Hynes' public writing is devoted to pure religious divisiveness -- he focuses almost exclusively on the claim that Christianity is superior and that those who attend church live better lives, and specifically to the belief that the Republican Party is the true party of those who believe in God and that Democrats are "anti-Christian." He wrote a book entitled In Defense of the Religious Right, and in an interview about that book in July, 2006, this is what he said:

Miner: Is it fair to call America a "Christian nation"?

Hynes: Yes. America is a Christian nation. As I write in my book, "Is America a Christian nation? Of course it is. Don't be ridiculous. What a stupid question.

Meanwhile, Media Matters for America, has found a related blog post, noting that Hynes has called the Democratic Party as "anti-Christian." Hynes titled a July 6, 2006, blog post: "Exclusive Poll Info: Democrats Devolve Deeper into an Anti-Christian Party."

Such specious charges are what we have come to expect to hear from the leaders of the religious right, whose us- against-the-whole-world-of-secular humanism-frame has animated the religious right for many years, and we can reasonably expect to hear more of this false framing in the run up to the 2008 elections. (With any luck, progressive and Democratic leaders who have internalized the frame, will have rethought what they have been saying.)

There is also more in the Hynes inteview Greenwald quoted from, that is of interest for other reasons.  Chip Berlet, writing at here Talk to Action, has recently debunked the debunkers of the notion that there is a theocratic political movement in the United States. This will be part of the ongoing discussion of the appropriate bounds of church and state and the nature of religious liberty: but the religious right and their allies are on the defensive and are furiously blowing smoke because they know that the charge is true, even if not always well articulated by some of us.

Miner: During your research, did you come across genuine American theocrats equivalent to the Iranian mullahs?

Hynes: No. The claim that conservative Christians in America are akin to the Iranian mullahs is an update to a similar smear that surfaced after September 11th - back then, the Religious Right was likened almost daily to the Taliban. This much is true: no matter the point in history, liberal pundits and extremist politicians will compare conservative Christians in America to whichever Islamo-fascist regime threatens to kill innocent Americans.

This brings us to a turn in this post where you may need to take a deep breath and consider that if you are with me this far, you should keep an open mind about the rest. What follows is not directed to anyone personally, but is intended to point out that in order for us to really advance the cause, some of us are going to need to change the way we approach these things.

On the substance, I would largely agree with Hynes'quote. (His hyperbole is of course the familiar framing of lots of political consultants, which is why you probably feel like you need a shower. But I digress.) Hynes' statement is an excellent example of why those who resort to making shallow and unsubstantiated name calling a substitute for knowledgeable analysis and actually making a powerful argument, do all of us a disservice.

If we are going to make our arguments stick, we have to use terms and lines of reasoning that do not backfire, or otherwise distract from what we are really trying to say.  If we are serious about explaining how and why the religious right has a theocratic (or any other kind of) agenda, it is important that we also explain to our friends and colleagues, that false analogies to the Taliban; Osama bin Laden, the Nazis, communists, or any other modern or ancient demonized or rightly or wrongly hated groups, is intellectually lazy and usually politically counter productive. As we can see, such useages provide openings for people like Hynes to tell people that the Left are saying they are just like fill in the blank.  Now, Hynes' audience is shocked. They know that they are not like fill in the blank, and think poorly of anyone who would say such a thing.

Otherwise thoughtful people who use terms like American Taliban, to pick one popular term, are, sadly, unwittingly aiding the religious right and their consultants to secure their base by showing the Left Behaving Badly.   That said, it is sometimes true that the views or policies of the religious right are similar to, or arguably worse than those promulgated by the Nazis or the Taliban. That is fair game. But whenever drawing such comparisons, it is important to draw them narrowly, accurately and fairly -- because the American religious right is nothing like the Taliban, the Nazis, Stalinist Russia, or any other notorious group in history. They are notorious enough in their own right, and we need to get better at explaining how that is so: clearly, accurately and persuasively.  

Digg
del.icio.us
Newsvine
Reddit
stumbleupon
Facebook