My progressive Mormon friend called my attention to the article
Suckers For Jesus by Ernest Partridge. It's an excellent but rather long discussion of why Christian fundamentalists continue to vote Republican even though the party oppresses them economically and doesn't represent their moral values. I've excerpted it heavily below the fold. The end of the story is that there's an opportunity to swing the Christian vote in our direction.
The Republican party is now dominated by an improbable alliance of:
- Libertarians (champions of limited government)
- Free market absolutists (favor privatizing all national assets)
- Greedy plutocrats (prefer monopolies for themselves)
- Christian fundamentalists
The first three, the "Secular Right", clearly gain a great deal from their alliance. How have the Christians, the "Religious Right", been persuaded that the moral teachings of Jesus are somehow consistent with aggressive foreign wars and the increased enrichment of the wealthy; but inconsistent with relief to the poor, comfort to the afflicted, education for the young, and employment for the jobless? The Secular Right had to pull this off, for without the Religious Right they would lack the votes that are essential for political power.
Libertarians and free marketeers articulate the political dogma, plutocrats supply the money, and the fundamentalists provide the votes. The alliance of the Secular Right with the Religious Right is a marriage of convenience - convenient for the Secular Right, which prefers to keep its pious "partners" barefoot, ignorant and pregnant. "Barefoot" in the sense of impoverished, "ignorant" of how they are being exploited, and "pregnant" in the sense being productive of votes.
The Secular Right avoids close inspection by the Religious Right because they have little in common. Many libertarians are avowed athiests and support legalization of marijuana, pornography, prostitution, abortion, and rights for homosexuals. We all know the sorry economic conditions brought on by right-wing policies. Why then do the victims meekly support their oppressors?
The tacticians of the Secular Right began, as all good salesmen begin, by identifying the hot buttons of the customer and proceeding to push those buttons. Fundamentalists are most comfortable with a Manichean world view - a concept of the world as a battleground between unalloyed good (us) and evil (them). For several decades, Communism fit the bill supremely well. With the fall of communism, new evils had to be identified, and so they were Islam abroad and Liberalism at home.
It follows from the preceding account that if the Democrats are looking for a wedge that might disable the political clout of the regressives, then here it is. The Fundamentalist Christians have been "had" - suckered - by the libertarians and oligarchs. If the rank and file of fundamentalist Christians in the Religious Right can somehow be shown that they are being used to further the interests not of themselves but of their oppressors, and that by so doing they are violating the central moral precepts of their Lord and Savior, then the political power of the radical right will collapse.
Fundamentalists like to ask "What would Jesus do?" Good question!
- Would Jesus launch a war of choice against a non-threatening country?
- Would Jesus cut back on school lunches for poor children?
- Would Jesus decline to comfort those who mourn as the soldiers' caskets arrive at Dover Air Force Base?
- Would Jesus sign 155 death warrants, giving the clemency appeals only a cursory glance?
The article concludes with specific suggestions for persuading the Religious Right to abandon their foot soldier service to the Radical Right:
- Liberal religious leaders must speak out and get involved in politics.
- The hypocrisy of prominent leaders of the religious right must be exposed.
- Attention must be given to the unchristian behavior of the plutocrats.
I'm an athiest who doesn't know much about how to appeal to Christians. Being called a sucker gets my attention intellectually but somehow I suspect it would drive away those who vote with their emotions. This message has to be framed carefully and delivered widely.