should be modified to ensure it is more balanced by making sure each electoral vote at least represents the same amount of people OR just plain eliminated. The electoral college is not democratic, and the fears of small states have long since proven groundless, thanks to our federal system. Which gives our “states” so many rights that in other countries, such an entity would be considered an “autonomous region” just below being outright independent.

  You need to get your hearing checked.. “Last I heard” the electoral college originally counted NON-citizen black slaves as 3/5 a person to give the southern states a greater say. Citizenship is still not an actual requirement to figure a state’s population. And the the bigot states otherwise known as the red states should feel lucky. Since they are garnering a far larger share of illegal immigration than ever before. So every illegal immigrant pads their already unfair representation.

  I am so tired of hearing the idiocy defining phrase ” -failed welfare state-!
  Um thanks to that failed program, infant mortality dropped dramatically. Seniors got medicare. Laws and regulations were passed forcing businesses to adhere to standards and safe practices Etc. The only way it failed was explaining to everyone just how dramatically successful it was.

  Yes, it is time urban/large states demand their rights. It’s time the smalltown/rural parasites understand that their high-living courtesy of outrageous subsidies from larger states must come to an end. Only then will those red state leaches realize that their selfish, self-centered ways are possible ONLY because the blue staters have been picking up the tab for their upkeep. States like Alaska, which produces oil, but gets cash from the Feds. like the proverbial welfare mom with a dozen babies all conceived to increase her pay. States like Texas which has highway developments totalling 4 lanes each way in the middle of absolutely nowhere serving a population base of 100,000s paid for by Californians who struggle on 2 lane roads serving communities of millions. States like Wyoming, Utah, Idaho, Montana where the parasite ranchers demand the right to destroy and ruin vast stretches of wilderness and park areas that belong to ALL Americans, because then all of America subsidizes their dismal animal husbandry techniques that use huge amounts of resources to produce relatively small amounts of usable product. But what do they care, it’s not their dime. So they spend like the welfare queens they are.

  The real irony is the liberals and urbanites were too confident that everyone knew the truth, and didn’t call them what they were corporate profiteers sucking the life out of this nation in a hundred different ways by demanding and using their representation in our legislature to get all sorts of “set asides” directed to their state to benefit a few businesses and individuals by giving them free or pay them to exploit the natural riches of this nation that belong to ALL of us, and NOT to the state such properties happen to be located.

  Posted by johnnyincentx on May 16, 2006 at 4:01 PM

  Not living in USA, it would be disrespectful of me to mingle in your internal affairs, but nevertheless I can’t help feeling astonished at the spreading of wrongly called Christianity and their fanatical views. You find sheperds all over Latin America taking advantage of ignorant people, even selling them contracts for 100 Dls. between them and God in which they are promised prosperity, healing, and all kinds of blessings. They are supposed to pay 10% of their earnings to the sheperd who, in turn, has the ability to talk to God and decipher for them different parts of the bible, which, as every other religious book was written by men in different times of history. There are several TV channels, with base in different parts of the USA where “miracles” are proclaimed, menaces are proferred and it’s all lilke a nightmare, a return to the Middle Ages. What’s going on? We used to look up onto our Northern Brother for enlightment, free-thinking , workers rights, freedom in all senses, and all we get now are these type of messages plus eternal excuses to start wars and deprive other countries of their riches. At the end of 19 century, an Argentine president, by the name of Sarmiento hired a group of American teachers to give shape to argentine school system, and they proved to be so helpful that we had, until around 1970, free education for all with humanistic contents and freedom of thinking. Then the neo-con nightmare settled down and we have now this monstrosity growing, dividing people, and preaching absolutely false values.
  to johnnyincentx: If you feel America’s riches belong to all of you, you should also consider that LatinAmerica, Irak, Iran, Syria and many other countries have the right to their own undersoil riches, n’est ce pas?
  I have also read that much of the money collected by so-calkled churches is directed to Israel, where supposedly the big battle will take place and where only the chosen people and so-called christians will be saved and will inherit the earth. Seen from the outside, it looks like holy madness.

  Posted by Maria on May 16, 2006 at 5:19 PM

• extended discussion >>>Continued...

  Discussions with more than 5 comments are continued on our special discussion page to encourage continuity and ease of use. There are currently 54 posts.

Also featured Delphi Dodges Union Contracts
Bankruptcy Law in Shambles
Why Exiting Iraq Wont Be Easy

Full contents
Previous issues
Subscribe and save!