4 ms·

Religion was always political. We're still in living memory of highly sectarian societies where, for example in Australia, a Catholic was a lower social grade

Religion was always political. We're still in living memory of highly sectarian societies where, for example in Australia, a Catholic was a lower social grade than Church of England and being a Methodist was something else entirely. All of these groups voted differently, associated differently and married differently. This hung on longer in small towns in Australia but was a definite societal attribute right up until the mid-1960s where it started to break down. We had waves of social change that barely shook that structure: Catholic churches and schools were once almost exclusively Irish, but the immigration from Italy during the 1940s/1950s changed that ethnic mixture significantly with barely a murmur to the social structure or how those people voted (predominantly aligned with the left for working class reasons). The church publically told them how to vote and they did it. As older churches like the Methodists disappeared (or were subsumed into more liberal church traditions) and the left started embracing social reforms (no-fault divorce, womens liberation, abortion, birth control, the breakdown of racial segregation) the religious part of society bifurcated: the more religious folk went to the right and the less religious folk just started walking away from church. That division was the end of organised religion as a driving social force. Now, the thing most christians seem to despise the most is other christians of a slightly different faith. Most organised religions have only themselves to blame for their quickly falling church attendance for that reason.

somethoughts 5y ago
I'd layer on that "Religion was always political... but in the US it didn't need to be overtly political". By that I'd say since the silent majority of the population was Protestant then dominant Protestant religion would freely be intertwined with government. It's only when there is no longer a dominant Protestant religion that Religion becomes visible in politics.
- smackeyacky 5y ago
  I can't say I've had much direct experience of the religious-political nexus in the US but as an external observer one thing that stands out to me was the objection to John F. Kennedy becoming president because he was Catholic and would be "beholden" to the papacy. In one respect though, the US and Australia share the history that our leaders have predominantly been protestant. I think that's far more a social class structure artifact than anything blatantly religious though. The denomination of the leader doesn't always dictate who gets the ear of the party in our political system though - Gough Whitlam was famously coerced into including the catholic schools into our public funded school system because they were "broke" - a somewhat laughable assertion even at the time, when the Catholic church was, and is, one of the richest institutions on the planet.
  - Kye 5y ago
    Our media has never been representative of the population's views. It was always spinning an image that looked like the people doing the presenting, even when they didn't mean to. I doubt many people actually cared about the president's religion. They might for a brief moment while the media was making a big deal out of it, but they forgot they ever cared as quickly as they took the issue up. The memory hole in 1984 wasn't just something Orwell made up from nothing.

somethoughts 5y ago

I'd layer on that "Religion was always political... but in the US it didn't need to be overtly political". By that I'd say since the silent majority of the population was Protestant then dominant Protestant religion would freely be intertwined with government. It's only when there is no longer a dominant Protestant religion that Religion becomes visible in politics.

smackeyacky 5y ago
I can't say I've had much direct experience of the religious-political nexus in the US but as an external observer one thing that stands out to me was the objection to John F. Kennedy becoming president because he was Catholic and would be "beholden" to the papacy. In one respect though, the US and Australia share the history that our leaders have predominantly been protestant. I think that's far more a social class structure artifact than anything blatantly religious though. The denomination of the leader doesn't always dictate who gets the ear of the party in our political system though - Gough Whitlam was famously coerced into including the catholic schools into our public funded school system because they were "broke" - a somewhat laughable assertion even at the time, when the Catholic church was, and is, one of the richest institutions on the planet.
- Kye 5y ago
  Our media has never been representative of the population's views. It was always spinning an image that looked like the people doing the presenting, even when they didn't mean to. I doubt many people actually cared about the president's religion. They might for a brief moment while the media was making a big deal out of it, but they forgot they ever cared as quickly as they took the issue up. The memory hole in 1984 wasn't just something Orwell made up from nothing.