I really enjoyed this article, especially the descriptions of religious nationalism in other countries. Sometimes it feels like we're the only country having a problem with these people trying to take over government. Don't forget Russia and its Eastern Orthodox version of Christian Nationalism, and until last week, Hungary, with its Catholic nationalism. And perhaps worst of all these countries, middle eastern countries under Sharia Law, like Afghanistan, Iran and Saudi Arabia, which push a harsh, fundamentalist form of Islam. The scary thing here in America is there are people high in the government who want a Christian fundamentalist version of Sharia Law here, in which women have no rights at all and LGBTQ are imprisoned or even killed.
I'm glad you enjoyed it! To be honest, the Religious Nationalism section was originally far more extensive but I cut it back because I wasn't sure how deep readers wanted to go. That original version might deserve its own standalone piece.
What I find particularly damaging about American Christian fundamentalism — beyond its domestic agenda — is that it travels with the American stamp of approval, which means it gets absorbed in developing countries as "Western values." That framing gives it a legitimacy it hasn't earned, and it ends up being used as justification for suppressing the very freedoms Western values are supposed to protect.
You're absolutely right about Russia and Hungary — though Hungary's situation shifted dramatically last week with Magyar's win, which may signal that Catholic nationalism's grip there is finally loosening. Russia's case is especially cynical: the Orthodox Church under Kirill has essentially become a theological arm of the Kremlin, blessing wars and sanctifying authoritarianism as Christian duty.
The Sharia Law parallel is one more people should sit with. When Americans hear "theocracy," they picture Afghanistan or Iran — somewhere distant and foreign. The ideological distance between those systems and what figures like Michael Flynn and the architects of Project 2025 are openly proposing isn't as wide as most people want to believe. The methods may differ differ but the destination rarely does. -
I am glad you included a lot of history that few people are aware of. I bet 90% of Americans would say abortion is what started the Religious Right.
I appreciated the comparison with other countries. Do you have numerical data?
And speaking if Australia, we would have been happy if they hadn't exported Ken Ham to the US, though I am sure they are happy that he isn't still there.
Thanks, Seth. As I mentioned to Suzan, I wasn't sure how much interest there'd be in Religious Nationalism as a global phenomenon, so I cut that section back significantly. When I publish it as a standalone piece, I'll make sure the numbers are there — comparative data on religious party representation, legislative influence, that kind of thing. It'll make the argument considerably harder to dismiss.
About Ken Ham, I couldn't agree more. Australia definitely got the better end of that trade. Ironically, as if they weren't immigrants themselves, these later additions make better xenophobes than homegrown Americans.
I really enjoyed this article, especially the descriptions of religious nationalism in other countries. Sometimes it feels like we're the only country having a problem with these people trying to take over government. Don't forget Russia and its Eastern Orthodox version of Christian Nationalism, and until last week, Hungary, with its Catholic nationalism. And perhaps worst of all these countries, middle eastern countries under Sharia Law, like Afghanistan, Iran and Saudi Arabia, which push a harsh, fundamentalist form of Islam. The scary thing here in America is there are people high in the government who want a Christian fundamentalist version of Sharia Law here, in which women have no rights at all and LGBTQ are imprisoned or even killed.
I'm glad you enjoyed it! To be honest, the Religious Nationalism section was originally far more extensive but I cut it back because I wasn't sure how deep readers wanted to go. That original version might deserve its own standalone piece.
What I find particularly damaging about American Christian fundamentalism — beyond its domestic agenda — is that it travels with the American stamp of approval, which means it gets absorbed in developing countries as "Western values." That framing gives it a legitimacy it hasn't earned, and it ends up being used as justification for suppressing the very freedoms Western values are supposed to protect.
You're absolutely right about Russia and Hungary — though Hungary's situation shifted dramatically last week with Magyar's win, which may signal that Catholic nationalism's grip there is finally loosening. Russia's case is especially cynical: the Orthodox Church under Kirill has essentially become a theological arm of the Kremlin, blessing wars and sanctifying authoritarianism as Christian duty.
The Sharia Law parallel is one more people should sit with. When Americans hear "theocracy," they picture Afghanistan or Iran — somewhere distant and foreign. The ideological distance between those systems and what figures like Michael Flynn and the architects of Project 2025 are openly proposing isn't as wide as most people want to believe. The methods may differ differ but the destination rarely does. -
I am glad you included a lot of history that few people are aware of. I bet 90% of Americans would say abortion is what started the Religious Right.
I appreciated the comparison with other countries. Do you have numerical data?
And speaking if Australia, we would have been happy if they hadn't exported Ken Ham to the US, though I am sure they are happy that he isn't still there.
Thanks, Seth. As I mentioned to Suzan, I wasn't sure how much interest there'd be in Religious Nationalism as a global phenomenon, so I cut that section back significantly. When I publish it as a standalone piece, I'll make sure the numbers are there — comparative data on religious party representation, legislative influence, that kind of thing. It'll make the argument considerably harder to dismiss.
About Ken Ham, I couldn't agree more. Australia definitely got the better end of that trade. Ironically, as if they weren't immigrants themselves, these later additions make better xenophobes than homegrown Americans.