Money, Lies, and God

How religion is being weaponized to destroy American democracy

Fifteen years ago, people might have been able to pretend like religion didn’t matter in the US. But today, as our country falls into the grip of Christian nationalism, understanding what’s happening and why is as important as ever.

Enter Katherine Stewart, a brilliant journalist and writer, who is one of the most knowledgeable people on this subject. She has a new book out now called Money, Lies, and God: Inside the Movement to Destroy American Democracy. It’s riveting, horrifying, and illuminating, all at once. And it’s worth reading.

I loved the book and highly recommend it. I also love that I get to be friends with Katherine, and that she agreed to talk about her book with me. I’m sharing our conversation below, with the hopes that you all enjoy hearing and learning from her.

What made you want to write this book? Why does it feel important right now?

The book is a culmination of 16 years of research into the rise of the religious right as an anti-democratic political force. It started on a playground in Santa Barbara in late 2008 when I was shocked to discover the presence of an aggressive program of religious indoctrination taking place at my daughter’s public elementary school. The program is spearheaded by a national organization that aims to convert children as young as five to a reactionary form of evangelical Christianity, and it deceives them into thinking that their public elementary school endorses this form of religion. As I explored the topic, I came to understand the extremism of the activists leading this initiative and their destructive aims for public education as a whole. I developed a familiarity with other organizations with which they were allied. Once I began to research their legal tactics and strategic alliances, it became clear to me that they were not just aiming their sights on public education but on the foundations of democracy itself.

I began reporting on the antidemocratic aspects of the movement and the ways in which it was emerging as a muscular political force. Even before Trump was elected in 2016, it was clear that this movement was gaining considerable political power and advancing its agenda through the courts. In those first years, however, my warnings, along with those of other reporters and researchers, were routinely dismissed as alarmist.

To me, as well as to other researchers in this field, it is no mystery how the movement has become so powerful. Its strength is in its deeply networked infrastructure, and my three books in this field explore that infrastructure, its funding and leadership, its strategies and goals. We need to understand how this movement intends to use its power. Their aims and desires are no secret, but somehow, they are not taken seriously on the outside. Movement leaders are pretty open about their plans at conferences and strategy gatherings and in the many platforms that they share. The problem is not that they are hiding; it’s that a lot of people aren’t listening.

What they are after is an effective end to democracy. Right now the movement, broadly speaking, controls all three branches of the federal government along with some state governments. It’s also part of a global anti-democratic movement that is ascendant around the world. If you are concerned about long-term economic prosperity, about equality and pluralism, about accountability to the rule of law, about corruption, about the environment and the climate, about the future of education, and about the preservation of democratic norms and institutions and the integrity of certain global alliances, you need to know something about this movement and its people.

It is also very important to understand that the movement is internally divided and, in some respects, deeply incoherent. The policies it ends up promoting are mainly geared toward satisfying the narrow and selfish interests of a financial elite of oligarchs. The rhetoric, on the other hand, is intended to placate its base with culture-war distractions, performative cruelty, and other ritualistic activity that satisfies their emotional concerns but does not benefit them materially. It means confusing the rank and file with disinformation and toxic conspiracies, degrading the schools, picking the pockets of the middle and working classes, and enriching and empowering a sector of movement-friendly oligarchs, financiers, and tech bros.

Why should non-Christians care about Christian Nationalism? What stake do they have in these issues?

Religious nationalism, like authoritarianism in general, is a political dynamic that afflicts political systems, not just a set of attitudes held by the rank and file. What the rhetoric of the Christian nationalist movement in America aims for is something it can never have in a country as large and pluralistic as the U.S. Its adherents think we would all be better off if every American attended a conservative church and – most important of all -- obeyed pastors and clerics who advocate for the “correct” form of politics. It is hard to overstate the degree to which the politics leads the theology, rather than the other way around. As one speaker said at the most recent AmericaFest, a gathering held by Turning Point USA, “There is absolutely no biblical justification to vote Democrat.”

But here’s the thing: what they’re after will simply never happen in America. We are too diverse religiously, ethnically, and politically. So the best the movement can hope for is to grab a share of public money, impose their “values” on the rest of society on the basis of government coercion, and essentially create a society of in-groups, out groups, and universal mistrust.

Why should moderate and liberal Christians care about Christian Nationalists? Can't they just turn the other cheek?

They should care for the same reasons as everyone else. The movement is damaging our democracy and our long-term future. It is damaging our shared prosperity. It is committed to undermining public trust. Christian nationalism is a vehicle for authoritarian and corrupt governance. So, frankly, it doesn’t matter what your religion is, you will be paying a price for that corruption and authoritarianism.

If moderate and liberal Christians have a special interest, it has to do with the fact that this movement is very damaging to the religion with which they identify. Increasing numbers of people, particularly young people, are coming to view Christianity not as a benevolent force in our society but as an intolerant and reactionary creed that hardly cares for the least of these, doesn’t love its neighbor, and is contemptuous toward those who are different.

They also might want to take note that even if they don’t care about Christian nationalism, leaders of the movement care about them -- a lot! At the most recent AmericaFest, which I attended in December, the head of Turning Point USA Faith, Lucas Miles, attacked “woke Christianity” as “heretical” and took particular aim at “the Social Gospel,” “the historical Jesus movement,” “Liberation Theology and Black Liberation Theology.” He added, “We have to decide which Jesus we believe in.”

Miles said he is working with a network of 3,500 churches “to eradicate woke-ism from the American pulpit.” How? By forming “a kind of a digital Nicene Creed and Council,” he said, referring to the fourth-century synod, called by Roman Emperor Constantine, that settled key doctrines of Christianity. This coalition is attempting to sideline the forms of Christianity as many if most American Christians understand them.

Your work depends on deep reporting on this movement over time. Do you think it will remain possible as the Christian nationalist movement continues to exert power?

There is a real and present danger to freedom of speech and freedom of the press. While “cancel culture” occurs to some extent on both left and right, there’s a sad perversity that the most important forms of speech suppression are now happening on the right. Their moral panic about “cancel culture” never really was about the principle; they just want to protect their own speech. Consider that TV meteorologist Sam Kuffel was fired by a CBS affiliate after criticizing Elon Musk’s fascistic salute on a personal social media account. ABC News caved to Trump, agreeing to donate $15 million dollars to one of his projects after one of their representatives reported on sexual abuse accusations for which he had been convicted. Reproductive health professionals in in many states are muzzled from discussing health risks or offering best-practices medical services and advice. Certain tech billionaires, who are always nattering on about “free speech,” are tweaking algorithms of social media platforms to suppress forms of speech they don’t like.

But even more concerning are the direct threats, on the part of Republican leaders, to pull broadcasting licenses or otherwise drive media out of business. Already some media operations are internalizing the threats and carrying out certain types of self-censorship without being told. We saw this in advance of the election, where owners of the Washington Post and the LA Times suppressed editorial endorsements. We can’t help wonder about the future books that will never find publishers, the articles and columns that will be rejected or held indefinitely, and the documentaries and films that will never be funded and produced.

The government also has some media operations, notably Voice of America, and it is now clear that the Trump administration is going turn that apparatus over to ideologues. It is also clear that the “enemies list,” developed by Trump’s nominee for FBI director, includes people from the media. What autocrats want is a media system that spreads only “good news” about the leader and his allies and vilifies and demonizes their opponents.

So the stakes are pretty clear. We can use the power of our democratic government to advance the interests of the people and future generations, or we can smash it up and sell it off for the benefit of a corrupt elite and its enablers.

While I appreciate that this subject can seem dark and gloomy, I tend to view it more as an opportunity to spread a little bit of transparency and hope. I believe that if we can understand the forces arrayed against us, and how they came to power, we can better identify the strategic and broad-based actions that can be used to defeat them. Many of Trump’s proposals are bound to fail – though incompetence, or because they are un-implementable, or because they will be snarled up in the courts. If those of us committed to democracy can organize in effective ways and stay focused, we can turn this period of our history into an opportunity for improving our country and establishing a more perfect union.