Trump’s Uncivil Religion

Fathom

Years past (1967) Robert Bellah proposed that America had the cultural, social, and political foundations for a civil religion. Perhaps starting as a cult, then expanding into a movement of millions; and, although not being spiritual, per se, but rather secular, exhibiting many of the characteristics of a religion.

Like many religions, this civil religion would have a god, prophet, apostles, priests, followers, and dogma. These would “provide a sense of inclusion, belonging, identity, unity and structure, worth, confidence, transcendence, and purpose.”

Let’s play with this idea for discussion purposes using a relatively recent exhibit: Trump’s Uncivil Religion. Discussion points.

1. God (e.g., several followers have posted in social media, especially political right, that Trump was given to America by God.
   
2. Prophet: Donald Trump, the self proclaimed leader of Trumpism.
   
3. Apostles: Trump’s sons Donald Jr and Eric, Senators Graham, etc., and House Representatives MT Green, Jordan, Speaker Johnson, etc.
4. Priests: Many of the hosts and anchors found in right wing social news and media (e.g., Fox and Friends, etc).
   
5. Dogma: “The notion that the just will be happy and the wicked punished” (Rousseau’s civil religion cited in Britannica). Trump’s often proclaimed retribution.

Peregrinus

My understanding is that the concept here is a civil religion, not a civil church. So we’re not talking here about an organisation or a hierarchy, and we’re not that interested in assigning specific roles (prophet, apostle, minister) to particular civic or political figures. The core of a civil religion is a set of ideas, values, symbols and ritual practices that foster a sense of communal identity and shared purpose.

A notion of God is not essential to a civil religion — the civil religion in France, for example, rigorously excludes any mention of God. Most civil religions, however, are agnostic on the question of God — they propose a set of ideas and values that stand on their own, for non-theistic citizens, but that theistic citizens can choose to connect with their theistic world-view if they wish.

One of the things that makes these ideas, values and practices a “religion” is a sense that they are sacred — they have a transcendent value, any attack on them is in some sense improper or immoral. In the political arena, even people who question them privately will refrain from questioning them publicly, because the price they pay for doing so is likely to be high.

Having said that a civil religion doesn’t generally assign roles to individuals, there are I think two exceptions:

- A very senior official (the King, the President of the Republic) is seen as embodying the state, and is therefore due respect and reverence regardless of his personal actions or personal characteristics. What he stands for is more important than who he is.

- A civil religion can have saints and martyrs. They don’t actually do anything — indeed, they’re often dead — but displaying respect and veneration for them is a significant aspect of most civil religions. Often they are archetypes more than individuals. In the American civil religion, for example, this role is filled by soldiers and veterans.

Ceremonies associated with civil religion include things like the ritual observance of national holidays or anniversaries (Remembrance Day parades in the UK; fireworks on US independence day), regular rituals involving the display or acknowledgement of the flag or the recital a pledge of allegiance. This are basically liturgies. And sacred texts, of course, abound — declarations of independence, charters of rights, constitutions, the political writings of leaders of a national movement, etc.

I don’t think Trump proposes a different civil religion from the civil religion the US already has. Rather, he’ll seek to exploit the civil religion to generate or secure support for his programme. But this isn’t unusual; pretty much all US politicians do this. What is different about Trump is not that he uses the civil religion in this way, but that he uses it in support of programme which is so nihilistic, so destructive, so decadent and so driven by fear and rage.

Fathom

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122308625#Comment_122308625

I like how you differentiate between religion and church.

If Trump has linked Trumpism to the existing American form of civil religion, and adopted it for his own purposes, to what extent do you think this was intentional from the beginning, or perhaps could he have discovered it through trial and error while campaigning, or a little of both?

Then again, could Trump have been an unwitting ping pong behavioral learning Skinner pigeon in an environment with an intermittent reinforcement schedule?

Having briefly flipped through Trump’s ghostwritten Art of a Deal, I have not encountered any thing resembling civil religion. Perhaps a different genre was the Deal than presidential and party politics? (Oh, as a side note, I would not recommend this book for its contents, as well as being poorly written).

At first blush, I find it dark humor when attempting to compare pre-Trump America to current Trump America. Have you seen the movie The Chronicles of Riddick (2004)? To what extent does the mystical “under verse” of the necromongers represent a civil religion of world destroying divisiveness offered to Trump’s MAGA followers, giving them a unquestioned and mystical sense of belonging, power, and purpose as they destroy America?

Please excuse my fuzz brain. It’s 01:36 Sunday morning, I’ve pulled a couple all-nighters last week, and fortunately will meet my 1 July 2024 fiscal year research grant deadline. Now I can’t get to sleep. So here I am on boards.

Cheers Fathom.