Why the #ReligiousRight backs Trump, racism, sexism and all

Many people of the center or liberalism wonder how many people of the Religious Right, including ministers such as Robert Jeffress and Jerry Falwell Jr., could embrace Donald Trump, and not only embrace him, but do so openly, not at arm’s length.

A constellation of reasons converge, with the ultimate answer being —

IT'S IN THEIR CULTURAL DNA.

(Update: The website Religion Dispatches largely agrees, from somewhat inside the movement.)

One, the Religious Right has made it’s bed with the GOP, so that’s where it’s going to sleep, period.

Related to that is the simple element of tribalism. Go, they’ll swallow hard and accept his sexual shenanigans.

Many of them accept his ideas and treatment of women in general, without, in theory, supporting extramarital sex or Trump’s brazenness. That said, the almost totally male faith leaders of the Religious Right also support Type A males acting like stereotypical Type A males in general.

As far as the racial elements of Trumpism, and the Religious Right’s acceptance of that?

This piece shows that the protestations of the Religious Right, or those who claim to be affiliated with it, of "no true Scotsman" re the likes of Jerry Falwell Jr. and Robert Jeffress endorsing Trump, simply don't ring true. The racist, or quasi-racist, background of a large chunk of the Religious Right runs pretty long and pretty deep. (I would complain about the header; per the body of the story, Trump did no "hijacking.") 

Related to that is the idea that many everyday Trumpists are part of the Religious Right, but in a different way. Many of these people may not go to church that often, but they have their own version of tribalism. They identify with a cultural “Christianism” that in many ways parallels Islamism, the para-Islamic set of beliefs held by many conservative Muslims in its heartland.

So, they’re fine with the Falwells et al cozying up to Trump even if they see the Falwells as being less “of the people” than some of them still think Trump is.

And, back to that link. The people in the pews, the people not in the pews but in the culture, and the faith leaders all, like Trump, surely still see blacks as “uppity” in some way.

And, that’s how things tie together.

And, there’s a deeper history behing this.

The Atlantic spells out the long history of American and white nationalism, with a bright line from Duke to Trump. It’s a long, long read, but a good one, connecting the sociological (NOT socioeconomic) thread from Duke to Trump. I make that careful stipulation in noting that, contra the Adolph Reed types, this is an issue where racism is the ultimate driver, with little of the element of class issues. 

So, at bottom line, there is an element of hypocrisy for the Religious Right. The hypocrisy is in a largely false image, not in going against core realities.

In more recent times, this spilled out into the religious affiliation of many private "academies" in the South in the 1950s and 1960s. It also is reflected in how White Citizens Councils gave cover to religious and non-religious alike who didn't want to look as crude as Klansmen. And, before that, the bible was used, not just antebellum to justify slavery, but after that to justify segregation.

And, it's not just Baptists in the South. Remember that Mormons barred blacks from the priesthood until 1978.