Living Large in Carson City: What’s a Liberal to Do?

Posted on by technoscribe50: Gary Brady-Herndon

“Censorship is the child of fear and the father of ignorance.” Laurie Halse Anderson, Speak

Of all the ploys and dirty tricks that mean spirited Republicans and ultra conservatives have set in motion over recent years, banning books is the most egregious and foolish because it overwhelmingly targets one particular segment of society – children. Driven by fear, religious dogma, homophobia, and white identity politics, conservatives have launched a full scale assault on schools and public libraries across the nation. Their goal to foist their peculiar brand of morality on the minds and social development of children when they should be soaking up knowledge is reprehensible. The battlegrounds vary from community to community, but the up tick of challenges at city council and school board meetings is staggering and rife with hypocrisy and often unwarranted concern. Yet, their effect is unrelenting and coordinated involving state legislatures, politicians quick to feed an angry base red meat, and often, uninformed parents who seek to protect their children where no protection is necessary.

Of course, book banning is not a new phenomenon. In America, one of the first groups to ban a book was the holier-than-thou Puritans of Boston.  Jake Rossen writing for Mental Floss recounts the story of one Thomas Morton. Rosen writes that Morton ran afoul of the ruling Puritanical hierarchy when he moved to Massachusetts in 1624. Morton was somewhat of a party animal and chaffed at the oppressive lifestyle he was expected to follow as dictated by the church elders. Rosen notes he was also friendly with the Native Americans of the area; something the church vehemently discouraged as well. He was eventually forced to relocate out of the area. In retaliation he wrote New English Canaan in 1637. It was seen as “a searing indictment of conservative Puritan life.”

Rosen continued stating,

“In their eyes, Morton wasn’t just a prototype frat boy, {and} he was a direct threat to their way of life. His book was perceived as an all-out attack on Puritan morality, and they didn’t take kindly to it. So they banned it—and effectively banned Morton, too. He was refused entry back into Massachusetts and remained persona non grata until his death in 1643.”

Morton’s dilemma highlights a secondary effect that banning books carries with it. In a culture where conservatives are quick to pull out the cancel culture card, Republicans and conservatives are doing just that to the authors whose work they target. While some books are more controversial in their eyes, they show their true intent when they target books by well known American authors like Pulitzer Prize winner Toni Morrison’s Beloved, numerous award winner Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451, and Pulitzer Prize winner Harper Lee for To Kill a Mockingbird to name a few. Regardless of the fame and acclamation, writers through the years faced having their literary works denounced and cancelled due to the narrow minded bigots, religious extremists, and politicians who follow the hue and cry of constituents without regard to the First Amendment’s freedom of speech and press.

In today’s vicious climate of white identity politics and unyielding, evangelical holier than thou primness, the stakes are higher than ever. Critical race theory, LGBQT issues, and gender identity have become front and center in the conservative right’s campaign to stamp out all voices that do not adhere to a strict interpretation of both the Bible and white supremist goals. Granted, conservatives have every right to oppose topics which they find objectionable. The problem is they are willing to trample over the rights of others who disagree or find themselves living alternative lifestyles contrary to a hate filled minority willing to suppress anything that goes counter to their worldview. Banning books from libraries and course curricula across the nation is the go to tool conservatives employ in a widespread campaign of stifling those they don’t agree with in principle and others who they simply despise but not understand.

Critical race theory opponents are either willfully obtuse or simply disingenuous in their belief that race has not been a part of the makeup of American society. Why else would the nation need to implement Affirmation Action and civil rights laws to ensure that all people, regardless of their heritage or ethnic background, get the same chance of succeeding as their white counterparts? In an article posted to Market Realist titled “Critical Race Theory Controversy: Bans on Some Books by Black Authors”, Robin Hill-Gray writes,

“The age-old battle on banned books is reflected in the late Toni Morrison’s saying that parents should have the right to control what their children learn. But when books are banned publicly, it sets a precedent for what other children may want to learn, too. The future of books by marginalized communities is uncertain as political leaders, parents, and school districts struggle with uncomfortable subjects.”

It is important to note that the banning of books, regardless of the topic, stems from disgruntled groups grappling with “uncomfortable subjects”, not questions of illegality or even ethical reasons. These “uncomfortable subjects” are especially poignant when books are banned on LBGQT or gender issues. Not surprisingly, Christians are at the forefront of banning books dealing with anti-LBGQT and anti-gender topics. Christians for all of their proclamations of “love thy neighbor” and “we are all equal in the eyes of (their) God” are quick in their condemnation and repression of these sensitive subjects. It would be different if they were targeting adults who have become comfortable with their sexuality, but the targets of banned books in schools are the most vulnerable. Many are children grappling with self identity at a time when they are often confused and seeking real answers to the issues they are facing.

It wouldn’t be too far afield to equate the actions of book banning groups to the role played by Big Brother in George Orwell’s famous dystopian novel 1984. The slogan “Big Brother is watching you” that reoccurs throughout the book has become famous over the years symbolizing how reigning powers tend to suppress free thought by instilling in people the fear of being exposed. Brooke Baitinger writing for The Miami Herald cites a study done by PEN America that addresses the specter of repression that comes hand in hand with book banning. She quotes the study stating,

“It’s creating a chilling effect on teaching and learning, fostering “an increasingly punitive and surveillance-oriented environment” for educators and librarians . . . It harms the authors “whose works are being targeted” and “parents who want to raise students in schools that remain open to curiosity, discovery, and the freedom to read,” the report states.

Understandably, today, when Americans hear about banning books, they think of Florida and Ron De Santis’ campaign to remove books that he and his constituents find objectionable on topics from critical race theory to gender studies, and his disingenuous crusade to instill restrictions around “don’t say gay” topics among others. Yet, Florida is only one of 26 states that is actively attempting to keep books on topics they find uncomfortable out of the hands of students. Critics warn that the current climate of repression is only in its infant stage. As White Nationalist, evangelicals, and other hate groups get involved, more states will surely sign on to the crusade.

While book banning relies heavily on opinion and false assumptions of the harm books cause to children, the truth lies more on the positive side of the equation. In an article posted on the news site of Stetson University, the author details three important points about the effect (or non-effect) banning books has on students. Research shows that,

  • “Banned books did not predict GPA or violent/non-violent crime
  • GPA was predicted by increased reading for pleasure, but not required school reading
  • Banned books are associated with increased civic behavior (doing good for society) and low risk of antisocial behavior”

Ultimately, banning books is little more than suppression of thought and ideas. Two things that all students will suffer from in the end. Until the conservative right can be exposed as the authoritarian control freaks that they are, this debate will surely rage on for years to come.

Living Large in Carson City: What’s a Liberal to do?

Posted on by technoscribe50: Gary Brady-Herndon

“The government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.”
― John Adams

What is Christian Nationalism and why should all American believers, non-believers, and even those of other faiths pay attention? Today, as the nation slides further and further into decisive debates over everything from education to the rise of MAGA to immigration to the rights of women to control their bodies, Christian Nationalism can be seen as a major contributor driving these destructive trends. Simply put, whereas once Christianity was a positive force in people’s lives, the rise of Christian Nationalists has cast a dark shadow over the role religion plays in American society, and more importantly, in how government works.

The origins of Christian Nationalism, oddly enough, lies in the roots of our democratic republic in the form of the First Amendment to the Constitution which states,

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

The problem from the beginning was two fold. First, the Founding Fathers were well aware of the problems created when a government placed religious restrictions on its populace. For years, Britain forced the Church of England’s doctrine on the new colonials. “Religious freedom attracted settlers to America. English Protestants sought to structure their society so that every part of life experienced the renewal of the Reformation. Quakers, Roman Catholics and others came to America to escape persecution.”

Consequently, the Founding Fathers had little patience with the way the British government insinuated religion into its policies of governance. They wanted to ensure the burgeoning American government kept religion out of governmental affairs and vice versa. Complicating the issue, the population of the new republic was heavily steeped in Christian belief and Christian ideals. The founders believed strongly that for a citizen to function at their best they should cleave to their religious ideals and live in accordance with those beliefs. This is where confusion came into play and has continued so through the years. Were the Founding Fathers opening the door for the intrusion of religion into governing of the nation? If not, why put it there in the first place.

The answer lies in the the phrase “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . .” What was meant to be seen as creating a “wall of separation” between church and state always held the potential of being misinterpreted by zealous Christians wanting power that extended into the governance of the country. Both James Madison and Thomas Jefferson supported a “wall of separation” that kept religion and the state separate.

Today, Christian Nationalism is all the rage in conservative circles. It is important to recognize that the movement is staunchly embedded in both the conservative movement and the Republican Party. It would be easy to dismiss the culture of Christian Nationalism as just another phase that will pass in time. It will not, and it can only be assumed that as conservatism gains a firmer grasp on the nation, so too, will the Christian Nationalism. Understandably, the movement is one of white identity politics which reflects a portion of white America who believe they are being pushed out of their positions of power they held since the nation’s inception.

The Founding Fathers were not sanctioning Christianity as the one and only “American Religion”, but rather, were speaking in general terms about all religions. In the late 1600s through the middle of the 1700s, Anglicanism and Congregationalism were the driving forces in colonial America. Both were derivates of the English Puritan movement and emphasized the Protestant aspect of religion. There were, of course, people of the Jewish faith, some non believers, Native Americans, and others who did not fit the mold that the larger denominations espoused. Still, in the Founding Fathers’ eyes, all were afforded the same protection given them by the First Amendment. As Christianity prospered, other less popular belief systems remained in the shadows as the juggernaut of Christian faith grew wealthy, powerful, and ambitious.

Unfortunately, along with white identity politics, the movement harbors sinister and dehumanizing attributes. Racism, negative gender positions, violence, blind trust in leaders who shouldn’t be trusted, and an “us against them” mentality are part and parcel of the movement. Savvy political operatives like Ron DeSantis, Lauren Boebert, and Marjorie Taylor Greene (no matter how negative or untruthful) are just a few of those who have tapped into the angst that permeates the Christian Nationalist negative worldview.

Understandably, Donald Trump who has a huge political base associated with his MAGA movement has reaped the most from the Christian Nationalist movement. He has mined the depths of Christian Nationalism to further position himself as a Messiah for those hungry to see their beliefs brought to the national stage. Conspiracy theories, the attack on the Capitol on January 6, and a plethora of unfounded lies and fake news stories can be attributed to Trump’s wooing of the Christian Nationalist movement. As he becomes more and more threatened by the courts as they pursue him on a variety of fronts, Trump’s modus operandi is to further embrace those who would foist their religious views on the rest of the nation; something that will surely lead the nation into dire straits in coming months and years.

At this point it would be useless to point to nations around the world who are actually governed by religious nationalist. Everyone knows the horror that is the Taliban. Their repressive belief system leads to death and defilement of any one, especially women, who dare step out of line and confront their thuggish actions. Iran is another example where people live in fear for their lives as morality police are a constant threat of all who don’t share their brand of religious extremism.

Could Christian Nationalists succeed in gaining sufficient access to the American halls of power to institute a national religion (Christianity)? Would its faithful followers act to subvert the freedoms that are guaranteed by the constitution? In many ways it has begun already. It is important to note that Christian Nationalism is not strictly an evangelical movement although many evangelicals are a part of the crowd. In an article published in Christianity Today titled “Christian Nationalism is Worse than You Think“, the publication’s global media manager Morgan Lee and editorial director Ted Olsen sat down with Paul D. Miller, professor of the practice of international affairs at Georgetown University’s School of Foreign Service, to discuss Christian Nationalism to better define the movement. Miller notes that Christianity is a religion dedicated to worshiping the Christian god. He makes an important distinction, however, when he states,

“Christian Nationalism is a political ideology about American identity. It is a set of policy prescriptions for what the nationalists believe the American government should do. It’s not drawn from the Bible. It draws political theory from secular philosophy and their own version of history as well.” Source

In hindsight, Americans watched as Trump courted evangelicals and other religious leaders as part of his goal of spreading his conservative views to groups around the nation. Christian Nationalists took Trump’s acknowledgment of them as a carte blanche nod to spread the group’s devisive agenda. And it worked frighteningly well. The question is can they be stopped and will America have the wherewithal to say enough is enough? Only time will tell.