In God We... Believe?

Religiosity in the United States has been a constant feature of studies of American exceptionalism, and is often mentioned as both agent and by-product of the ascendancy of conservative politics over the last two decades. While the citizens of all the other Western industrial democracies became less religious with each generation, and church attendance and belief in God dropped sharply, the United States remained the exception to the rule.

A number of surveys over the last decades have showed atheism and agnosticism in the single digits (only two percent of atheists). The country is run by a born-again Christian, faith-based initiatives are the flavor of the day, church attendance remains vibrant, and a hypothetical atheist president is always dead last in "would you vote for" polls, faring worse than Muslims, homosexuals, and ex-communists. In addition, the last two decades have seen religion and politics mixing with special intensity. The Christian right took center stage as a decisive voting bloc in the last elections, fighting over issues like abortion, gay rights, prayer in school, stem cell research, and evolution. In 2004, after the rise of the insurgency in Iraq and the loss of Fallujah, after the failure to find WMDs, and right after the Abu Ghraib scandal, George W. Bush still won reelection thanks to the strong support of Christian evangelicals and a strong concern -number one in the exit polls- over so-called "moral issues." Nowadays, one of the most common questions in policy-making is "What would Jesus do?"

It is widely believed that the reason why Europeans are much less religious is the existence of established churches, supported by the state, while the disestablishment of religion in the United States infused it with market-like competition and vitality. But there's another reason: in Europe, unlike the United States for much of the 20th century, religion was clearly associated with the conservative side of the political spectrum, while anti-clericalism was deeply ingrained among leftists. In the United States, however, religion was useful for both sides (anti-abortion and civil rights, for starters), and a connection between religiosity and party affiliation was much less marked. However, with the emergence of the Moral Majority, the Christian right, the huge rate of churchgoers that vote Republican, and the socially conservative stance of the Republican party, an association is clearly emerging. But by closely siding with one camp, religion risks alienating the other. Thus, one could safely predict that the number of atheists, agnostics, and non-religious Americans will increase, and grow from the single digits to the double digits.

It already has. Many surveys are beginning to confirm this, indicating more assertive secularism in political attitudes, and an increase in the number of people declaring themselves non-religious, doubling from 7 percent to 14 percent in less than 10 years. This percentage is much higher among young people, and the trend is expected to continue. For the first time in a while, there's a battery of best-selling books openly hostile towards organized religion, the impact of religion on politics, and even belief in God. Richard Dawkins' "The God Delusion," Daniel Dennet's "Breaking the Spell," and Sam Harris' "The End of Faith" normally get mentioned together as the recently-published opus of a trio of in-your-face neo-atheists. Kevin Phillips' "American Theocracy" appeals to liberal readers who believe in God but disagree with how religion is shaping public policy. In a new book, Stephen Prothero points out that Americans, especially the younger generations, are religious illiterates. And finally, Christopher Hitchens' "God is not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything" went straight to the number one of best-sellers' lists. It is hard not to notice that these days, the comedian/pundit Bill Maher's frequent comments against religion on television, get more applause than derision. Recently, the Atlantic Monthly echoed this trend and stated that, as backlash to the ascendancy of the Christian right, we were witnessing the emergence for the first time of mass secularism in the United States. In the 2006 Congressional elections, despite attempts to appear more pious and pro-religion, Democrats won by gaining a stronger share of the secular vote, while not making any inroads among churchgoers.

One should not expect this trend to turn the United States into France or Sweden, but it does put to test our assumptions about politics and religion in the United States in the near future. In meddling with politics, religion always takes a hit in the long run.

Ron Paul: Internet Buzz is not enough

It's the Internet, stupid. That's what many said when the last Senate race was called for Jim Webb in detriment of his Republican opponent, George Allen. Allen (R-VA), who was expected to be a presidential candidate for 2008, succumbed to the impact of the infamous "macaca" video, posted on the Internet and immediately picked up by TV channels and watched by millions of people. The 2006 Congressional elections were called in some fora the first YouTube election.

Before that, Joe Trippi and the Howard Dean Campaign had waken everyone up to the transformative effect of the Internet in politics. Today, candidates pour money in fancy interactive web sites, and spend time taping and posting their videos to reach millions of viewers. They have profiles on YouTube, pages on MySpace, they court the blogsphere, and they try to take advantage of the infinite new possibilities for organizing events, mobilizing supporters, and raising funds through online contributions. Emails from Friends of Hillary or MoveOn.org are a daily occurrence. And MySpace, whose registered members outnumber the population of all but 10 countries in the world, will hold a presidential primary next January, before the actual primaries in any state. Barack Obama, who has far more MySpace friends than any other candidate, Republican or Democratic, is expected to win.

However, the great mistery is still how to use the Internet to persuade. The Dean Campaign failed and Karl Rove proved that Sunday church, FoxNews, and talk radio, were still more effective tools of mobilizing supporters and getting out the vote.

These days, Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX), must be feeling a similar disappointment. He's one of the Republican candidates for President in 2008 and claims to be the most conservative of them -although paradoxically appeals to the Left on foreign policy due to his anti-war position. Over the last two months, supportive videos of his candidacy have been a constant feature in YouTube's most viewed and top rated videos, outranking even Barack Obama. He has more MySpace friends than Mitt Romney. In terms of Internet buzz, he's got plenty. Yet he has consistently stayed in the polls below 2 percent. More than a million people have watched his YouTube videos, but the country still doesn't know him. If they do, they know him as the candidate that provoked an angry reaction from Giuliani in one of the debates, with the result of a big bump in the polls for Rudy. Meanwhile, just a couple of weeks of rumors on TV about Fred Thompson's possible candidacy have been enough for the actor of Law and Order to jump to second place on the polls.

Maybe Rush Limbaugh is right and Paul's supporters are spamming. Maybe it's too early for the buzz to materialize in more widespread support, or at least in name recognition. So far, Ron Paul remains a celebrity on cyberspace and the unknown candidate in the real world.