Students and faculty from the University of Connecticut came together to hear Angelia Wilson, a professor of politics at the University of Manchester, discuss the impact of the Christian right on American politics. Over 40 attendees filled the conference room Wilson spoke in at Susan V. Herbst Hall on Monday, Nov. 3.
Wilson’s lecture delved into the main points from her recent book, “The Politics of Hate: How the Christian Right Darkened America’s Political Soul,” published earlier this year. Her work focuses on the strategies used by Christian right political organizations to advance specific causes and their impact on the United States’ political landscape.
Wilson began by outlining her education and family background. She was born in Texas and her father was a pastor, giving her exposure to a Christian environment until she obtained her undergraduate degree. Her perspective shifted when she went to the U.K. to obtain her PhD degree. For the last 20 years, she has focused her research on the intersection of religion and politics, especially with the Christian right in the U.S.
“I didn’t go into [my research] thinking these are bad people… because of what I started the story with, which was that I grew up in Texas,” Wilson said. “I actually wanted to know what’s going on, why is this political phenomenon and how can I use this skill set?”
Wilson clarified relevant definitions from her talk before discussing political strategy. She defined the Christian right as political groups or movements of any Christian denomination. She said that these groups can get overlooked, but as she began her research, she realized there was a lot to learn about how these groups function and work together.
All of these groups follow a Christian worldview which asserts that the U.S. is a Christian nation, according to Wilson. The groups want to ensure important elected officials, like the president, are Christian and advance policies in their interest.
Wilson pointed out that one of the strategic strengths of the Christian right is their co-belligerence. She talked about this term as the willingness for these groups to work with people they fundamentally disagree with to advance shared causes. She used political groups working with feminists to advance anti-trans legislation as example of this practice.
This co-belligerence can also unite Christian right groups with conflicting religious beliefs. Wilson said, “I don’t care if you’re going to hell, we need to get this policy passed,” voicing the mindset used by these groups when they work together.
Another strategic ploy Wilson observed was the use of war rhetoric. She said Christian right groups will “say they’re at war” to emphasize the severity of their cause. Her research in this area and other parts of her project drew on writings from geopolitical scholar Colin Gray.
Some of the contemporary Christian right organizations that Wilson focused her research on are the Faith and Freedom Coalition, Alliance Defending Freedom and the Family Research Council (FRC). These organizations invest resources in building their organization and teaching Christian values. She said this education can come to groups on local levels, like churches, about how they can engage with political issues. But it also includes influencing homeschool curriculums, making films and producing other media.
“The Christian right educational industry is enormous, and it is incredibly profitable,” Wilson said. “[They’re] providing education for everyone, every moment in life, from the time that you’re a child to the time that you’re single to the time that you’re a grandparent.”
Part of Wilson’s research involved screening over 2000 emails sent by the FRC to its constituents between 2007 and 2018. Her team scanned for buzzwords about specific issues like Roe v. Wade and same-sex marriage. She saw these topics get increasingly mentioned around periods like elections or state rulings on these matters.
Wilson said the modern impact of the Christian right led to a theological justification for President Donald Trump’s first and second presidency because of his ability to carry out agreeable policies. It also added to the already existing “politics of hate,” where a commitment to one group of people places those outside the group of “others” that can be hated.
Wilson concluded by explaining her own concept, which she called “ethics of hate.” The term refers to the way people justify hating others as an ethically correct thought process. This occurs when people think hatred is necessary for self-protection.
“For the protection of ‘us,’ God’s chosen, because we are exceptional, we are God’s people, they will necessitate the exclusion of ‘them,’ whoever they are,” Wilson said.
For the last 20 minutes of the event, Wilson took questions from the audience, which led her to elaborate on different topics from her talk.
Fabiha Era, a first-semester philosophy PhD student, said there is a lot of overlap between her areas of interest in philosophy and political science. She said that to understand certain philosophical concepts, it is necessary to know the political context underlying them.
“As someone who studies philosophy, I must also know the political science research of it,” Era said. “Coming to this event is really to address gaps of knowledge and also to just bridge disciplines together.”