Adapted from a contribution to an ongoing discussion of religious fundamentalism on Talk to Action.
An epidemiology and prophylaxis
Why do certain forms of bigotry and ignorance seem to persist over millennia, adapting to different environmental conditions like viruses? Ideas and ideology can take on a life of their own, far divorced from the original context in which they were conceived. One only has to look at the recent development of protestant Christian fundamentalism in Africa to shake off any preconceived idea that this is a particularly American weakness.
The viral analogy may provide some useful pointers. More ‘benign’ viral infections can spread rapidly from host to host, because they do not immediately destroy the host. The virus must do its poisonous work without affecting the host in such a way as to prejudice its own chances of survival. It must also be able to adapt or mutate as it finds itself subject to in new environmental conditions.
If we extend this analogy to the various religious right movements, we see that some have functioned as deadly viral outbreaks but with little persistence over time. Heaven’s Gate is an example. Such experiments might be considered the Ebola or Marburg virus strains of religious extremism. The virus is deadly but since it destroys its host it is generally quickly contained and immobilized. Some aspects of the ex-gay movement seem to conform with this pattern as well.
On the other hand there are pre-millennial dispensationalist and ‘family values’ religious groups in all their variations. These seem to propagate easily and adapt well to whatever the prevailing socio-political climate happens to be – whether that adaptation takes the form of accommodation to a neo-conservative establishment or is dressed up as ‘opposition’ to the ‘liberal, secular-humanist elite’. The relationship to society is much more symbiotic and it could be argued that these movements exhibit characteristics reminiscent of influenza. They prey largely on the ‘weak’, although nobody is necessarily immune from their impact. The influence of such groups wax and wane from year to year, often from one hot-button issue to the next. There are occasional epidemics (as evidenced by phenomena such as abortion clinic bombings, the Toronto blessing, or the current ‘defense of marriage’ movement).
Mild viruses likely Influenza can become deadly however in two ways: Firstly, they adapt so well and are transmitted widely through the population, so over time the impact and death toll are noticeable just through sheer size and scope. Any large and well-financed movement can have an accumulating impact over time just through sheer force of will. Secondly, relatively harmless strains have been known to jump the divide and cause horrific epidemics. It could be argued that this has happened within certain elements of Islamic fundamentalism, and that it is quite possible a similar mutation could occur within Christian fundamentalism (perhaps as a result of ‘gene-swapping’ with neo-conservatives?) that would lead to a more virulent and dangerous strain.
Disease can be prevented or treated. From a public health perspective, it is generally considered that prophylactic (preventive) measures are more effective in preventing the spread of disease than simply relying on treatment of already infected patients. To extend the analogy further then, while it is important on humanitarian grounds to seek a cure for those already affected, it may not be the best use of scarce resources. And in most cases the patient does not want to be cured or does not possess the resources to improve their health. However, with many viral illnesses it has been shown that early intervention (before symptoms become too acute or entrenched) offers the best hope for disease management and/or recovery.
I was a committed fundamentalist for 6 or 7 years, and it took probably much longer to undo the effects of the ‘virus’. For a lifelong adherent, a cure might be less imaginable (although never impossible). So individual ‘conversions’ are important but it may be that these will occur to some extent or another at a relatively fixed rate due to a range of different factors. I do not underestimate the importance of cognitive dissonance as a factor in breaking down the hold that religious rigidity can have on a person. At least this was so in my case. No amount of argumentation from family or friends persuaded me I was wrong. What did persuade me was seeing people say one thing and then do the opposite: talk about love but demonstrated hatred. There was also the sudden loss of loved ones and an internal struggle over how a God of love could consign any part of creation to an eternal hell of torment and torture.
Historically, the most effective forms of prophylaxis against disease have included immunization, quarantine and improvements in public hygiene. Looking at each of these in turn we might draw particular conclusions about how to respond to the threat posed by the religious right. We might rephrase the prophylaxis in terms of education, containment and democratic action. None of this is news to anyone on the left.
As progressives, perhaps our best hope for those entrenched within wing-nut religion is to recognize that people do frequently make the exodus in spite of everything, and that in a world of increasing complexity and uncertainty there are certainly more and more opportunities for fractures to occur. Fundamentalism is largely both a reaction to and an accommodation with modernity, but like the giant statue in Daniel it has feet of clay. Rigid regimes (whether political, intellectual or spiritual) do not endure forever. Most intense fundamentalisms (at least those that don’t go supernova) tend to settle down over time. Many modern liberal denominations began life as conservative or even fundamentalist movements. You can’t sustain a contrarian approach to the universe indefinitely. When Jesus doesn’t return in the clouds, Armageddon doesn’t take place, and theocracy doesn’t take over the world, many people just get tired of it all and begin to move on with their lives. Perhaps the greatest antidote to religious fervor is eventual boredom?
Leave a comment