2 Comments
User's avatar
Brandon's avatar

The empirical underpinning of studies and claims about CN is highly highly dubious work. read "Old wine in new wineskins" By sociologist Jesse Smith, or my accessible discussion here: https://backcountrypsych.substack.com/p/ideologically-motivated-social-science

Expand full comment
Joe James's avatar

Yeah, in a couple of my follow up posts I allude to it being problematic. The book I reviewed in this post we're commenting on does a solid job of outlining the problems. Honestly, it's the best part of the book! I think Paul D. Miller's work is the most evenhanded (as he is a Christian and an academic who opposes CN and has clear definitions of terms, differentiates between nationalisms, etc). I talk about it a little here, I think (I wrote these like 5 months ago so they're a blur) https://joerjames3.substack.com/p/what-is-christian-nationalism-anyway

I'm sympathetic to the idea that CN is a slight moral panic among academics. I'm convinced that many American Christians are CNs, just because I grew up with them, but I'm not sold on their political power/relevance. All the lefty academics seem to be screeding against normal (yet bad!) right wing politics. It sells books and get attention because people are afraid of these people. And ya know, I'm also sympathetic to that fear and have little patience for people who downplay CN influence in the right wing (the doug Wilson bit), but a more evenhanded view of the actual mainstream aspects of CN (or lackthereof) should mitigate anyone's anxiety.

Expand full comment