Since the election, I've read a lot about how Democrats were outflanked in the red states on issues of "morality" and "faith" and what to do about this. Much of this is good stuff.
Here, I'm just trying to offer another angle on how Democrats could understand and more effectively deal with this trend.
I'm sorry in advance for the wordiness of the article and (as a newbie) if I unknowingly violated any blog protocols.
My main point is that this really is a "culture war", perhaps not in the sense that you may have thought of it before, being stirred up primarily by mainstream marketing aimed at Christians, and as such, should be fought that way in a deep sense.
I believe most of the analyses I've read so far focus on symptoms and manifestations of the culture difference, and not on the root cause of it. I don't know if I've correctly identified it myself or or not, so I'm posting here to get feedback.
Background
Recently, a friend of mine recommended the following article in the Nation to me (by Barbara Ehrenreich, who in order to understand poverty became poor) as a criticism of Democrats on this issue:
The Faith Factor
My friend liked it a lot, as did I, although I also think she's a little off (more on this below).
First, just some background about me. I grew up as a fundamentalist, evangelical in a "red state". In my life, I've spent long periods of time (i.e. been a member for more than a year) in many churches (over 10) of many denominations (over 6) in both very "red" and very "blue" states. I now live in a red state and have moved to a less evangelical, more mainstream, more liberal church. Thanks to my parents, my politics started off on the right and have gradually moved left since I left home until now I am as about as far left as you can get.
I've spent a lot of time thinking about "the Evangelical problem" both leading up to and after this last election. The main reason is because I was frequently arguing with my (still Republican) parents trying to convince them not to vote for Bush. (I actually succeeded in getting my mother to vote for Kerry, but failed with my father.) Anyway, I had to couch all of my arguments to my mom in religious terms (and, for example, my main opponents in this debate, aside from my father, were her church friends and indeed her pastor himself, whose emails she frequently forwarded to me and who I argued with via email, indirectly through her). I also made some attempts to persuade people at my old, more conservative church (via their church-wide email list that I set up for them before I left). And, having been raised this way and, until fairly recently, surrounded by these types of people on a weekly basis, I believe I have a fairly good understanding of what's going on here.
Ehrenreich's analysis
First, Ehrenreich is of course right that in reality, liberals have "Jesus on their side". And I think she's probably right at the end that we're going to have to adopt an attitude like the early Christians did who had to exist in the Roman empire that was originally hostile to them. But I think the part of the article about the social programs of the church being a source of their recruiting is wrong. But even if it's not, the important question for Democrats is not that, but rather what allows these churches to then convert everyone's politics and turn the members uniformly into "Repuvelicals" (my new word for people in this group). It wasn't always the case that churches were so politically homogenous.
Before I get into that, here are just a couple of things I thought she had slightly wrong when I was reading her article that are important for background:
- Repuvelicals do not start/run/work-at these social programs for the purpose of recruiting more Republicans, but rather for recruiting new Christians (and also, of course, to make themselves feel good about themselves). A minor distinction, but one that gets at the point I made in the above paragraph. There is no overt effort on the part of churches to turn people into Republicans. This is a side-effect.
- Repuvelicals are convinced that their programs actually do help the poor in the world like the "tough love" a father might have to administer to a son. They really believe that welfare is bad for the poor because it encourages irresponsibility and doesn't give them an incentive to change their own situation. They really believe (or believed) that they are helping the people of Iraq by "bringing them freedom" and "saving them from Saddam". They really believe that "big government is bad". Etc. In other words, it isn't that they begin to ignore parts of their religion when they become politically active/aware to the point where they're supporting policies that seem so "anti-Christian" to us. Rather, they see no inconsistency, and the smarter ones, sensitive to this criticism by us on the left, defend their favorite policies tooth and nail as being full embodiments of Christian principles.
My diagnosis
In my opinion, the problem with the church today is what I'll call "Christianity, Inc." (I think others have used this term before, but I don't know who. (*)) Corporate America has seen Christians as a lucrative demographic that is consistent enough in certain beliefs that "formulaic" marketing can be effective (and here I'm not just talking about advertising, but marketing). I believe this trend first started in the mid- to late-80s and is responsible for a lot of the "political" shifts we've seen in church attitudes today. In short (and to simplify it a bunch), I believe that marketers are responsible for creating "Repuvelicals".
Even though I grew up in a very traditional (fundamentalist) Christian home, things were very different then than now. There were at most a dozen "Christian musical groups" that made popular records. (Here I don't mean groups with Christian members, I mean groups that are promoted and marketed as "Christian" whose target market is really only Christians.) Now there are hundreds, if not thousands, with many stars. There were no Christian radio stations. Now just about every town (in the red states at least) has access to at least one. The "700 Club" was the only religious show on TV and it was considered to be a fringe thing, even among evangelicals. Nowhere could you buy Christian t-shirts or other "accessories" (WWJD bracelets, fish bumper symbols, etc.). Indeed, there were no "Christian Book Stores". Now, there are thousands across the country in every state and most towns. (And even just today I discovered here that there is apparently at least one Christian theme park now as well. Wow!)
Corporations are cashing in big on Christians. There is a huge industry that's grown up around them. And, just as with any marketing, marketers manipulate this group to "define it" for itself, and therefore make it more homogenous.
For someone outside this subculture, it is very hard to imagine how large it actually has become, or how insidious/pervasive it is.
What has this done?
Christians are behaving just like good consumers should. They are unconsciously slipping into the "mold" that the marketers have laid out for them. It's done so well that it has become part of the Christian culture.
Importantly, this directed marketing has given Christians a sense of separate identity. They are no longer Americans who happen to be Christians and happen to be Republican or Democratic. They are Christian Americans -- separate from (and some believe, superior to) the rest. (Note this is just like typical "identity politics", except, at the heart, it was not originally about politics, but rather money... although Republican politicians are now engaging in it as well, of course.) This has led to more and more of an "us" vs. "them" attitude, which the marketers have picked up on. (Which, in turn, has led them to market more and more to this attitude directly, until we have Christian bookstores selling in-your-face t-shirts, books about "taking back America", etc.) Christians more and more believe that they are persecuted in this country, that their faith is under attack from all sides, that they are in the minority. (And, by the way, the reaction of the secular Left to the alarming politicization trend within Christianity has just served to reinforce the view.) Home schooling is one example of this. This is a phenomenon that is really driven by the companies selling home-schooling materials to parents. (Indeed, I've often wondered if the latest battles in public schools (primarily over creationism and prayer) aren't "prodded along" by clever marketers of home-schooling materials.)
Of course, Republican politicians and strategists, recognizing the usefulness of a homogenous demographic group, have also done their best to push this along as well. Add to this that local pastors, having easy access to the same mass-marketed books and radio, being better able to communicate with each other via the internet. attending conferences together (sponsored by Christianity, Inc. of course), etc. are more and more influenced themselves by this marketing of a "Christian culture", and they also slip into the mold provided for them, such that their messages every week, while not directly part of the marketing effort, are at least consistent with it. (Many use anecdotes and stories that reinforce the stereotypes of the Christian subculture.)
Furthermore, thanks to companies like Clear Channel, Christians across the country are being exposed to exactly the same political rhetoric. James Dobson's "Focus on the Family" is carried on virtually every Christian radio station across the country, as are many other such programs. And while the protestant wing of Christianity is hopelessly fragmented into thousands of denominations and sects, Christians feel a sense of unity here. The idea here is: We may disagree about the proper way to baptize someone, but at least we can "all" agree on some certain core points. And although Christianity. Inc. is careful to never articulate these clearly, these are the core points around which it is organized. There is no doctrine on "Spirit 95", our local Christian radio station. Instead there are platitudes, feel-good (i.e. non-controversial) Bible verses, and praise songs. Consequently, through this tendency to avoid anything controversial, there is very little discussion of Christianity itself at all! This happens at the local level. But these stations also play the national-level shows distributed across the country. Because of this, there is a hidden implication that the topics discussed by the likes of the Dobsons and the Robertsons must be part of the "safe" topics that we (apparently) "all agree upon".
And so we are well on our way to a voting block.
What can Democrats do?
First, recognize that it isn't about just being better able to articulate how your party platform is consistent with Christianity (although this is important to). It's about breaking into the culture. It's about breaking a voting block.
Here, it might be instructive to look at what the Republican wizards have done in recent years to try to break the virtual voting block of minorities for Democrats. (Although the left might reject some of these techniques on ethical/moral grounds, it is still instructive to see what worked and what didn't.) I'm just suggesting this though, as I have yet to do any research on it. One thing that seems obvious though is that Republicans are trying to divide and conquer. Initially, they just tried to divide Hispanics from African Americans. Then, they went further to try to divide within these larger groups. (For example, they use other demographic wedges to split these groups.) While the jury is still out, this appears to have had only mixed success, and besides I think it is something that the left wants to steer clear of in general.
In my opinion, one good idea would be start a very overt frontal attack on the hypocrisy, corruption and downright "anti-Christian nature" of "Christianity, Inc." Here I don't mean to attack the culture itself, but rather the marketing and corporations that are growing fat and wealthy off of their Christian flocks. For example, shine some light onto the "Christian media moguls". By doing this, the goal isn't to reform the industry or anything like that, but rather just to plant the meme in the minds of some Christians that they are being exploited for their faith. At the same time, work needs to be done to start a "counter culture" in Christianity... people who recognize and reject the norms and stereotypes of the mainstream but are still Christians and, crucially, still seen by the mainstream as such.
Believe it or not, I think this might be enough.
If the culture is splintered, so is the voting block.
(*) Since I posted this today, I did a search on "Christianity, Inc." and hit this article from 2002 in Sojourners by Michael Budde and Robert Brimlow:
Christianity Inc.
It's not exactly the same idea, but it is fairly close.