Having Reagan out of the White House did not slow the rise of fundamentalism, nor did the dissolution of the Moral Majority. In fact, the year 1991 marks the year the Religious Right finally completed its seizure of power of the Republican Party. John C. Green argues that “While the movement did back some extreme candidates with little success, it more commonly – and successfully – operated as part of a broader Republican condition, a pattern that reached full flower in the 1994 elections.”[1]
But, says TheocracyWatch.org:
“Journalists attended Christian Coalition and Republican Party events in the early nineties documenting the tactics of the newly formed organization. Reports appeared in newspapers around the country detailing the takeover of the local Republican Party committees and efforts by moderate Republicans to form competing entities.”
“Politically evangelicals (including fundamentalists) have displaced mainline Protestants as mainstays of the Republican Party.” Studies show that “This politicization of religious beliefs has been attributed to the greater legitimacy evangelicals accord to political cues from preachers.”[2] This was an ominous sign of a trend that would only continue as the decade wore on.
Studies argue that “some antipathy toward Christian fundamentalists might be a backlash in response to perceived religious intolerance”[3] but Dolce and Maio argue that “At present, there appears not to be much truth to these observations.”[4]
But, if antipathy was missing, a reaction was not. John C. Green points out that “the movement’s core agenda and political activity have produced intense counter-mobilization by opponents, particularly among religious liberals and the non-religious.”
There was good reason for this: the growing influence of religious extremists in the Republican Party was demonstrated in 1992 when the Republican Party of Washington State had banning witchcraft and yoga classes on their platform. Criminalizing witchcraft is so…medieval, but yes, they did it. And yes, yoga classes, because they’re so “of the devil”.
Also in 1992, Pat Robertson said to the Denver Post, “We want…as soon as possible to see a majority of the Republican Party in the hands of pro-family Christians…” Randall Terry agreed, saying in April: “What it is coming down to is who runs the country. It’s us against them. It’s the good guys versus the bad guys. It’s the God-fearing people against the pagans, and some of the pagans are going to church.”[5]
By 1992 the contemporary fundamentalist is “less the ignorant hillbilly or cracker, and more a conservative suburban housewife who votes Republican”[6] But see experience of Jo Martin below for at least one exception. Says Jo Martin, who calls herself “an Episcopalian and fifth-generation Texan”, and a life-long Republican who hadn’t been active in politics “for many years until they happened to attend a local GOP meeting last spring”:
“The party apparatus had been taken over by religious activists intent on bringing ‘biblical principles’ to government: outlawing abortion, ostracizing homosexuals and teaching creationism in public schools, among other things. We honest to goodness felt like we had fallen through a time warp into a Nazi brown-shirt meeting,” Martin said.[7]
And not only in Texas: the San Jose Mercury News reported that year that,
“A group dedicated to making the Bible the law of the land has quietly positioned itself to take over the Republican Party’s power structure in Santa Clara County… A fund-raising letter for that slate, sent by the Santa Clara County chapter of the California Republican League, warned that the Coalition on Revival’s agenda includes ‘a call for the death penalty for abortion, adultery and unrepentant homosexuality.’”
The growing polarization of the American political landscape was evident at the party conventions in 1992: “Christian fundamentalists were viewed (and acted) as ideological partisans (i.e. conservative Republicans) doing battle with liberals, feminists, gays, Democrats, and environmentalists.”[8] This attitude was epitomized by Pat Buchanan’s delivery of a speech at the Republican National Convention in Houston that year enthusiastically endorsing the culture war.
One study showed “The principle effect of 1992 was to bind evangelicals to the Republican Party”[9] and unsurprisingly Dolce and Maio saw these elections “as a critical demarcation point.”[10]
“[P]artisanship and newer concerns associated with ideological and cultural issues began dividing the public” and “This restructuring had the result of giving antifundamentalist sentiment a distinction liberal, culturally progressivist, and partisan Democratic cast throughout the 1990s.”[11]
This move was often successful. According to William Martin Chavanne, in “1992, 1994 and, it appears, in 1996, they [the Religious Right] won about forty percent of the elections they were involved in.”
The 1992 presidential elections saw Arkansas Gov. Bill Clinton face off against incumbent George H.W. Bush. Democratic centrist Bill Clinton won by a wide margin with 43 percent of the popular vote against Bush’s 37 percent. The Christian Right was blamed for the defeat in 1992[12] and in truth, many of them did turn away from Bush over his views on abortion according to exit polls. Even so, Bush did get 47 percent of the White protestant vote and 61 percent of the born-again or religious right, a group that at the time amounted to 17 percent of the vote.
The defeat did not deter fundamentalists from their ultimate goal of achieving complete control of the Republican Party per Pat Robertson and Randall Terry: “What the Christian right spends a lot of time doing,” says Marc Wolin, a moderate Republican who ran unsuccessfully for Congress from San Francisco last year, “is going after obscure party posts. They try to control the party apparatus in each county. We have a lot to fear from these people. They want to set up a theocracy in America.”[13]
If antipathy was iffy in 1992, by 1993 this was no longer true. A1993 Gallup poll showed that 25 percent of respondents had an unfavorable opinion of born-again Christians and a Zogby Group poll showed nearly the same thing, with 24 percent of respondents having negative feelings towards fundamentalist Christians.[14]
Antipathy was certainly present on the Christian side. Randall Terry was not talking about loving his enemies or turning the other cheek in 1993 when the Operation Rescue founder told a congregation in August, “I want you to just let a wave of intolerance wash over you. I want you to let a wave of hatred wash over you. Yes, hate is good. … Our goal is a Christian nation. We have a Biblical duty, we are called by God, to conquer this country. We don’t want equal time. We don’t want pluralism.”[15]
America was forewarned, and we still not at the high-water mark.
READ ALL THE ARTICLES IN THIS SERIES:
The Antecedents of American Fundamentalism 1606-1925
The Rising Tide of American Fundamentalism in the 1940s and 50s
The Cresting Tide of American Fundamentalism in the 1960s
American Fundamentalism in the 70s – The Rise of the Moral Majority
The Rise of American Fundamentalism – The Year 1980
The Rise of American Fundamentalism – the Reagan Decade
[1] John C. Green, Religion and the Culture Wars: Dispatches From the Front, 1996:3-4
[2] Dolce and Maio 1999:32
[3] Ted G. Jelen, The Political Mobilization of Religious Beliefs New York: 1991; Robert Wuthnow The Restructuring of American Religion: Society and Faith Since World War II Princeton NJ: 1988
[4] Dolce and Maio, 1999:53
[5] Speech in Jackson, Mississippi, April 1992
[6] Dolce and Maio 1999:33
[7] “The GOP’s Religious War” by Joan Lowey of Scripps-Howard News Service
[8] Dolce and Maio 1999:48
[9] Lyman A. Kellstedt, JohnC. Green, James L. Gruth, and Corwin E. Smidt, “Religious Voting Blocs in the 1992 Election: The Year of the Evangelicals?” in Religion and the Culture Wars: Dispatches from the Front, 1996:284
[10] Dolce and Maio 1999:50
[11] Dolce and Maio 1999:52
[12] John C. Green, “The Christian Right and the 1994 Elections: A View from the States,” PS: Political Science and Politics Vol. 28, No. 1 (Mar., 1995), pp. 5-8
[13] (“The Fifteen Percent Solution: How the Christian Right is Building From Below to Take Over From Above.” By Greg Goldin, published in The Nation (1993
[14] Dolce and Maio 1999:40
[15] At an anti-abortion rally in Fort Wayne, Indiana; quoted by the Fort Wayne News Sentinel 1993-08-16





goddess
Aug. 22nd, 2011 at 11:01 am
“I want you to just let a wave of intolerance wash over you. I want you to let a wave of hatred wash over you. Yes, hate is good. … Our goal is a Christian nation. We have a Biblical duty, we are called by God, to conquer this country. We don’t want equal time. We don’t want pluralism.”
Oh. My. God. (As it were.)
loading...
jlt
Aug. 22nd, 2011 at 11:31 am
Movie about the current issue….
.http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2011/aug/18/kevin-smith-red-state-westboro
loading...
Shiva (Moderator)
Aug. 22nd, 2011 at 11:24 am
one of the keys here that I see is this profamily Christian stuff. I don’t think they care of bit about the family,but they need a way to get their foot in the door. Once the family is securely under your wing that you can bash everybody outside of it.
It is surprising to me that any type of Christian would fight environmentalism. It’s just totally beyond my belief system that any Christian would be against taking care of the world he lives in. But I guess that would ruin their seven mountains stuff were taking over corporations is concerned.
There is one thing we can hope for. That there will be many people who are currently in the group and are in positions of power such as local party headquarters etc. that will see what is going on and quit or at least stop it locally.
This is an excellent series Hraf and I know you have put much time into it. It is appreciated
loading...
Hrafnkell Haraldsson
Aug. 22nd, 2011 at 3:27 pm
Thank you, Shiva.
loading...
Mikeyhatesit
Aug. 22nd, 2011 at 12:19 pm
Doing good works like taking care of the environment or ensuring the poor have food and shelter is going to take a back seat to making sure their faith becomes law of the land. “Let go, let god” is their mantra, so it gives them licence to wage a cultural crusade (even jihad is appropriate) on sinners, because god will take care of everything outside the human sphere of experience. Why that zen style of forgiveness and allowing people to live their own lives doesn’t extend to letting god touch the souls to bring them to christianity, I don’t know. If god is in charge of everything, why do eveangelicals feel they can do better, and must take over his duties. It doesn’t sound like they have a lot of faith in the lord…
loading...
Dan
Aug. 22nd, 2011 at 1:12 pm
This series of articles has been excellent. If you want a really in-depth look at the rise of American Fundamentalism from its roots through to the present, read Kevin Phillips American Theocracy. Brilliantly written and well researched, it will open your eyes.
loading...
Hrafnkell Haraldsson
Aug. 22nd, 2011 at 3:26 pm
Thank you. There are many good sources out there and we may have to consider a bibliography, including the book you mention. There is far too much material to cover in articles like this, which can only provide the barest of outlines.
loading...
SinghX
Aug. 22nd, 2011 at 7:08 pm
Most people do not follow the flow of garbage that comes out of the pie-hole of the fundamentalist Christian right as they are merely a pussy face pimple that looks ugly, better left alone. But, their “ugly” is getting lots of notice due to their oozing discharges into our public discourse.
The crazy-eyed zealots who lead their rank and file throw themselves into the spotlight distracting as many Americans from the real issues the country faces, like the financial execution of the middle class. They know how to market their message as well as Disney, and, it’s crazy, regressive, dangerous, ignorant, baseless babble meant to exchange “culture” with fundamentalist values. No one takes their kind of garbage seriously, however their intent is serious. They are barbarians, trampling down our rights, pushing public discourse away from critical thinking and, robbing us of justice for all, replacing it with what they call biblical law…which is basically, barbaric “rules” from Leviticus.
This entire “bible gives me the right” crew is nothing new in the large context of social history–past consequences of their rise to power always remains the same; divided and conquer, then torture those who won’t join their rampage. They pit the sexes against one another, the races against one another, religions against one another and it all comes down to power and control–nothing new.
Currently, this up-graded faction of the religious right believe that they have “the bible gives me the right” to conquer the world through spiritual warfare, spiritual mapping, intercessory prayer and corporate divinity (although they will tell you they are keeping all of us safe from the infidels). If you look at how they define their crusade, you will discover that it sounds like a bizarre concoction of New Age Know-Nothings gone wild creating demonic movie scripts quoting obscure scriptures. Their purpose has very little to do with the bible, but more with destruction of all civilization that doesn’t look like the Cecil DeMille move set after the apocalypses…that’s why I call them the Bible Barbarian Revival Global Show.
They invade schools, infect communities with fear, steeple-jack legit spiritual groups, and finance political causes and candidates. Their goal or ultimatum is to push their agenda into the daily discourse via psychological marketing meant to influence our beliefs and behavior. They’re intention is to eventually rob us of choice, our rights. They are the disease, the “carrier”, if you will, of fascism.
The question still remains–what do we do about these barbarians? We don’t have a way to “pop the ugly” and disinfect the people and places it has diseased. It appears that these Barbarians are inoculated against “us”; the more you try to get rid of them, the deeper they burrow under the layers like a tic.
They’re biggest weakness; they are very, very rigid. They are also trained addicted consumers; they buy whatever they’re told by their masters (minister or media). Like Moses’s people, they are slaves and don’t know how to act when free, so they hoard, fight and do stupid things while wandering, waiting for some kind of Utopian A-team to rescue them. The “maya” is strong in them…very strong indeed.
loading...
Makarios
Aug. 22nd, 2011 at 7:53 pm
Margaret Atwood said, in an interview, that the reaction to The Handmaid’s Tale varied by geography. Britons said, “Great story.” Canadians asked, “Do you think it could happen here?” Americans asked, “When do you think it will happen?”
loading...