What if America is just like all the other empires? What if America’s power and wealth aren’t a mark of divine favor, but merely a byproduct of empire-building?
And what if, by mistaking the fruits of empire for God’s blessing, Christian nationalists have gotten confused about what sorts of things God favors—confused about the features of our civilization that believers should make an effort to cultivate and amplify into the future?
For example, what if it’s just a very, very bad thing that our government systematically slaughtered and dispossessed indigenous peoples and desecrated their sacred places? What if that’s just all there is to it: no manifest destiny, nothing redeeming about it—just really bad?
And what if it’s just very, very bad that a lot of America’s early wealth issued from labor that was straightforwardly stolen from people who were kidnapped and sold into slavery. What if that’s just evil, full stop?
Read the Exodus account and ask yourself where you fit into the narrative. If you’re a white American evangelical, you’re not among the Israelites—plainly, you’re with the Egyptians. And why think the American empire is any different from that of Egypt, or Babylon, or Rome?
I don’t understand what Christian nationalists are up to, theologically speaking. I just can’t imagine the early Church concerning itself with Rome’s GDP or reputation on the world stage. The greatness of the Roman Empire was perfectly irrelevant to Christ and his followers.
Of course, as an American, I might concern myself with the American economy, national security, etc. But my concern for such things will be tempered by my Christian faith; it certainly won’t be a consequence of my faith.
The notion that Christianity stands in a special relationship to America makes about as much sense as the idea that Jesus took on flesh to make Rome great again—which is to say, it makes no sense at all: it misunderstands what Christianity is about.
So when, as Christians, we see our nation pursue policies that threaten the well-being of orphans and immigrants in our midst, we really don’t have any business asking whether these policies are good for America. That’s not our concern.
Our concern should be for the ones oppressed, regardless of whether that concern is consistent with ephemeral notions of what makes America great.
Christ has no use for the cultural nostalgia of white American churchgoers: Christ simply doesn’t care whether America is great, or ever was or will be.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
With the unwavering support of the religious right for roughly five decades, conservative politicians in the US have engineered staggering levels of economic inequality—eroding democratic institutions and inviting the rise of authoritarian populism.
1/
Reagan leveraged racial resentment to give middle- and working-class (white) voters the false impression that their economic interests are served by cuts to government programs that benefit undeserving (Black) welfare recipients.
2/
(The politics of racial resentment hardly began with Reagan—he was merely the first modern conservative to successfully couch the argument for economic austerity within the politics of racial resentment.)
3/
Ralph Reed is former executive director of the Christian Coalition, and an old school evangelical grifter.
He garnered fame for leveraging his Christian Coalition connections to lobby for stricter casino regulations *on behalf of the casino industry* in the 90s and early 00s 🧵
Specifically, by his own admission, Reed accepted payments of no less than $1.23 million from a consortium of casino operations. (In 2006, a bipartisan Senate investigation found that Reed had accepted payments in excess of $5.3 million.)
In return, Reed unleashed scores of evangelical ministers and political activists to lobby for new casino regulations.
Two hours ago, as an experiment, I posted this direct, verbatim quote from W.A. Criswell (SBC president, 1968-70, pastor of First Baptist Dallas for five decades, founder and namesake of Criswell College):
Aspiring SBC luminaries @William_E_Wolfe and @colinsmo , among others, have declared the author a Democratic operative, a heretic, and an unbeliever who denies the divinity of Christ.
This tells me three things.
1. They aren’t in the habit of reading carefully: given how much they engage with my tweets, they should’ve known immediately that I didn’t write this.
So, assuming the happy couple is meant to be homeowners, their mortgage would be subsidized by federal programs—which programs were funded by a steeply progressive income tax (top marginal tax rate in the 90% range).
1/
The equity that accrues in that home—purchased with the benefit of government wealth redistribution—will be the single largest (and in all likelihood the only) source of whatever wealth these people pass to the children pictured.
2/
Is *that* the sort of politics envisioned by the trads who adore this imagery? Of course not.
Because the vast majority of these people don’t study history, or philosophy, or economics, or political theory, they regard such arrangements as “Marxist.”
3/
It’s commonly supposed that the problem with religious fundamentalism is that its moral commitments are too rigid. In fact the opposite is true: morality based in religious fundamentalism is infinitely flexible.
In the hands of ecclesial authorities who’ve insulated themselves from expert critique, sacred texts become a vehicle for legitimizing all manner of ungodliness, injustice, and abuse, in the name of an Authority that is transcendent and therefore unavailable for interrogation.
So the moral and intellectual intransigence of the fundamentalist is a product, not of immutable principles, but a technique of knowledge furnishes an unassailable pretext for maintaining social practices and habits of mind that are morally and intellectually bankrupt.
The creation science industry has come to inhabit a kind of intellectual no-man's-land in which creation scientists advance ostensibly biblical and scientific claims while avoiding substantive engagement with either biblical scholarship or legitimate science.
Over time, this intellectual no-man's-land has proven to be a hospitable base of operation for enterprising theologians and ambitious ministers who exercise social control by framing their opposition to "secular" expertise as the definitive "biblical view"—
of gender, race, parenting, politics, public school curricula, Walt Disney, progressive income tax, financial capitalism, international relations, and so on and so forth.