Why Religion Is On The Rise

[Yavin4]

Religion, in particular Christian Fundamentalism, is on the rise because it gives the top 10% a nice cover story. Starting in the 80s, the top 10% of income earners starting pulling away economically from the bottom 90%. Their incomes were rising rapidly as well as their asset holdings while the bottom 90% actually saw declines in their incomes, after adjustments for inflation, and their asset purchasing power waning.

In a normal democratic nation, the bottom 90% would use their numbers to change the economic system to make it more just. However, the top 10% used their massive media power to dissuade the public from using their votes to change the system. For instance, massive propaganda was spread about how forming unions was bad. Moreover, the top 10% would point to the high-paying jobs in the Information Technology sector as proof that the system was fair, and that it was the fault of the bottom 90% that they weren't doing as well as the top 10%. It was their lack of education, job skills, and poor personal choices, etc.

Fast forward to the new century. The top 10% pushed for and got liberalized free trade agreements. These free trade agreements, along with looser immigrant labor restrictions, have collapsed the IT cover story. No longer can the top 10% point to the IT sector and tell the bottom 90% that it's their fault because IT is no longer producing the high-paying jobs. So, how does the top 10% use it media power to thwart the bottom 90% from using its democratic power to change the system?

Enter religion. The top 10% is using religion as the new cover. Elections are not about these free trade agreements and looser immigrant laws. No, elections are about Jesus, Gay marriage, and abortion. The top 10% and their servant politicians are using religion to keep the masses from demanding changes to a system that rewards only the top 10% while giving scraps to everyone else.

IOW, let them eat Jesus.

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[UdoKier]

10. See post # 9

nt

[PaDem]

2. As a "born again" Christian, I must agree with you.........

Conservative ideology cannot survive on it's own merit, so religious issues have been introduced into the public debate from the right to ensure a majority and distract from the real agenda.

[BringEmOn]

12. Itching ears

For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.

2Timothy 4:3-4

[cidliz2004]

3. Great post! Thanks@ Did you arrive at these observations and

conclusions all by yourself!

[GOPFighter]

4. Yup. As any good magician will tell you...

...every trick relies on misdirection. The wealthy neocon bastards are using religion as misdirection as they pick the pockets of the weakminded.

[GreenPartyVoter]

5. Exactly. It's a tool for keeping folks in line. And you can't argue with

it if you believe their version of the faith. Trains people to swallow _everything_ without thinking about it.

[ProfessorGAC]

6. Nicely Done, Yavin

The Professor

[Nomad559]

7. Only 44% Now Believe In God - In Britain

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews/tm_objectid=15018615&method=full&siteid=50143&headline=only-44--now-believe-in-god-name_page.html

Dec 28 2004
By Sean Connolly

People who believe God exists are now a minority in Britain, a survey claimed yesterday.

According to a poll by YouGov, just 44 per cent believe in God compared to 77 per cent in 1968.

A majority - 81 per cent - also believe the country is becoming more secular, with fewer people going to places of worship.

But among this percentage, 68 per cent of believers and 14 per cent of non-believers, regretted that society was becoming less religious.

Only a third of the 1,981 people who took part in the online survey believe in heaven and even fewer believe in the devil. Just a quarter think hell exists. Fewer than half, 43 per cent, believed their souls would outlast their bodily life.

Young people especially are significantly less religious than older generations, with more than a third saying they were agnostics or atheists.

[coloradodem2005]

8. Another thing.

When I went to church in the late 90's, the pastor would say the economy being good is the reason why morality is so bad. WHich I think is an extension of what you are saying.

[UdoKier]

9. But is church attendance really rising?

According to these stats:

http://www.umich.edu/~nes/nesguide/toptable/tab1b_5b.htm

The number of people who NEVER go to church has steadily risen since the 70s, and the numbers of people who attend regularly has dropped or remained static.

I think this stuff about a new religious fervor sweeping the country is nothing but media hype over a nonexistent trend.

[theboss]

14. The original post has a poorly formed thesis

If I am not mistaken, overall church attendance is down. However, Evangelical Christianity is growing.

The question should be why is this sect growing in the face of overall decline.

[Norquist Nemesis]

19. Well, just a morsel and a tinfoil hat, but

I would propose because it has roots from Dominionism. The Evangelical leaders (Robertson, Falwell, etc.) have put forth a rock star persona over the airwaves from early on. These are the same people that are closely linked to Dominionism.

The problem is, most of the fundamentalist followers are unaware of these ties. And just as it wasn't that long ago few had ever heard of PNAC/Neocons (some are still clueless about it), I'm hopeful that the Dominionism agenda comes out as well (soon!!!).

[FizzFuzz]

45. I think more than any other, Evang. Xtianity posits easy scapegoats

that an emotionally whipped up populace can hate. It also contains some convenient twists of logic so that these people who truly see themselves as kind and moral can excersize their hate while believing themselves godly. It is also a closed community which teaches that any deviation from their ideology denotes the working of demons, satan, etc. Rewards of acceptance, easy acceptance and ties of friendship accrue easily to those willing to repress thought.

They have created a neat circular logic, bolstered by simplistic, sensationalistic, emotion driven media which their leaders have been collecting to their side for decades.

Last thought that comes to mind is that it is also a fellowship of likeminded, fearful people who wish to feel the safety of a simpler time--there must be quite a romantic pull in praying to an all loving being you picture as fatherly and fair who will pull the chosen group closer to an omnipotent bosom and punish any who do wrong against the chosen group, in the face of uncertainty and ignorance which they also feed on (it fuels the dependency on the deity outside themselves).

Just some thoughts, no research behind this.

[Kolesar]

26. What a coincidence

They quit "ordering me" to go to church in about 1975.

[MXMLLN]

28. Looks like a significant change occurred between 1988 and 1990

The percentage of never attendees and that of those who attend a few times a year swapped.

In 1988 (and before) 28% attended a few times a year vs. 12% who never attended.

In 1990 (and after) 16% attended a few times a year vs. 33% who never attended.

All of the other categories have stayed about the same since 1972.

Those attending every week ... 25%

Those attending almost every week ... 12%

Those attending once or twice a month ... 18%

[muriel_volestrangler]

35. It's the change in question noted underneath the figures

1970-1988: (IF ANY RELIGIOUS PREFERENCE) "Would you say you/do you go
to (church/synagogue) every week, almost every week, once or twice a
month, a few times a year, or never?"
1990 and later: "Lots of things come up that keep people from attending
religious services even if they want to. Thinking about your life
these days, do you ever attend religious services, apart from
occasional weddings, baptisms or funerals?" (IF YES:) "Do you go to
religious services every week, almost every week, once or twice a
month, a few times a year, or never?"

The difference may those who attend for weddings, baptisms and funerals. Up to 1988, they said "a few times a year", because of those services. After that, they were screened out by the "apart from ..." question, being counted as 'never'. Also, the 'no religious preference' numbers have gone into the 'never' category from 1990 onwards.

[Kolesar]

30. No way do 55% of Americans go to church once or more a month

I drive by church parking lots on Sundays. There is no way that 165 million Americans are in those parking lots at least once or twice a month. The traffic surge of that many people commuting to church would be almost as large as rush hour. My only conclusion is that 30% of Americans are overstating how often they go to church.

People lie to pollsters. People lie about how often they exercise and how conscious they are about what they eat, too.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

32. Depends on what part of the country you're in

If you're in Oregon, probably 20% of the population ever goes to church, if that much.

If you're in Mississippi, the figure is undoubtedly much higher.

Also, you have to account for the varying sizes of churches. Some of the larger churches do cause major traffic jams in their neighborhoods.

[theboss]

36. Seems possible to me

First of all, blacks and Latinos go to church in droves. I lived next to a Catholic church that was nearly one hundred percent Latino for a few years. At mass on Sunday, you couldn't drive within half a mile of it due to the stream of humanity. Those two groups make up 20 percent of the population (or thereabouts) and probably are in the 70 or 80 percent range.

Then in much of the South, the figure is much higher than 55 percent. It's a peer pressure thing there.

Most northern/urban Catholics I know find there way to Church at least once a month. In college, a few buddies and I spent a debaucherous weekend in New York and we still managed to get to St. Pat's for mass because, well, we're Italian and have to make our mothers happy.

[Yavin4]

11. The Real Tragedy Is that It's Perverting Religion Itself!!!

The religion that the top 10% is pushing has very little to do with real Judeo-Christianity which preaches helping the poor, the sick, and weak. The top 10%'s Judeo-Christianity is a judgemental religion, specifically judgemental about people's sexual habits.

Every human being has sexual thoughts of some kind or another. The majority of sexual thoughts are normal, but may not fit in with various religious doctrine. Making people feel guilty about these thoughts is the path to control their entire lives.

[theboss]

13. That doesn't explain the growth of the Evangelicals at all.

You've only explained how it has been used by the power elite. That much is pretty obvious.

But why are so many people choosing Evangelical Chrisianity? You never address that.

[The Magistrate]

17. It Is Questionable, Sir, Whether More People Are Choosing It

At least here in the United States. Those who adhere to it are growing more obstreporous and raising a greater clamor....

"Are these people getting dumber, or just louder?"

[theboss]

21. They are

This is from a Catholic News website:

At 62 million, Catholics were the largest single denomination represented in the United States in 2000, although Protestants grouped together were more numerous at 66 million. Catholics also experienced one of the largest increases in membership, 16.2 percent. Only the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (19.3 percent), Christian Churches and Churches of Christ (18.6 percent) and Assemblies of God (18.5 percent) had larger increases since 1990. Most mainline Protestant denominations experienced declines.

http://www.americamagazine.org/catholicnews.cfm?articleTypeID=29&textID=2503&issueID=403

The Catholic growth is largely due to the influx of immigrants from Latin America. Among native-born Americans, there is no growth. Mainline Protestantism is in decline. Evangelicals (Churches of Christs, Assemblies of God, etc) are taking from both groups and grabbing any new converts.

So basically, about 50 percent of Americans go to church. It's pretty much 50/50 between Catholics and Protestants. Catholics see their growth from immigrations. In Protestant circles, Evangelicals are grwoing while everything else is in decline.

I've never been quite sure how to Categorize Mormons.

[tjwash]

15. The purpose of Religion, prioritized in the order of today:

To beat death, to push one’s belief system on others, for those in charge to make a living, to deal with our personal misery, to better oneself, to spread peace, compassion, mercy and love.

These priorities should actually be put in the opposite order, but they aren't.

[alcibiades_mystery]

16. That explains nothing

You still have to figure out why people feel so strongly about their religious beliefs, why they feel it in their bones. No propaganda theory or top-down production could do that.

[Yavin4]

20. People Are Losing Control of Their Lives

They're working, sometimes multiple jobs, but they're not becoming middle class nor are they gaining any real control over their lives. They're getting poorer and poorer as time goes by. The only organizations talking to these people on a daily basis are the religious ones. Unions are almost extinct and have no answers, and the Democratic party is more concerned about getting coporate donations than they are about addressing these peoples' economic problems.

Money doesn't solve all problems, but it does give you control over your life. If you have a major illness in your family, you can get the medical help to cure it if you have money. Without money, your life is out of control. Religion gives people the idea that they have control when they don't. People in other first world nations use their political power to enact laws that give people such control, like a national health care plan.

[alcibiades_mystery]

24. That's a much better explanation

than the top 10% are allowing and fostering it.

I think the rise of fundamentalism (Christian and Islamic) has everything to do with the way globalization is ripping people from their previous support structures and categories of belonging (and you're right to cite the death of unions, for instance). Fundamentalism provides the solid grounding for action where the previous structures of normativity are eroding.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

33. Both of the above

The mainstream churches have declined partly because they became complacent and made no particular effort to retain people. They were still mentally in the fifties when church was the only socially acceptable place to be on a Sunday morning, so they thought they just had to be there and people would keep coming.

It's not as if nobody ever joins a mainstream church: the Episcopalians get a lot of people who have burned out on fundamentalism or strict Catholicism. But being not much into evangelism and very friendly to gay and single people, they don't have the natural increase that comes from being a "family-oriented" denomination full of young married couples who tell other young married couples about what great children's and youth program Exurbia Community Church has.

As I've mentioned before, the fundamentalists are strongest in the exurban areas, where young families move without any community or familial support systems and where there is no natural secular center of action, as there would be in an "urban village" setting in a city or inner-ring suburb.

[raccoon]

18. I don't know that religion is on the rise

so much as TALK about religion is on the rise.

And people who claim to be religious are more vocal about it nowadays.

[theboss]

22. "Religion" in America is stagnant or in decline....

However, Evangelical Christianity is very much on the rise.

So, that's the issue.

I don't think the original poster sees the difference between Catholicism, Old Line Protestantism and Evangelical Christianity.

[Modem Butterfly]

23. In difficult times, people crave easy answers

Religion offers the easiest answers of them all.

[Javaman]

25. It's because life in the USA isn't what it used to be...

When times are tough people always turn to religion. I'm currently reading, "Hard Times" by Studs Terkel.

During the height of the depression, many American turned from faith in the country to faith in "God". More likely, they turned to various radio Evangelists for salvation.

The difference this time: the nation is eroding. Unlike the crash of 29, this nation is experiencing a slow motion crash. It doesn't happen overnight, but with the rise of gas prices, cost of living and the dropping of the value of the US dollar and wages, Americans are looking to find an answer. And since our current administration is providing nothing but talking points and none answers, people look to God. What pulled us from the brink of a theocracy in the 30's was work programs and oddly enough, FDR's fireside chats. Radio was THE media back then, innocently people did have high regard for the presidency back then, and when a President took the time, weekly, to talk to the nation from his home, that actually meant something.

What we have now is a do nothing spend thrift president. Whose only plan is to bully and not solve the poor or middle classes problems.
So comes the rise of the political religious right.

Unless things get back on track, or something brings these masses to their collective senses, expect it to get worse, not better.

[raccoon]

31. Great post. nt

[Bridget Burke]

27. It isn't.

The Dominionists are getting more power & press.

[catzies]

29. Thanks for my new favorite line: "Let them eat Jesus."

I will be using that a LOT. :thumbsup:

[Larkspur]

34. "Religion is the opiate of the masses," Karl Marx

He was right about that in a way. Religion is used by the state to demand blind loyalty as well as cover up the ruling elite's corruption.

[Terran]

37. But...religion isn't actually 'on the rise'.

It just has a higher profile because your elites are indeed using it for gain. But I know I've read about a study that shows that the number of people in the US going to church and those who consider religion important to them is dropping. In fact I read that here at DU, most likely. I suspect we have the reverse of the Silent Majority from the Sixties. The majority don't feel strongly about religious issues, per se. They may feel strongly about some things like abortion and the death penalty out of ethical concerns, but the ones who base their position on religion are in the minority.

[Cats Against Frist]

38. Yeah, I've always thought it was pretty fucking hilarious that people

could actually argue that labor unions are "bad." What a bunch of self-effacing assholes -- they usually say "unions are so corrupt."

Like "the company store" walks around with a halo over its head. Like Tom Delay is not corrupt. Wingers put their trust in all kinds of untrustworthy people and instutions. Why do unions bear the brunt --?

P-R-O-P-A-G-A-N-D-A.

I need to ask a freeper what it feels like to be a complete numb fuck.

[tinonedown]

39. I always get a big kick out of people telling me why

I started going to church. Everyone has a theory. My friends, family, etc.
You aren't even close.

[Zenlitened]

40. It's not at all a given that religion is on the rise. Just the opposite...

... according to a study by CUNY, the City University of New York.

It shows the percentage of people identifying as Christian declined sharply, from 86.2% of those surveyed in 1990 to 76.5% in 2001.

Those identifying with another religion, including Judaism and Islam, rose slightly from 3.3% in 1990 to 3.7% in 2001.

Meanwhile, those identifying as free of religion -- including atheists, agnostics and humanists -- increased their numbers from 8.2% in 1990 to 14.1% in 2001.

http://www.gc.cuny.edu/studies/key_findings.htm

[theboss]

42. Religion is not on the rise; Evangelical Christianity is

I wish people here understood that you can be very very religious and not be Ralph Reed.

Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton are ministers; that makes them "religious." But they aren't Evangelicals.

[Cats Against Frist]

41. I think there's some larger psychological issues that should be addressed

I have long been wary of the "elites get together in the back room and plot the demise of the working man," theories. Not to say that the outcome isn't much the same than as if this were actually happening -- but, I think you have to take a couple of things into account.

1. Most people want to be "rich," and further, want to appear wealthy to other people. Therefore, one's psyche must find a way to be convinced that he or she is "rich," or is at least delineated from those who have to have food stamps or can't afford a Paris Hilton calendar.

2. The rich themselves have consciences, but to horde the amount of wealth that they do, in the face of starving children, they have to come up with rationalizations for hording wealth. Some of these make more sense than others. The concentration of wealth DOES further R & D, which leads to advances in technology, but "trickle down economics," in my opinion, is just another way to say, "I don't drink that much -- what are you talking about? I'm not a fucking alcoholic. Your eyes must be broken. You must be CRAZY!!!!"

3. I think that the "fat cats" that you're fingering are actually much more complex than that for which you're giving them credit. For instance, the owner of Raytheon IS a fundamentalist Christian, and I believe that Tom DeLay and Pat "Can you spare a diamond?" Robertson BELIEVE -- at least in their crazy fucking heads -- that they are moral people. That's what "Dominionism" is -- it is inexorably entangled with MONEY -- and a "rationalization" scheme that demands that, Christ's central message -- instead of being a steward of the poor and needy -- MUST be that THOSE WHO ARE REWARDED WITH RICHES, ON EARTH, ARE BLESSED.

I think you underestimate the extent to which the elites are "plotters" and that they're actually fucking delusional themselves. Our society is actually one big mirror of the psychological problems of the rich -- caught in not-unlike-a drug or alcohol problem -- where getting and keeping more money is and OBSESSION, and ADDICTION, but it never soothes the soul -- so an alternative Mammon-based mythical Jebus takes its place.

Now, the effect on the masses. It goes both ways. I think those who are poor, and who recognize they're poor are hangers-on of the religious movement, because they have no other choice. And those who are wealthy, and are Evangelicals -- and there are a FUCKING LOT -- of them, have the rationalization down. And those in the middle wish to identify with group II (the rich) rather than the poor, for their own psychological comfort -- and therefore, manifest the same psychological pathology that the rich do. Hence -- the status quo.

In short -- I don't think the rich are plotting -- I think they're fucking batshit, and suffer from an unhealthy obsession with money, and the need to rationalize it. The only group of plotters, as far as I'm concerned are the Neocons, who are smarter than you want to believe -- and I think that they have loonies like Bush and DeLay eating out of the palms of their hands, like little bible-carrying parakeets in Armani suits.

Fear the ideologues, not the rich.

[Yavin4]

44. I Somewhat Disagree

First and foremost among the elites is to protect their wealth from the masses. This is true going all the way back to at least the French Revolution. When only 10% of the population holds all of the wealth, then at any time that 90% may rise up against you.

In the 20th century, the elites were humbled by the times. They saw the rise of communism and fascism. They saw WWII. They saw the end of colonialism around the world, and they saw many of the world's poor turn to Marxism. The elites understood that the only way to protect their wealth was to give back some of it. Better to give away 40% than lose 100%.

Starting in the late 60s with Goldwater, the elites began to craft a plan to build a popular political movement whose real purpose was to take their wealth back. They would build propaganda workshops (otherwise known as think tanks), and pay top dollar to writers, historians, and thinkers that agreed with their agenda. Their main goal would be to propagandize the masses against communism, but their movement fell far short with the defeat of Barry Goldwater in 1964.

In order to win, they had to broaden their movement beyond simple anti-communism. First step was to pick up disaffected Southern Whites who were angry at the Democrats for passing Civil Rights laws into law. Combining anti-communism with a disaffected Southern White voters brought in the Nixon era.

However, this too was short-lived as Jimmy Carter won the presidency in 1976 with the help of Evangelical Christians. In 1980, the elites found their leading man, Reagan. He would combine all three into one. He was strongly anti-communist, appealed to disaffected Southern White voters, and pleased Evangelical Christians. Under Reagan, the elite was finally able to enact their game plan which was to relieve them from having to pay anything this nation.

Now that their agenda is heading towards completion with the privitization of Social Security, they need something to distract the masses. That something is Jesus.

[Avalux]

43. People want to BELONG

they want to be part of something bigger than themselves, especially in times of uncertainty. The republicans know this and their strategy is working brilliantly.