Crisis of democracy II: Secularization and loss of liberal confidence
gettyimagesbank
By Peter Y. Paik
In my
column, I wrote about the role played by Christianity in providing cohesion to American democracy, a unity that it could not find elsewhere. Religious belief had the consequence of prompting Americans to look beyond their self-interest and serve the common good. As Harvard sociologist Daniel Bell observed, Christianity provided the foundations of a moral consensus which directed the people toward values and vocations that were higher and more important than making money.
But the number of religious believers has been declining sharply. According to Pew, the number of Americans who regard themselves as Christian dropped from 77 percent to 65 percent between 2009 and 2019. Those who identified as atheist or agnostic rose from 17 percent to 26 percent.
This may not appear to be a major shift, since the majority still holds on to religious belief. But the numbers do not reveal which segment of the population is becoming more openly inimical to religious faith.
Sociologist George Yancey, who studies the spread of anti-Christian attitudes, points out in “Hostile Environment: Understanding and Responding to Christian Bias” that Americans are becoming increasingly vocal in demanding that Christians be banished from the public sphere. They assert that Christianity poses a greater threat to freedom and reason than all other religions, ignoring the fact that the scientific revolution and modern liberalism were the products of a Christian civilization.
The crux of Yancey's study is that the Americans who are the most hostile to Christianity are often the ones with the most social power ― the most highly educated and the most financially well-off. For in the mainstream media, academia, and even in large corporations, the only acceptable form of Christianity is one that is wholly in agreement with liberal progressivism.
Yancey, who is African American, notes that in his academic career, his Christian faith has caused him more problems than his race.
Secularization, then, has split American society into two cultures. For the elite, overwhelmingly made up of those who have attended prestigious universities and pride themselves on their openness and rationality, religion in general and Christianity in particular are mere superstitions, doomed to fade away as science advances and humans gain greater control over their bodies and their environment.
The American elite, progressive and liberal, is convinced of the rightness of its beliefs. Yet it finds itself woefully out of its depth when it comes to gaining the support of people who cling to irrational attachments like their religious beliefs but also to other obsolete notions standing in the way of the liberal vision of a better world: love of one's country, reverence for tradition and the veneration of heroes.
Thus, the increasingly censorious character of public life in America, with its strident, unceasing demands to silence and ban people who voice even mild criticisms of the reigning liberalism, reveals a stunning loss of intellectual confidence. This comes at a time when liberals have achieved a near-monopoly over the media and higher education.
Certainly, liberals in the past, when more Americans were churchgoers, demonstrated greater poise and mettle. Liberals, not conservatives, were more likely to express confidence that open discussion of political and ethical questions would result in the victory of the better and more enlightened position.
Why have liberals given up on their ability to reason and resorted to outright authoritarianism? A vital clue resides in how they justify their leadership.
Strikingly, liberals are unwilling to claim that they are entitled to lead because they have superior ability and deeper insight than the general public. A liberal refuses to assert that he possesses greater merit, because he believes merit does not exist, except as a code word that serves to justify racial and social inequities.
Likewise, improving the economy means that global warming will only worsen. It is thus pointless to make the economic appeal that progressivism will bring Americans a better life.
The elite liberal has painted himself into a corner. The only thing that makes him superior to ordinary people is his worldview: his values enable him to stand out as more tolerant, compassionate and open-minded than others.
In other words, the liberal believes that his good intentions are what make him worthy of exercising power. The loss of religion leads him to fall back on tolerance to fashion a new moral code to replace the Christian ethic of agape.
But the liberal insists on ignoring the old religion's teaching about what we ought to regard with the greatest skepticism, lest we find ourselves tumbling toward hell.
Peter Yoonsuk Paik (pypaik@gmail.com) is a researcher in literature and philosophy at Yonsei University. The views expressed in the article are the author's own and do not reflect the editorial direction of The Korea Times.