Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Social Conservatism As a Coercive Tool Of The State

Posted by Bruce Wilson at 5:41 PM on April 29, 2007.


Bruce Wilson : Fundamentalism, Stalinism, and Fascism Have Much In Common

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get PEEK in your
mailbox!

 

Also in PEEK

Court Ruling Puts "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" On Notice
Daniel DiRito The All Spin Zone

Webb GI Bill Passes in Senate
Ali Frick Think Progress

McCain Hosts Potential Veeps at His Ranch
Jon Ponder Pensito Review

James Veverka's writing transcends categories and typologies, and he runs his analysis back over a thousand years:

"Uncomfortable as it makes people to compare religion with dictatorships, the most dangerous dictatorships of the 20th century were also radically socially conservative in regards to family values and sexuality. Whether it was the Motherland, the Fatherland or the Christian Nation, the same rigid moral message of intolerance runs through them.

Like religious conservatives throughout history and indeed, in the present, they used the state as a coercive tool to force their version of a conscience upon the rest of people. While only one-third of people generally tend to be socially conservative, this does not make a difference to those possessed with the compulsion to force their morality upon all others for their own good. This is not to say fundamentalists and other religious extremists are Nazis or Stalinists, but that they hold very similar views on these 'family values' and sexuality subjects and employ similar language in their positions and propaganda. They represent similar dangers to free societies as they always have throughout all of western history.

Ververka continues:

"It is for the same reasons, and rather ironically, that many conservatives have coined the word "Islamafascists" to describe religious fundamentalists of Islam. But both religions have a fundamentalist wing that continually attacks modernity and secularism. Radical Islamists want to fight off the same forces of western modernity that Christian extremists do. At the UN, we see Islamic nations, the Catholic Church and Protestant fundamentalists on the same side in the matters of science and society, modernity and secularism.

It may surprise many that hardline communists were also hardline social conservatives on the matters of family and sexuality. It is the nature of extremism to incorporate far out views on these matters into state policy. The answers to this perverse mix of despotism and family values lies in the natures of religion and nationalism. It is not about left versus right because social conservatism can be found in both as tools of the state. Social conservatism, both religious and secular, when wed to nationalism and embraced as state policy, has almost always turned into an enemy of tolerance and liberty. In fact, social conservatives in the USA, led by Christian conservatives, have fought or disagreed with religious diversity, religious equality, abolition of slavery, Suffrage, desegregation, integrating the armed forces, Brown v Board of Education, mixed race marriages, respect and equality for Jews (not in MY country club!), the Civil Rights Act of 1965, gender equality laws, women in authority, working women, reproductive education, family planning, contraception, condoms, gay rights and a host of others. It was humanists, both religious and secular that banded together to win the rights movements of the past. Such is the case presently with regards to gay, lesbian and family planning rights.

"Such people are sinning against God and will lead to the ultimate destruction of the family and our nation. I am unalterably opposed to such things, and will do everything I can to restrict the freedom of these people to spread their contagious infection to the youth of this nation." . . . "If the widespread practice of homosexuality will bring about the destruction of your nation, if it will bring about terrorist bombs, if it'll bring about earthquakes, tornadoes and possibly a meteor, it isn't necessarily something we ought to open our arms to."

In an Interview with Molly Ivins on September 14, 1993 (Fort Worth Star-Telegram), Pat Robertson added to his history of bigotry and ignorance when he said:

"Just like what Nazi Germany did to the Jews, so liberal America is now doing to the evangelical Christians."

Because of popular cultural myths and the religious right's propaganda, both misinformed and dishonest, most people don't realize that Nazi Germany and Stalin were on the same page as religious conservatives regarding homosexuals. The anti-gay propaganda of both the religious conservatives and the Nazis is nearly identical. One is religious, the other secular, but the message is the same. The views are the same. The doctrines are the same. The blind hatred is the same. Both embrace rigid patriarchal family views that see women as men-helpers and baby-makers. Both consider their views "virtues". Both are the moral crusaders to save the family in a nation that is supposedly threatened by decadence (Weimar Germany then and counterculture now). The sky is falling; civilization will crumble if the family isn't saved. Both are extreme right wing ideologies that embrace a state enforced social conservatism. Both are blends of extreme nationalism and extreme obsessions with law and order and the moral fiber of the nation. Both loudly proclaim their so-called family values as the salvation of the nation. Without them, civilization will collapse. [ read more ]

Digg!

Tagged as: conservatism, fascism, stalinism

Bruce Wilson writes for Talk To Action, a blog specializing in faith and politics.


Court Ruling Puts "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" On Notice
An appellate court ruing may signal the end of "don't ask, don't tell."
Post by Daniel DiRito. May 22, 2008.
Webb GI Bill Passes in Senate
Despite some Republican political shenanigans, Jim Webb's GI Bill passed the senate with overwhelming support.
Post by Ali Frick. May 22, 2008.
McCain Hosts Potential Veeps at His Ranch
Bobby Jindal, Charlie Crist and Mitt Romney - the GOP Veep short-list - descended on Arizona for a pow-wow with McCain.
Post by Jon Ponder. May 22, 2008.

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Ok, lets do some math!
Posted by: JoshuaLudd on Apr 29, 2007 6:51 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Fiscal conservatives = conservatives = good (in moderation)

Social conservatives= tyrants = NOT conservatives = bad in any amount.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

blind faith and self-righteous morals make people easy to control
Posted by: drblack on Apr 30, 2007 2:28 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
By using peoples blind faith and fear of those who differ it is easy for a group of unscrupulous people to control a population.
Issues that have no meaning or value ..like gay rights, making drugs illegal,prostituition, school prayer,etc...keep people from thinking about real issues.
We really need an Amendment to the Constitution that makes clear what the intention of the phrase Inalienable right to life ,liberty and happiness was .
A person was guaranteed the right to their own body by the Bill Of Rights. Whatever a person wants to put into or take out of themselves is their right.
No more vice laws. Chuch and state should remain seperate as the Founding fathers put into law.
Religion makes people ignorant because it has all the answers,asks no questions, turns people into followers, denies scientific fact, discourages creative living and sets up a framework where people must obey without question.
If the US continues to choose religious irrationalism over the scientific method we will become a third world country with China as our master within the next century or sooner.
Morality should always be based on practicality and not belief.
The original concept of morality developed so people could live together more harmoniously and productively.
At some point it was perverted into the kind of mindless insecurity that most religions practice and preach.
Gay people becoming legally bound to each other does no direct harm to anyone. It doesn't even effect anyone else.
This is an example of unpractical "morality". In fact this kind of thinking is truly immoral as it causes tension,divides people and takes time away from solving REAL problems.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Constitutional Amendment Posted by: Bruce Wilson
» RE: Constitutional Amendment Posted by: aonghus36
I'm beginning to question evolution, at least......
Posted by: tap17x on Apr 30, 2007 2:01 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...........as it applies to christian conservatives. There's a good argument to be made that they lag far behind humans with functioning brains. When they say "I did not evolve from a monkey," they were more correct than they realize.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Where did Bruce Wilson learn history?
Posted by: rileycase on Apr 30, 2007 5:31 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So, another tirade against Christian evangelicals under the label of "fundamentalist." I would be scared to death to put much of the running of this nation into the hands of Bruce Wilson types. First of all, it is simply inaccurate to label "fundamentalists" as social conservatives or to suggest that somehow fundamentalism is linked with nationalism. Fundamentalists of all types have always been outsiders in America, with the possible exception of the Puritans. The Jesus People were fundamentalists. The Amish are fundamentalists. The early Methodist circuit-riders were fundamentalists. They fought gambling, alcohol, slavery and prostitution. The most extreme (forerunners of today's fundamentalists) argued for women's rights and were against war. They were opposed by instituionalists who are today's liberals. They did not oppose religious diversity; they rather invented it since they divided over even the most minute religious issue. Instead of being nationalists they were suspicious of politics of any kind.
But of course they did believe in marriage between a man and a woman. They did believe in faithfulness in marriage and celebacy in singleness. They did believe in integrity. They did support the home, all these various fundamentalists and that seems to be what is agitating Bruce Wilson.
What would Bruce Wilson want us to be like? France?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Not a surprising nexus: totalitarianism and religion.
Posted by: wisegalah on May 1, 2007 5:12 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Totalitarianism of the left has been described as the final corruption of organised religion. Look around. Sounds right to me.
Marx's characterisation of religion as the opium of the people is because he knew that religion and his philosophy could not coexist because they occupied the same space.
His philosophy was/is based upon a corrupted christianity and the regimes which his teachings spawned grew in the purifying remains.
The remaining connections are the insistence on controlling every aspect of the lives of everybody.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I'VE GOT TO SMILE AT THE NAIVE UNDERSTANDING OF RELIGION in the history of america
Posted by: poppop_schell on May 1, 2007 5:53 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
To MANY MEmBERS OF ALTERNET:

I will send you the key so you can wind me up. After all, I'm just an unthinking robot brainwashed because I accept Jesus Christ as my Savior. (sarcasm off)

I'm afraid that not only is your knowledge very lacking about the history of social conservatism in America and its impact on making America a better place to live for the poor and downtrodden but also the power of the Christian religion in shaping the very foundations of the Declaration of Independence, The Constitution and many of the laws that make America a great place to live.

I am curious? Do you have any truly practicing Christians as friends or even close associates? OR are you simply robots of the nihilists and cynics that often are in the MSM and on Univesity campuses?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Wilson Has His History Wrong
Posted by: faultroy on May 6, 2007 6:49 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The fact that Stalinism, Fascism and Fundamentalism are all conservative in Nature is not prima facie evidence that because they are conservative they invariably descend into repression. This is decidedly incorrect.
What appears to be correct however is the cold reality that all of these movements were reactions to what had been perceived as negative future trends within their respective societies.
Furthermore once the pendulum started to swing in to opposite direction-- in essence trying to mitigate the offending largesse-- society lost control and vicious repression took the place of sound legitimate correction to a more moderate stasis.
When societies overcorrect, the the usual method is severe repression, and this results in violations of human rights--old injuries revisted, ethnic cleansing, and the inevitable mass killings.
Societies by their very nature are conservative. Morality which plays a key role in control of societies is based on a long historical continuum within their respective countries.
We are seeing the same thing in the USA today. The cries of Christian Fundamentalists and to a lesser extent Christian Conservatives is a direct reaction to the insidious liberal largesse that currently effects both our society as a whole, and our politics as well. The country is pretty evenly divided between liberal and conservative ideologies.
Conservatives feel literally besieged by both the immorality and amorality of television, and other forms of mass media, advocacy judges, discriminatory school systems which literally tell children their parents are anti american because of their beliefs, and a feminine public that has destroyed the very foundations of conservative social identity--the nuclear family. Prior to the rulings on abortion, gun control, gay marriage, and the exponential rise of the divorce rates one never really heard about various religious organizations and their activities. The issues above have become rallying cries to circle the wagons and repel the invaders.
It is not the Christian Conservatives or Fundamentalists that we need to worry about, but an out of control liberalization of morality and social mores that is literally out of step with at least 50 per cent of the American population.
Consequently there will invariably be a serious attempt at reaching an equilibrium acceptable to the majority of the population.
Unfortunately this attempt at equilibrium will be fueled by hatred, distrust, repression, bigotry, reprisals and the ultimate death of many innocents.

Sniff, Sniff--Ah... gather your loved ones...I smell the stench of burning flesh in the air.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]