Election Reflection by RELS Faculty

The academic study of religion is highly interdisciplinary, intersecting with all areas of human life and culture. So, how could we not offer some reflections on the spectacle of the American presidential election of 2016, as informed by our study of this multi-form thing we call religion? The following brief comments are offered by individual faculty members of the Religious Studies Department of Manhattan College. The views expressed are of individual faculty members, not the department as a whole, and certainly not the College. They are in random order, except for the first reflection, which was predestined to come first.

From Prof. Stephen Kaplan:

A Taoist tale tells the story of a man who buys a horse. His neighbor congratulates him telling him how good that is, but the man says who knows what is good and bad. Soon after, the horse runs away and the neighbor expresses how bad that is and the man utters the same refrain ‘who knows what is good and what is bad.’ When the horse returns with a wild horse at her side, the neighbor is now convinced this is good and the man reiterates his refrain. This happens again when the man’s son breaks his leg trying to tame the wild horse and the neighbor sees that this is bad news. But, when the general comes to conscript the young men of the village, the son with the broken leg is left at home. The neighbor declares this is good and the man says ‘who knows what is good and what is bad.’ (Revised from T. Patrick Burke, The Major Religions 1996: 132)

On another hand but not sure whose hand, if the world is not rational or, at most only rational some of the times, is it rational to be rational? But how can non-rational be the rational approach? If neither rational nor non-rational are the rational approach, then how should we act or think? If this helps you think about the election, seek help immediately.

From Prof. Michele Saracino:

One of the hardest pills for me to swallow this Fall was that gender justice appears to be somewhat of an illusion. Like many others, I was stunned by the sexist language to describe Secretary Clinton in the debate and coverage of election process. Moreover, I was shocked that people were not more appalled by the misogynist and violating rhetoric circulating on the public stage about women, their bodies, and their value. Finally and probably most important for me, as a mother of 2 young children who are negotiating their gender identities as they grow and as a professor of students who are confronted with the painful realities of sexual assault, I am heartbroken by the reality that there is less freedom now to become and love our true selves in all our complicated, gendered identities.

From Prof. Andrew Skotniki

As a Catholic Christian and a pacifist I was not highly motivated by the choices of either party. Both candidates speak of the threat of radical Islam and other nations inimical to American foreign policy with belligerence and violence and, in the case of Clinton, co-authorized the bombing of targets in six different nations while Secretary of State. In the same way, neither candidate was inspiring in bringing a humane and restrained approach to the problems of mass incarceration. Trump, as a business person, will likely seek to expand privatization both of state prisons and the ignominious facilities run by the Immigration and Naturalization Service and, perhaps, reverse the recent decision to disallow federal prisoners serving their sentence in private prisons. Bill Clinton was responsible for a host of anti-prisoner legislation while president that severed educational grants, placed severe constraints on lawsuits filed by prisoners, expanded the loss of civil liberties for the formerly incarcerated, and repeatedly defended the death penalty. Most of Hillary Clinton's statements, until she hit the campaign trail, reinforced those sentiments. I remember when Reagan was elected. I thought the world was going to end. It did. Since 1980 we have seen the triumph of social darwinism/neo-liberalism restricting virtually any barriers to the financial and corporate sectors, refusing to find any defect in the social structure or the economy, and effectively blaming the poor for their lot. For all of that, I am hopeful; not that America will be become a nation that values the sacredness of human life as a primary commitment, but in our faith traditions that, despite the poverty and bloodshed, declare that Providence is continually active in each human heart and in our social bodies and will inevitably wear down our resistance to bring all things into one.

From Prof. Robert Geraci:

Politically, I consider myself to be on the far end of the progressive side, and so there was much in the election to concern me. But professionally, my most substantive connection to the election has to do with the environment. As a scholar engaged with the study of religion, science, and technology, I am never far removed from debates over climate change and the catastrophic rise in extinction rates, a subject that I engage in my Religion and Science course. Religious groups have shown a growing sense of responsibility for the environment; but those debates have yet to reach the question of political necessity. That is, abortion politics remain central to political decision-making for many voters, but the environment does not. Such matters are especially curious given the alignment of progressive and conservative groups in favor of environmental protection. For example, the U.S. military (generally connected to the Republican party) has been vigorously defining climate change as the single biggest threat to U.S. stability in the century to come because environmental shifts will wreak havoc throughout the world, leading to instability that will be a problem for our country. Nevertheless, Republican voters who often see conservation as valuable for religious reasons, ignore it politically even while such allies champion environmental protection. Christians across the political spectrum have increasingly seen environmental protection as a requirement of human stewardship of the Earth. It will be interesting for me to see whether this change of perspective promotes a restructuring of political practices in the years to come. So far, it has not.

From Prof. David Shefferman:

The 2016 election was full of surprises. Or maybe it wasn’t. As someone who considers the role of religion in North American history and culture, I was most surprised – after all and against most predictions about this ‘change’ election – by the continuation of certain long-running political patterns. For example, religion did matter a lot in the end, although it did not emerge as a major element in the campaigns. Evangelical Christians served, once again, as a significant part of the Republican base and, in turn, of the coalition that gave Donald Trump his Electoral College victory. The evangelical voting trend held true and made a difference despite Trump’s previous disinterest in (even a seeming disdain for) religion and his demonstrations of limited religious literacy. The widespread evangelical support for Trump during the primaries, even with other explicitly evangelical candidates in the race, was a notable surprise … but ended up as a predictable yet overlooked factor in the national vote. Most of all, Trump benefitted from his unflagging emphasis on American exceptionalism. We can’t forget the religious roots of the belief in the United States as the fulfillment of the divinely ordained “city on a hill” figured in the Hebrew scriptures and vividly invoked in the Christian New Testament. The Puritans – endowed with the conviction that they were latter-day Israelites that God would distinguish or destroy according to their adherence to the Abrahamic Covenant – built their American colonies around this exceptionalist vision, and it has evolved but endured in American life in the form of the notion that the U.S. is the historical beacon of democracy and righteousness to the rest of the world. It’s hard to overemphasize the persistent influence in our political culture of that idea of America’s singular greatness. Even if Trump’s call to “make America great again” proposed a ‘fallen’ preeminence that must be restored, I hear in it the echoes of familiar refrains about “America the Great.” For worse or for better, I think a decisive difference in the election came from the emotional appeal of Trump’s entreaty to a large slice of the electorate.

From Prof. Mehnaz Afridi:

Please listen to my statement here: http://www.wnyc.org/story/jews-and-muslims-prepare-trump/

From Prof. Kevin Ahern:

The US Election and the Challenge of Pope Francis

The present political climate presents a serious challenge to people of faith who are concerned about the common good. From his historic address to a joint session of Congress last year to his homily at a Mass for new cardinals (just two weeks after the US election), Pope Francis has offered a twofold challenge to the social and political crisis facing the United States and other western democracies. On the one hand, he reminds us about the value of working for common ground and dialogue amidst polarization. Christians, following the teachings and model of Christ, are called to embody the very nature of God, who is love. And this means reaching out to those we might consider enemies and work for healing.

On the other hand, however, Christians must also denounce any and all actions and language that seeks to dehumanize and exclude the vulnerable, especially those aimed at the poor, the immigrant and the marginalized. While Christians are called to love our enemy, mercy and love must never be used as a cover to accept, condone or normalize hateful attitudes or actions. In other words, the good of tolerance and inclusivity can never justify the evils xenophobia, racism, and misogyny. Here, Francis, calls all Catholics and people of faith to action, to organize, and to work to overcome all forms of marginalization and exclusion. For more thoughts on this, see: Moving Forward in Love: 6 Tips to Address Polarization and Exclusion. https://dailytheology.org/2016/11/19/moving-forward-in-love-5-tips-to-address-polarization-and-exclusion/

From Prof. Philip Francis:

What exactly is it that makes American GREAT again, again? The empty master-signifier wins another one.