There’s an old adage that goes that the two things which you do not discuss in polite company are politics and religion, and anyone who’s ever discussed these topics in anything less than polite company realizes why. Many people hold very strong views on these subjects, “strong views” perhaps being a euphemism for “irrational views” or perhaps “brainwashed ravings”, and arguments over these subjects can often become quite heated, leading to anger, accusations, hurt feelings, damaged or broken relationships, and sometimes lasting hatred or lifelong grudges. The upside to holding discussions over these topics: that people might learn something; seems to pale in comparison to the downside and so it is often wise to just avoid bringing up the subjects at all.

The reason why discussions of politics and religion get so heated is because both are ideological in nature, and we should probably also add in economics as another forbidden subject given as how it is more ideology than science these days. Many ideologies spread by making their believers virtually impervious to anything that might convince them to believe in a different way as well as making them very aggressive about winning ideological arguments, and so bringing two people together who strongly believe in different ideologies is generally a recipe for disaster. All too often the discussion will devolve into irrationality, name calling, word games, “facts” made up on the spot, and wild accusations of all sorts as emotions rise up to defend the ideology when the intellect fails to do so. These arguments can often be quite amusing to watch, and can pose an intellectual challenge in spotting logical fallacies as well as a willpower challenge in trying to keep yourself from getting dragged into such nonsense. But try not to laugh out loud if you are watching one.

And as long as such arguments are merely jousting between wound up believers regurgitating the latest half-truths that they heard from their favorite pundit or infotainment programs then they certainly are little more than just an odd kind of sport, and equally inconsequential. However, ideologies can and do rise to prominence and when they do these ideological clashes are no longer arguments. Instead, one side is declared to be the truth and all alternatives are shouted down and silenced, using force if necessary. It is in this stage that holding a belief in something other than the ruling ideology, or simply not believing in any ideology at all, becomes an exercise in duplicity.

It is not a simple task to behave one way and to believe another, but it is one that helps ideologies to survive when a rival is in power. Imagine if you were not able to talk or act in any way contrary to what you believed. Aside from offending people because you were unable to tell those “little white lies” that make things go smoothly you would also be unable to go along with what the ruling ideology dictates. For instance, a Christian in a Muslim world wouldn’t be found in a mosque for Friday services and would instead stay at home praying on Sunday instead of going to work. It would be easy to identify you as an unbeliever and put pressure on you either through persuasion or persecution until you changed your ways. Furthermore, you would have no privacy of thought. You would have to embrace the ruling ideology or suffer whatever punishment there was for not believing.

Thus, being able to hide one’s beliefs is a survival advantage and many religions contain passages that implore their believers to practice their faith privately and instruct them to be modest. Christianity is notable in this regard and Jesus advises his followers to stay in their rooms when they pray, to fast without appearing dismal, to not lay up treasures for themselves, to not judge others, and to not throw their pearls before swine. To Jesus, a person’s holiness is a matter between them and their god and should not be put on display. This allows them to blend in with the crowd. When one adds in the praise Jesus extends to those who suffer from persecution and the promises he makes that they will find great rewards in heaven for persevering one can start to see how Christianity is well suited to survive and even propagate within a hostile ideology. A Christian does not necessarily need to be within a community of others who believe similarly in order to feel holy although having contact with those of a similar faith does help to reinforce their beliefs; instead, a Christian can behave piously in private and feel rewarded for doing so completely on his or her own. Christians do not need oracles to tell them what to do, or need statues to pray before, or require elaborate rituals to reinforce their beliefs, although Catholicism did adopt many of these “pagan” elements. All that a Christian really needs to practice their faith is a quiet room and either a bible or to have memorized the Lord’s Prayer. The individualistic nature of Christianity, much more so than the beliefs that came before it, is one of the reasons it has been able to spread and thrive both in ancient times and in modern ones.

Additionally, one need not suffer from actual persecution to feel persecuted. Simply believing differently than everyone else can make one feel lonely, cast out, and hurting just for being different. And even when one is not cast out, and is pretending to be like those around them, one can feel empty inside, unable to truly enjoy being with others because one knows inside that they are not like them. This can feel like persecution, which would normally discourage individuals from believing differently than their peers, but ideologies like Christianity transform persecution into being something that validates their beliefs and makes them more dedicated to their ideology. Such as, the more that a Christian is persecuted, the more that they can relate to Jesus’ suffering, and the closer they feel they are to their savior and to heaven. Other ideologies, such as Ayn Rand’s Objectivism, champion the idea of the noble sufferer, and heroes that endure persecution and defeat only to find victory in the end can be found in numerous books, songs, and plays going back over centuries. We honor and admire those holdouts that stick to their ideals despite all opposition and we often seek to be like them. Thus, even when we are hiding our inner beliefs from others, and silently suffering because of it, we feel noble and heroic. Our suffering, channeled through an ideological prism, provides reinforcement for our defiance and we come to embrace our ideology even more.

Today it appears that ideologies are spreading far and wide via the notion that persecution is a virtue, seemingly in harmony with the outgrowth of narcissism in our modern world. The notion of one person, or a small group, fighting nobly against the world is powerful indeed, made even more so if the rest of the world is perceived as being delusional, mislead, or conspiring against the true believers. This “persecution paradigm” is nothing new to ideologies, it being a virtually necessary component of any belief system since the rise of Monotheism, but with the advent of mass media, and especially the internet, ideologies of every stripe have been able to use this paradigm to vastly strengthen the hold they have on their believers as well as increase their ability to indoctrinate others. The idea is simple: you spread a secret truth that holds some sort of appeal for those you wish to indoctrinate using persuasive techniques well suited to your audience. This secret truth is something that can make the individual feel special for knowing it while also making them feel frightened and oppressed by some powerful force that doesn’t want the truth to be known. By spreading the “truth”, the individual will run into opposition, but the ideology holds them up as heroic if they endure it as well as promises them a bright future if they succeed. Thus they are made to do the bidding of the ideology. In this way the persecution paradigm is very much like advertising, where the individual is made to feel inadequate in some way that the product being sold can fix, except that the product being sold in this case is a belief system. Also, because a person is compelled to spread their ideology to others, and those others to more still, ideologies greatly resemble a typical multi-level marketing scheme.

Take, for example, the idea that the global economy is on the verge of collapse and that only by investing in gold and silver can one preserve their wealth and retirement nest egg. On second thought, the prices of precious metals have been rising steadily with the increase in the money supply for the last six years and show no sign of abating. So, let’s change that to the idea that the global economy might collapse if the current set of world leaders is allowed to continue blundering their way into financial oblivion, or if you prefer a more conspiratorial perspective, if they are allowed to complete their diabolical plan to impoverish the masses and force a New World Order upon us. Now we have something juicy that ideologues can sink their teeth into, well, provided that they aren’t the ones in power. For example, when the Republican Party was in control of the U.S. Government, it was all the rage among Democrats and liberals to bash the Republicans for running massive deficits and allowing lax regulation to destroy the economy and threaten the solvency of the government. Some claimed that it was all a push for a corporate takeover of the government where human rights and the welfare state would be completely dismantled. At the time Republicans defended the spending, saying that “Reagan proved that deficits don’t matter”, but now that Obama is in charge all that the Republicans can talk about is how much deficits do matter, especially Obama’s. Some even claim that it’s all part of a vast conspiracy between the Democrats, the leftist media, and the central bankers to debauch all our currencies so that they can impose socialism upon the world. Unsurprisingly many Democratic supporters who sneered at Republican deficits are defending Obama’s stimulus spending and even asking for more, a lot more.

It’s reminiscent of the novel “1984” where people’s minds could be changed in an instant based on what they saw on television. In our case, Democrats and Republicans seem to switch roles on a number of issues, such as deficits, national security, executive power, and many others, when the political ideology in control of the government changes. This hypocrisy was vividly clear in 2000 when the Florida presidential recount mess went to the Supreme Court. The four “Democratic” Supreme Court justices, usually proponents of federal power superseding that of the state, suddenly embraced states’ rights and voted to let Florida continue its recount, while the five “Republican” Supreme Court justices cast aside their dogmatic support of states’ rights and used federal power to put a stop the recount, allowing “their” candidate to take office. That’s a 9-0 decision in favor of hypocrisy. And like “1984” the past is re-written by each political ideology to support its policies and disparage those of the other party. Of course, political ideologues do not actually throw inconvenient facts down the memory hole and physically replace them with ones that fit the current crisis (although websites have been known to surreptitiously update and backdate their pages), but they will explain the past in a novel new way that fits their current policy and propaganda aims, hoping that their constituency has forgotten the salient details of the issues of long ago and accepts the new explanation as honest and complete. To be honest I thought that the “memory hole” part of “1984” was ludicrous when I first read about it. The idea that people’s memories could be so weak and malleable struck me as impossible. But if you see the way that readers and viewers are bombarded with the same, carefully crafted mantras over and over as well as hit with one new “scandal” after another without being given enough facts to truly understand and absorb what they have been told about, you realize that unless one is close to any given issue it is difficult to come away with anything beyond memorizing the oft repeated sound bites and getting the impression that one ideology is right and all others are wrong. Worse still, believers are craving more of this ideologically spun reporting and editorializing since it is both entertaining and vindicating. As a result they let their critical thinking skills lapse and surrender their memories, trading them in for an ideological ego boost. And as the political parties’ ideological solutions are sold their believers will spread the word, donate their time and money, and cast their votes for the party which has convinced them that they will fix everything.

Let’s get back to the idea of an impending global financial collapse. Republicans and Democrats have both used the notion to their advantage but it has a much broader appeal than to just the mainstream political ideologies. All ideologies, political, economic, and religious, can seize on this catastrophic fear as a source to sell their own ideologically driven agenda. Socialists are proclaiming the failure of Capitalism and demanding the equitable distribution of wealth while Libertarians are declaring that central banks and government regulations should be abolished, Keynesians are insisting on massive government stimulus while Austrian School Economists are recommending that the business cycle be allowed to run its course, and some religions are speaking of eschewing materialism for spiritual fulfillment while others are declaring that the end times are upon us and it is time for us to pay for our sins. In the past these views would have remained mostly inaccessible to the general public, but with the internet everyone is just one mouse click away from digging up convincing cases of all stripes supporting the views of any given ideology no matter how far it is off the beaten path. One can even find thousands of blogs written by individuals espousing their own unique views, such as The Burning Blade, and thus be exposed to some very whacky ideas.

This is not to say that every opinion given for every sensitive issue is skewed to support an ideological agenda. Truth does exist. But sorting out the truth from the half-truths, the lies, and the spin can be a difficult and laborious task which might even lie outside the scope of human intelligence to solve. One way to determine if something you read or see is tainted is to determine whether or not it is appealing to a particular way of thinking. In other words, is an essay or editorial or news story trying to sell you on a particular ideology? In some cases the bias is obvious but in others it is not and so that method can be unreliable as a way to find the truth. Another way is to take an honest look at the way that you feel when you are exposed to a new perspective and ask yourself if you are being asked to embrace a way of thinking that is pitting you as an outnumbered champion against a world of clueless fools or evil conspirators. If so then you are probably falling victim to a persecution paradigm of the kind often used by ideologies to indoctrinate and motivate their believers. And it’s not a bad idea to take a good hard look at yourself and your current beliefs to see if you’ve bought into a number of persecution paradigms already. If you feel oppressed and isolated then you should consider stepping back and taking a more dispassionate view of the world. You might discover that you are embracing a number of ideas that are causing you more trouble than they are worth.

Additionally, not all persecution paradigms are part of ideologies and all manner of wild ideas from conspiracy theories to hidden secrets to eccentric views of how the world really works stand ready to exploit people who are conditioned to embrace them. Ideological conditioning creates a lasting need to view the world in such combative terms and so people who have broken free from their former faith or who no longer feel threatened by their former foes will often seek out new persecution paradigms in order to fill the void. Simply put, those conditioned to suffer and/or fight are always in need of an enemy or oppressor and will often seek them out if none readily present themselves. Furthermore, these paradigms can be very psychologically rewarding. Victories against such impossible odds make one feel heroic and powerful whether it is when they win an argument, spread the word, write an inflammatory diatribe, protest what they are vehemently against, or perhaps undertake violent or illegal actions to further the cause. And when the believer loses or doesn’t fight, the suffering reinforces the paradigm by underscoring the idea that the believer is being persecuted, unjustly of course since they believe that they hold the truth.

Thus, people can be drawn deeper and deeper into embracing these persecution paradigms. Ideological reinforcement of the special status of heroes and martyrs make people vulnerable to their appeal and when they fight against their many foes they can often end up more adamant believers than before. But psychological reinforcement through victories isn’t always enough, especially for those who choose not to fight, so believers often find reinforcement by immersing themselves in the paradigm almost as if they were part of a cult. Religious cults use isolation to control the environment around a new recruit so that they can inject their odd ideas into the recruit’s head without opposition, eventually wearing them down and getting them to accept their new way of seeing the world. But believers seeking psychological rewards will impose a similar isolation regimen on themselves, blocking out all contrary sources of information and focusing only on those that support their existing beliefs. They become true believers, addicted to their ideology, and pour over “scriptures” day after day. Some become news or internet “junkies”, obsessively seeking out data which supports their views so that they can feel better about themselves and perhaps use those new "facts" as weapons against their foes in arguments.

Of course, you might never know that someone close to you secretly harbors a very odd view of the world. Not everyone fights conspicuously for their beliefs and some don’t fight at all. Many have learned to just keep quiet, appearing to all the world that they are just like everyone else, mastering the art of duplicity while they indulge their need for persecution. It makes one wonder just how haunted we are by fears of some sinister force or impending doom. How many of us fear the devil, the terrorists, the Jews, the bankers, the illuminati, the New World Order, global warming, Socialism, guns, gun control, U.S. imperialism, growing Chinese influence, economic catastrophe, alien abductions, secret government experiments, the corporate takeover of government, the government takeover of corporations, moral debauchery, the Moral Majority, drugs and gangs, dangerous pharmaceuticals, losing our health coverage, paying for everyone else’s health coverage, or what others will think of us if they knew what we truly believed? And how many of us see ourselves as being on a crusade to change these things for the better? Of course, I’m not saying that all of these fears are misguided and that championing a cause makes you a dupe, I’m just wondering how much of a role fear, especially irrational fear, plays as a part of our consciousness. I feel that perhaps we feel a great deal of fear on a daily basis but that we are so accustomed to it that we do not even realize how much it guides our thoughts and behaviors.

And so it seems that we are food for the gods and that our fears are what they dine upon.

They appear to be very well fed.