Apocalyptic Politics is the Death of Politics

Reading about the most recent politically or religiously motived shootings in Minnesota leads easily to despair about the state of our country. Among numerous outrageous comments, Sen. Mike Lee’s (R-Utah) was: “This is what happens When [sic] Marxists don’t get their way.” Sigh.

By comparison, I recall my time as a graduate student when Watergate was the dominant national issue. Every day I would return from campus in time to tune in to Walter Cronkite on the national news, fearful of learning about what new horrible thing had been uncovered and crawled out of the dark forest.

With the vast expansion of information sources—not all of which are “news” in the strict journalistic sense—I find I am having the same feelings of dread about what we will learn these days.

So much of this stems from the development of different media worlds in which people have come to live. The excellent Pew Research Center provides data regarding where people get their news, and the partisan polarization is striking even apart from streaming websites.

Percentage of each group saying they regularly get news from these sources:

Republicans Democrats

NBC 24% 47%

ABC 27% 46%

CBS 22% 39%

CNN 20% 48%

PBS 11% 31%

FOX 57% 18%

MSNBC 11% 33%

NPR 09% 32%

New York Times 10% 29%

Washington Post 07% 18%

USA Today 11% 17%

Wall Street Journal 12% 16%

Media polarization—living in different media worlds—both fosters and reflects political polarization, and polarization sees enemies rather than opponents.

There is a significant difference between opponents and enemies. It’s one thing to say you disagree with your opponent or that his policies will hurt the country. It’s quite another thing to go apocalyptic, to say that you’re saving the country, that the country will be destroyed if the other side wins. The casualty is trust; the result is suspicion and fear.

Recall Michael Anton’s 2016 argument in “The Flight 93 Election” that the 2016 presidential election was the last, desperate chance to save the country from disaster. What stands out to me in all this is the remarkable sense of alienation exhibited by at least the MAGA strain of contemporary Republicans.

As I noted in “Trust Me” last September, “What we have in MAGA is the politics of mistrust fed by grievance, anger, fear, and suspicion. For both financial and ideological reasons, cable TV, talk radio, and social media pour gasoline on the normal flames of political and moral disagreement.”

These outlets foster an apocalyptic understanding of politics, sometimes overtly religious and sometimes not. If the other side is not just your opponent but your enemy, the fear that that losing to your enemy is a mortal threat to your own existence is a rationale for violence.

In their 2024 American Values Survey published last fall, the Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI) found a particularly disturbing result: “Although most Americans reject political violence, Republicans remain more likely than Democrats to support potential political violence.”

These findings are from their executive summary:

· Nearly half of Americans (45%) believe Republicans are determined to stay in power, even if that means resorting to political violence, compared with about one-third (35%) who think the same about Democrats.

· Nearly three in ten Republicans (29%) believe that true American patriots may have to resort to violence to save the country, compared with 16% of independents and 8% of Democrats.

· Republicans are twice as likely (27%) as independents (14%) or Democrats (12%) to agree that armed everyday citizens should be poll watchers, even if this makes some voters uncomfortable.

· While most Americans (80%) disagree that “if the 2024 presidential election is compromised by voter fraud, everyday Americans will need to ensure the rightful leader takes office, even if it requires taking violent actions,” Republicans (22%) are more likely to agree than independents (14%) or Democrats (12%).

Similarly, PRRI’s report on Christian Nationalism found that “Christian nationalists are more likely than other Americans to support political violence and subscribe to QAnon views.” Specifically, “Nearly four in ten Christian nationalism Adherents (38%) and three in ten Sympathizers (30%) agree that ‘because things have gotten so far off track, true American patriots may have to resort to violence to save the country,’ compared with only 15% of Skeptics and 7% of Rejecters.”

A headline in U.S. Catholic reads, “In today’s political rhetoric, apocalypse always looms.” If apocalypse always looms, so too does the threat of violence by people who believe they are acting in accordance with God’s will.

Material things can be compromised, but values are a lot harder to compromise. If I am a soldier of God and you are an agent of Satan, where is a middle in which we can meet? Wrapping yourself in the flag or in the supposed command of God leads to your saying, “You’re not attacking me personally; you’re attacking the country, or you’re attacking God.” We know where that goes. See conservative columnist Mona Charen.

This is why the absolutes of apocalyptic politics are the death of politics even when those absolutes are not overtly religious. The fundamental premise of politics is that we can compromise, live and let live, agree to disagree. Politics is not and should not be about absolutes.

Apocalypticism rejects that premise and therefore rejects the possibility of politics. Beyond emigration, the only option left is violence. The most dangerous person in the world is someone who claims to know the mind of God. Hence, Minnesota last weekend.

God help us all.

Please check out other columns at the Iowa Writers Collaborative and consider a paid subscription to keep community-based local journalism and commentary alive as we keep you informed. Paid subscribers are invited to the Office Lounge, a live Zoom call on the last Friday of the month at noon Central time.