Who are the TheoBros? A religious alt-right

[joluoto]

People like Peter Thiel, Curtis Yarvin and Nick Land are not very religious, they can even probably quite correctly be described as atheists (though they might refute that label). But while the Dark Enlightenment and much of the alt right movement tend to be very secular, and only talk about religion as a cultural thing, rather than a thing of faith, there are a smaller religious alt right. The theo bros, who wish for a theocracy and are not silent about it.

To Understand JD Vance, You Need to Meet the “TheoBros”​

Meet the Theobros, who want you to know they’re right about everything​

They are loud online, and tend to be younger men. They are often pastors (but not always) and comes from various denominations. Some names you might have heard some time are Douglas Wilson, Andrew Isker and William Wolfe. They believe in the need of a Christian Prince to rule America. They consider women having no place in the pulpit neither in the voting boot, and indeed they dream of repealing the 19th Amendment. They actually believe the Constitution is dead and all that is needed is the Ten Commandments. They have hardons for dictators who claimed to be Christians (they often praise Francisco Franco). They also seem to really like JD Vance, which is kinda weird, he is married to a Hindu, so you'd think Christian nationalists would be against that. They have previously been against marriages between Christians and non- Christians. Well Vance share their view on women, so maybe that's why they like him. There is no direct line between Vance and the Theo Bros (unlike the very direct line between Vance and the Dark Enlightenment).

They seem to really like Jean Calvin, which probably just mean they do not understand Calvin very well. They also seem to be into Ulrich Zwingli, and they definitely do not understand Zwingli. They claim that women's role is to be submissive to men, that slavery wasn't a bad thing, and they claim Martin Luther King Jr. is in Hell, because apparently segregation was good and civil rights bad.

But the question comes down to: what's so Christians about their ideas? Is misogyny Christian? White supremacy? I think not. I think these TheoBros are secular warrior in religious clothing, arguing for their secular aims with religious language.

 

[ataraxia]

This sounds just like the Islamic Republic of Iran, except the name of what they are going for: The Christian Republic of America. It may even come complete with its own morality police.

I read an interesting book a few years ago on this general emergence of religious fundamentalism in the modern world:

The Battle for God book by Karen Armstrong

The book starts out by pointing out that by the 1960s and 70s, it looked like religion was on its way out in the modern world. But then we had the revolution in Iran in 1979. This was soon followed by the rise of religious fundamentalism in countries like Egypt. It then did not remain confined to the Islamic world. Here in the United States, we had the rise of the Christian coalition and the televangelists with increasing political power. In Israel, you had the rise of the ultra Orthodox Jews with increasing political power.

The book goes into a lot of detail about the roots and the rise of these various movements around the world. But it ultimately asks the question of why this was happening. Its conclusion was that the changes in the world since the European enlightenment were too much, too fast: you had the scientific revolution, the industrial revolution, the rise of democracy, the separation of church and state, the rapid declined of religion, profound personal and philosophical questions of existentialism and meaning in a godless world, etc, etc…

Its argument is that religious fundamentalism was a backlash to all these changes. And it was not just a regression to the medieval dark ages. It is a very distinctly modern phenomenon, because medieval thinkers did not reject science or reason. The great scholars of the middle ages, both in the east and the west, had great respect for science and reason, and felt that both reason and revelation were pathways to understanding the truth. This modern fundamentalism is a rebellion against and rejection of science and reason (well, except maybe when it comes to weapons technology). It is a blind and desperate clinging to tradition in the face of rapid and unrelenting change.

Very thoughtful provoking book; would strongly recommend to understand our modern world today.

 

[Sweden]

This sounds just like the Islamic Republic of Iran, except the name of what they are going for: The Christian Republic of America. It may even come complete with its own morality police.

I read an interesting book a few years ago on this general emergence of religious fundamentalism in the modern world:

The Battle for God book by Karen Armstrong

The book starts out by pointing out that by the 1960s and 70s, it looked like religion was on its way out in the modern world. But then we had the revolution in Iran in 1979. This was soon followed by the rise of religious fundamentalism in countries like Egypt. It then did not remain confined to the Islamic world. Here in the United States, we had the rise of the Christian coalition and the televangelists with increasing political power. In Israel, you had the rise of the ultra Orthodox Jews with increasing political power.

The book goes into a lot of detail about the roots and the rise of these various movements around the world. But it ultimately asks the question of why this was happening. Its conclusion was that the changes in the world since the European enlightenment were too much, too fast: you had the scientific revolution, the industrial revolution, the rise of democracy, the separation of church and state, the rapid declined of religion, profound personal and philosophical questions of existentialism and meaning in a godless world, etc, etc…

Its argument is that religious fundamentalism was a backlash to all these changes. And it was not just a regression to the medieval dark ages. It is a very distinctly modern phenomenon, because medieval thinkers did not reject science or reason. The great scholars of the middle ages, both in the east and the west, had great respect for science and reason, and felt that both reason and revelation were pathways to understanding the truth. This modern fundamentalism is a rebellion against and rejection of science and reason (well, except maybe when it comes to weapons technology). It is a blind and desperate clinging to tradition in the face of rapid and unrelenting change.

Very thoughtful provoking book; would strongly recommend to understand our modern world today.

Perhaps useful for understanding Islamic states, India and the US where religion is still important. Not Europe though where Christianity is mostly a memory.

 

[bongsaway]

People like Peter Thiel, Curtis Yarvin and Nick Land are not very religious, they can even probably quite correctly be described as atheists (though they might refute that label). But while the Dark Enlightenment and much of the alt right movement tend to be very secular, and only talk about religion as a cultural thing, rather than a thing of faith, there are a smaller religious alt right. The theo bros, who wish for a theocracy and are not silent about it.

To Understand JD Vance, You Need to Meet the “TheoBros”​

Meet the Theobros, who want you to know they’re right about everything​

They are loud online, and tend to be younger men. They are often pastors (but not always) and comes from various denominations. Some names you might have heard some time are Douglas Wilson, Andrew Isker and William Wolfe. They believe in the need of a Christian Prince to rule America. They consider women having no place in the pulpit neither in the voting boot, and indeed they dream of repealing the 19th Amendment. They actually believe the Constitution is dead and all that is needed is the Ten Commandments. They have hardons for dictators who claimed to be Christians (they often praise Francisco Franco). They also seem to really like JD Vance, which is kinda weird, he is married to a Hindu, so you'd think Christian nationalists would be against that. They have previously been against marriages between Christians and non- Christians. Well Vance share their view on women, so maybe that's why they like him. There is no direct line between Vance and the Theo Bros (unlike the very direct line between Vance and the Dark Enlightenment).

They seem to really like Jean Calvin, which probably just mean they do not understand Calvin very well. They also seem to be into Ulrich Zwingli, and they definitely do not understand Zwingli. They claim that women's role is to be submissive to men, that slavery wasn't a bad thing, and they claim Martin Luther King Jr. is in Hell, because apparently segregation was good and civil rights bad.

But the question comes down to: what's so Christians about their ideas? Is misogyny Christian? White supremacy? I think not. I think these TheoBros are secular warrior in religious clothing, arguing for their secular aims with religious language.

I think the theobros are in the wrong forum, they should be posting in the theology forum. I personally am sick of their religious bullshit in politics.

 

[Goshin]

Never heard of them, which is not surprising as I stay away from fringe extremists in religion as well as politics.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

Never heard of them, which is not surprising as I stay away from fringe extremists in religion as well as politics.

They are mainstream now, and if Trump wins and suddenly has an unfortunate accident and Vance becomes POTUS you will finally realize that this is no longer fringe and hasn't been since the days of the Tea Party.

 

[Lisa]

They are mainstream now, and if Trump wins and suddenly has an unfortunate accident and Vance becomes POTUS you will finally realize that this is no longer fringe and hasn't been since the days of the Tea Party.

I would almost say that a now banned DP member might have supported this idea.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

I would almost say that a now banned DP member might have supported this idea.

More like around ten or twenty.