dagblog - Comments for "The Logic of Electing Hypocrites"

Let me add to that: yes.

Doctor Cleveland — Wed, 17 Mar 2010 02:22:00 +0000

Let me add to that: yes. Christianity, especially the more populist versions of Protestantism, as always laid a lot of emphasis on the narrative of the redeemed sinner. Most of the activist and exuberant strands of American Protestantism come from a basically Calvinist tradition, in which no one isn't a sinner. Sinning and being saved is the way to be saved.

That, as you say, is the surface logic. I'm interested in the hard, practical political logic underneath it. This set of behaviors fits into that faith tradition easily, but it survives because it's politically viable. Other behaviors, at least as ingrained in the Protestant tradition but less practical from a realpolitik standpoint, are much much harder to find in the activist American churches.

Ah, thanks, Genghis! Good

Doctor Cleveland — Wed, 17 Mar 2010 01:54:28 +0000

In reply to I'm too tired to produce a

Ah, thanks, Genghis! Good tip!

I'm too tired to produce a

Michael Wolraich — Wed, 17 Mar 2010 01:50:00 +0000

In reply to The Logic of Electing Hypocrites

I'm too tired to produce a coherent summary of the book, but Max Blumenthal focused on this question in Republican Gomorrah. His answer was that members of the Christian Right are big proponents of forgiveness--as long as the penitent sees the error of his ways and commits himself to Jesus and the conservative cause. Blumenthal cites many examples of evangelicals welcoming tearful sinners back into the fold, including homosexuals like Ted Haggard.

I don't think that Blumenthal's explanation is incompatible with yours. You provided the underlying rationale; Blumenthal provided the overt rationalization.