Are We Heading towards Theocracy?

[unapologetic]

Nah. Fictional characters only have the wants ...

I need to start labeling my sarcasm.

 

[Tigers!]

Nah. Fictional characters only have the wants ...

I need to start labeling my sarcasm.

yes please

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

The ideology is explicitly Protestant and white nationalist. White Protestants are only 26% of the population. When you add up the non-Christians, the Catholics, the non-white Protestants, and the anti-theocracy subset of white Protestants, that adds up to an overwhelming majority who aren't going to go along with their agenda.

Without getting bogged down in the larger question of the thread, your demographic math overlooks a few things regarding Christian Nationalism: first, Christian Nationalist ideology is not strictly confined to white Protestants. Significant sub-populations of Black and Hispanic evangelical Protestants also hold these beliefs. Second, support exists on a spectrum. It isn't just a binary choice between hardline theocrats and everyone else; organizations like the Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI) categorize respondents into Adherents, Sympathizers, Skeptics, and Rejecters. When you account for both Adherents and Sympathizers, the footprint is much larger.

By coincidence, I was actually reviewing PRRI's state-by-state data yesterday. In several states, a full majority of white, non-Hispanic residents qualify as Christian Nationalism Adherents or Sympathizers--such as Arkansas (59%), Mississippi (54%), and West Virginia (53%)--with Louisiana (49%), Oklahoma (49%), and Missouri (45%) trailing closely behind. What is most fascinating to me anyway is what lies beneath these high-level state averages. If a state's general white population sits at 50% to 60% support, the specific sub-demographic of White + Evangelical + Protestant in those locales is expected to be significantly higher to pull the state average up to that level--likely reaching 75% to 85%! This points to powerful local feedback loop, where regional church networks, conservative media ecosystems (particular AM radio stations?), and community norms could be reinforcing one another.

In any case, political influence does not necessarily require an absolute national majority; it relies heavily on geographic concentration and party alignment. For example, PRRI's findings show that a majority of Republicans nationwide qualify as either Christian Nationalism adherents or sympathizers. When a highly motivated movement forms the core constituency of one of the two major political parties and holds heavy regional majorities, raw national demographic headcounts simply don't tell the whole story. When Republicans hold the power across the three branches of government, it can reasonably be anticipated that they will throw bones to this base. They may also attempt to maintain power through more intrusive means--such as implementing Bible instruction in history classes to cultivate future voters, likewise to eliminate exposure to diverse or critical opinions, while simultaneously institutionally undermining the opposition party's ability to win elections.

 

[SLD]

The ideology is explicitly Protestant and white nationalist. White Protestants are only 26% of the population. When you add up the non-Christians, the Catholics, the non-white Protestants, and the anti-theocracy subset of white Protestants, that adds up to an overwhelming majority who aren't going to go along with their agenda.

Without getting bogged down in the larger question of the thread, your demographic math overlooks a few things regarding Christian Nationalism: first, Christian Nationalist ideology is not strictly confined to white Protestants. Significant sub-populations of Black and Hispanic evangelical Protestants also hold these beliefs. Second, support exists on a spectrum. It isn't just a binary choice between hardline theocrats and everyone else; organizations like the Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI) categorize respondents into Adherents, Sympathizers, Skeptics, and Rejecters. When you account for both Adherents and Sympathizers, the footprint is much larger.

By coincidence, I was actually reviewing PRRI's state-by-state data yesterday. In several states, a full majority of white, non-Hispanic residents qualify as Christian Nationalism Adherents or Sympathizers--such as Arkansas (59%), Mississippi (54%), and West Virginia (53%)--with Louisiana (49%), Oklahoma (49%), and Missouri (45%) trailing closely behind. What is most fascinating to me anyway is what lies beneath these high-level state averages. If a state's general white population sits at 50% to 60% support, the specific sub-demographic of White + Evangelical + Protestant in those locales is expected to be significantly higher to pull the state average up to that level--likely reaching 75% to 85%! This points to powerful local feedback loop, where regional church networks, conservative media ecosystems (particular AM radio stations?), and community norms could be reinforcing one another.

In any case, political influence does not necessarily require an absolute national majority; it relies heavily on geographic concentration and party alignment. For example, PRRI's findings show that a majority of Republicans nationwide qualify as either Christian Nationalism adherents or sympathizers. When a highly motivated movement forms the core constituency of one of the two major political parties and holds heavy regional majorities, raw national demographic headcounts simply don't tell the whole story. When Republicans hold the power across the three branches of government, it can reasonably be anticipated that they will throw bones to this base. They may also attempt to maintain power through more intrusive means--such as implementing Bible instruction in history classes to cultivate future voters, likewise to eliminate exposure to diverse or critical opinions, while simultaneously institutionally undermining the opposition party's ability to win elections.

Exactly. The Nazis never won a majority. Indeed their last free election, they actually lost some seats. In the March 33 elections which were rife with voter intimidation and suppression of the opposition, they still only won 47%. Not enough for an outright majority.

And furthermore, what happens when the Republican Party tries to use some shenanigans to try to unseat democratic candidates with the bullshit claim of voter fraud? You don’t need a majority, you just need to cheat and hope that others who somewhat support your agenda, or at least are willing to put up with it, will rally around you to preserve other things they want.