“The Unlikely Alliance Between Mormonism and Christian Nationalism” with Dr. Benjamin Park

Um, I would say that if you looked at the history of Mormon Christian nationalism over the last four decades, so since, you know, the rise of the religious right, the key theme of that story is the dissolution of the difference between Mormon Christian nationalism and evangelical Christian nationalism. I think there used to be a particular strain of Mormon Christian nationalism in which Mormons were a bit more unique. It was a much more liberal-minded. It was a much more particular Christian nationalism that recognized um, you know, a more gregarious nature to opponents um and also being kinder on some topics like being multi-racial. Mormons had long been uh supporters and defenders of immigration, for instance. Mhm.

But over the last decade, especially with the rise of the MAGA movement, much of Mormon Christian nationalism has become synonymous with evangelical Christian nationalism. It's much more anti-immigrant. It's much more exclusionary. It's much more partisan.

Welcome to the Culture, Faith, and Politics podcast. I'm Pat Kanki, and I'm joined today by a guest that I've been listening to for a few months now. And when he first started his YouTube channel, I think. And right away I thought, this is somebody that my audience really needs to get to know. And he's Dr. Benjamin Park, and he's a historian of the Latter-day Saints movement, the Mormons. And he's written several highly respected books on the Mormons, which I'll I'll put links to those in the description below. And he's currently a professor of history at Sam Houston State University. And today, we're mostly going to be talking about an article that that Dr. Park wrote a while back called The Unlikely Alliance Between Mormonism and Christian Nationalism. But before I go any further and and introduce you, uh, welcome, Ben. I'm really honored to have you join us today. I think my listeners are in for a treat.

Thanks. It's a great privilege to be here. You're doing such great work with your channel, so I'm honored to be part of it.

Well, thanks. I appreciate that. And I've been enjoying your YouTube channel for for several reasons. Uh, first because I've been learning about something that I just know very little about. I told you when we just met here a minute ago that u I'm over my head on this. So talk to me like I'm a fifth grader. And uh, that's but that's what I love is that you're talking about things that are fascinating to me that I'm not an expert in. And I think that a lot of our listeners might relate to that. Some of them do come from an LDS background though too. So I think they'll really uh learn from you too. But um, as a guy myself who's trying to understand Christian nationalism in America, I've been fascinated to hear you talk about specifically the history of Christian nationalism among Latter-day Saints. And so I just want to ask you first of all, how did you become interested in history and specifically Mormon history? And what is it that makes you want to step outside of the university and talk publicly about this stuff and start a YouTube channel, for instance?

Yeah. Well, I first became interested in history as a way to learn about my own ancestors. I was raised in the Latter-day Saint tradition uh in a family whose uh ancestry goes back to uh the Mormon pioneers and my family of course is very proud of that. And so I always want to learn more about that. that I served an LDS mission. Uh, and through that I was introduced to the literature and learning more about the history and and through that I soon became interested in religious history because I learned Mormons weren't the only interesting religion. Um, and then American history writ large because I believe that you had to understand the broader context of what's going on if you ever want to understand the particulars like the Mormons or the religion or other religions, the Catholics, the Protestants. Um, and so that led me first uh after getting my bachelor's degree in English and history, I went and got a a master's degree in theology from the University of Edinburgh's uh Divinity School. And then it was through that that I realized I was mostly interested in history rather than theology or religious studies. Uh, and so I went on and got my my PhD in history. Um, and I've now been a professor for, you know, 12 years. Um, but reaching people in the classrooms, reaching people through my books, I soon realized that there's a limit on that because not everyone is interested in those genres, nor do I have everyone in my classrooms. Um, and especially now that I have teenagers, uh, I am very well aware that lots of people get their information through other formats, especially through YouTube. Um, and after appearing on lots of people's, uh, uh, platforms and shows and channels, I decided, uh, well, maybe I should dip my toes into that. So, I started doing a few social media accounts on Instagram, on Tik Tok, and then I had someone reach out to me, Anthony Ambrose, who is a phenomenal YouTube producer, was like, "Your work really should be on YouTube." Um, and so I've, after a few months of discussions with him, I launched my channel, Professor Benjamin Park. And I do it because I I really believe that now is a time where we often have so much historical ignorance in our public discourse that it's it's an imperative for those of us who know a little bit more who are overspecialized geeks in these topics to try to leave our comfort zones and uh and enter the discussion. So, the goal of my channel is just to raise uh the the the baseline of our discourse on American history, religious history, and especially Mormon history. And that's what I try to do with my videos.

Yeah. Yeah. And you're doing a good job of it, as I said. And um I can relate, by the way, when you said that you you feel that certain I not to put words in your mouth, but you feel a certain obligation based on what you know to share some things publicly. And I retired from pastoral ministry in 2016. And I thought at that time, I'm never again going to do anything that even looks remotely like public ministry, you know, because it just um I thought I was done with that. And uh but then I, you know, I saw what was happening in the nation and I thought, "Wow, my people have a big role in what's happening here." And and I just need to talk to them. And so here I am. And I'm I'm talking about things because I have something to something to offer. Seems like seems like you come from a similar position. You've got this historical thing to offer.

Yeah. Also, most of the people who listen to me lecture are students that I have to bribe with grades to come listen to me. So, just the idea of people choosing to listen to me is just an intoxicating idea.

Yeah. And so you mentioned that you grew up um in the Latter-day Saints or your your family background is from that. And I would just ask on what level does that so like so I'm I'm talking as an insider as like a a former evangelical. I I mean I was an evangelical pastor and I say former because I've I feel like they've left me, you know, but um but on what level um are you do you consider yourself an insider to this movement and and on what level are you more just at this point more of a just dispassionate observer of the movement?

Yeah, it's a good question. There's no clear easy answer for me. Even though I'm not an active member of the LDS tradition anymore and I'm definitely not orthodox in beliefs, the Latter-day Saint community raised me and in many ways it structures how I see the world. And so I don't think you can ever fully leave that type of mindset. I mean, the Mormon community is in many ways my community that I that I still feel a lot of love for, even if I definitely feel a lot of distance from them. Um, so on the one hand that tradition has shaped me and so it's always going to be a a a degree of of of the background of of how I view things. On the other hand, I try to put on my scholar hat and speak as, you know, an academic from at least a certain portion of of distance. Although, as most scholars will tell you, there's no such thing as objective analysis. We're all shaped by our biases. And so I think wrestling with that perspective is something that I often do and I probably often fail in sometimes coming off as too lenient or too critical. If you just go through the comments on my videos, you'll often hear me denounced as both an apologist and a a critic. And so I I think that trying to find that that ground of providing fair analysis is something that I strive to do even though I often fail.

Yeah. And that's probably a good place to be if you're getting criticized from both sides. I find the same thing. I actually take comfort in the fact that people people, you know, just yeah, they they criticize my faith and they criticize what they perceive as my lack of faith. It's like, okay, I'm probably probably right where I need to be. So, um, so let's get into this, um, specifically the Christian nationalist thing because I I just, um, I find this fascinating and I think that I know that I can learn. And I have been learning just to see through the lens of of how Christian nationalism is played out in a Mormon context. Uh, I'm learning about how it works more broadly too. And you wrote an article a while back called the unlikely alliance of Mormonism and Christian nationalism. And in that article you wrote this uh, you said this is not just a story of religious trivia either. Rather, to tell the story of Mormonism's political and cultural evolution into the Christian nationalist mainstream is to narrate the broader contours of religious development in America, a reminder of how quickly circumstances and allegiances can change. It also exemplifies the power of media in enabling such a transformation. I just find this this fascinating. That's why I want to talk to you about this. I think we can all learn from your research. So before we jump deep into that article, I'd like you to tell us why you called it the unlikely alliance of Mormonism and Christian nationalism and what is it about Mormonism and Christian national that makes that an unlikely alliance?

Yeah, I think there are at least three levels here. First, um, the Mormon tradition, as Joseph Smith originally envisioned it when the Church of Christ was founded in April of 1830, did not speak much about the American nation. It almost spoke as if it existed in this transnational space that was going to be a reaction to an American experiment that wasn't going to um and so on the one hand the origins of Mormonism was meant to not be constrained by a particular nationalist idea. Um, second, ever for the last 50 years or so there have been more Latter-day Saints who live outside the United States than inside the the United States. So while Mormonism is typically seen as the quintessential American religion for a number of reasons we might go into later, it is exceptionally global. And so trying to become an international global worldwide church does not always fully align with, you know, Christian nationalism. And third, those people who typically come to mind when you think about Christian nationalism, you know, white evangelicals and Protestants historically have not always been friends of the Mormons. Uh, in fact, they often viewed Mormons as as targets and Mormons viewed American Protestants and evangelicals as, you know, a fallen decaying carcass of ecclesiastical decline in America. Um, and so whereas Mormons used to be the the main uh uh enemies of an evangelical political movement, now they're seen more as allies. So those those are just a few reasons why I find this strong, perpetual, and robust, if complicated, and evolving Mormon Christian nationalism and this alliance with the religious right. Unlikely, if not, you know, historically odd.

Yeah. Yeah. Exactly. And just to put an exclamation point on that, if if you've read uh Steven Wolf's book, The Case for Christian Nationalism, uh he actually lays out in this book, and and he's I mean, I I hate this book. Uh, but I but I'll just, you know, I'm not a historian, so I don't have to be quite as dispassionate about my statements, you know. Um, I hate this book, but he he lays out in that book that, you know, if they take if they if his version of Christian nationalism becomes a thing. I mean, Catholics are going to be right out. They're not going to have any role in the government. And Mormons I'm I don't know if he mentions Mormons specifically, but to your point, uh, would not be part of his utopia, you know.

Yeah, I think that's it. I mean, we're only a few decades removed from one of the most popular evangelical movies being The God Makers, which was an explicitly anti-Mormon movie that was at its peak seen by 20,000 Americans a month in the early 1980s, denouncing Mormons as a cult, as someone who does not belong within the Christian umbrella, nor should be really trustworthy as American citizens. And to go from that to now being, you know, political colleagues, it just shows how much can change and how tenuous I would argue that political alliance is.

Yeah. Yeah. And that's what your article traces for us. It traces how you went from point A to point X or wherever we're at right now. But um, so you mentioned in that article um one of the symbols uh that you that you talked about in that article first of all is this painting called One Nation Under God by John McNottton. And I'm going to put that painting up on the screen because I think it's uh just talk to us about that painting and why you chose to start your article with a discussion of that.

Um, well, personally speaking, my whole academic career began dissecting a John McNotton painting. When I was an undergraduate, when I was a a graduate student at at the University of Edinburgh's Divinity School, John McNotton became the major painter for the Tea Party movement, which was a right-wing, you know, quasi libertarian Christian nationalist movement uh around 2009, 2010 in response to Barack Obama's election. And so I've always had an interest in in McNotton's paintings. But why I find this painting so powerful. John McNotton, a Utah-based painter who has done a number of works both for the LDS community and for the broader nation, soon became known as a partisan painter, someone who would paint these images that fit the right-wing conservative argument. This particular image, One Nation Under God, features uh Jesus Christ at the center who looks remarkably like Aaron Echar to the the the actor um holding uh the US Constitution. I mean, you can't get much more of a visual of the blending of Christian nationalism than Jesus Christ holding the Constitution as if he uh as if he wrote it or he ordained it or he approves of it. And then surrounding uh this Jesus Christ holding the constitution, you have lots of historical figures, the the founding fathers, Abraham Lincoln, Benjamin Franklin, you have more recent people like Daniel Boone because why not? um you you have Ronald Reagan in the background and then you also have you know these bad people in the bottom right corner those who can't be trusted like a judge who oversaw the erosion of of say of of at the time Roe v. Wade before Roe v. Wade was repealed you have a Hollywood uh producer uh you have lawyers uh you have a moneyman and then the the only person what's what's great about this image by the way is if you go to John McNotton's website, you can scroll over the image and and every time your cursor goes over another image, a dialogue bubble will come up and tell you who that person is and explain the significance. And if you scrolled over the person on on the the top of the the group on the bottom right, it says it is a professor holding his Origin of Species. And only the professor is preposterous enough to be sitting on the same floor as Jesus Christ. And as a professor, I just, you know, that that that image strikes me. But but I love this image because it uses history to make a religious and political point, right? These historical figures become props in a narrative that divinely sacralizes a of the United States that fits the political message. So I think in this painting, One Nation Under God, you get theology, history, and politics fusing into one robust uh presentation.

Yeah. Yeah. And it just it's it's amazing to see it. And then I I just think about all these these paintings that I've looked at in my life, you know, that have that have just kind of indoctrinated me into a view of America that I realize, oh, people are doing this intentionally. you know, there there's an intentional message behind this. And yeah, another another one of his images features Barack Obama holding the Constitution on fire, right? I mean, the the the symbolism isn't that deep here, right? It's not that subtle. It's, you know, but but like it strikes you like who wants to hang these types of paintings in their home, right? That that you want these images of vitriol to capture a message that it is the front part of your identity. But I think it captures a particular mindset of many people in America where you are driven by these identity politics that right-wing people often claim is only on the left, but it's really shaping a religious ideology, including for many on the right.

Yeah. Yeah. And one of the symbols in that painting that you talked about in the article is this book, The 5,000-year Leap. You write The 5,000-year Leap written by Cleon Scousin. Is that how you say it? Scousin. Scousin. The book is not only one of the most influential works of right-wing Christian thinking in the 20th century, but it also reflects a particular brand of religious imagination and and you mentioned that Glenn Beck has referenced that book. So tell me about that book and why you think it was in that painting and what it represents.

Yeah, so Cleon Scousin is a fascinating figure who's actually going to be the a focus of a book project I'm I'm just starting on who uh was one of the most prominent uh John Birch Society style anti-communist thinkers in the 1950s, 1960s America and then becomes the historian for the religious right movement in the 1970s, 80s, and 90s, creating what was first the Freeman's Institute and then the National Center for Constitutional Studies. When you see people kind of wave around a pocket constitution that shows James Madison holding the constitution that's created by this National Center for Constitutional Studies. It was, you know, poking out of Ammon Bundy's pocket. If you remember when Ammon Bundy did the siege at the Malheur uh uh recre um um the center in Oregon a few years ago. Um, but what's that book represents? The 5,000-year Leap, which was initially published decades ago, but then becomes a New York Times bestseller in 2009 thanks to Glenn Beck and the Tea Party movement, is it frames not just American history, but world history in a way that culminates in this Christian nationalism that everything fits along this providential narrative and that nations and communities and people fall when they leave behind these divine principles and they rise when they follow this Christian divine blueprint. So, in many ways, The 5,000-year Leap was is appropriately found in McNotton's One Nation Under God because it is the textual argument of the visual being depicted in that painting.

Okay. Okay. Yeah. That's that's fascinating. And so now I want to I want to kind of let you just take over a little bit in this discussion because I want you to talk me through the history of of you know Christian nationalism you know in the beginning you know in the article and then to where we got today. But I'll just start by asking you to talk to me about the Kingdom of Nauvoo because until until I started watching your channel I hadn't heard of the Kingdom of Nauvoo. I'm embarrassed to say that but I hadn't. And um talk to me about where that lies in the development of like the nationalistic sort of thought, you know, because it seems like there was a transition that happened somewhere in there.

Yeah, so when the Latter-day Saints begin their new tradition, they have a habit of of drawing enemies in every community where they grow. They are kicked out of New York, kicked out of Pennsylvania, kicked out of Ohio, and then cause a war, a quasi Mormon Missouri war in the state of Missouri. And then by 1839, they find themselves in a small uh peninsula uh on the banks of the Mississippi River in Illinois that they come to call Nauvoo. And Nauvoo becomes the LDS headquarters from 1839 to early 1846. And it becomes a booming city, a quasi city-state. They have at its peak nearly 20 20,000 people living there, which was larger than Chicago at the time and one of the largest cities in the western uh areas uh for for quite a while. Um, but Nauvoo also represented what I argue is one of the most radical political proposals in antebellum America because Joseph Smith and the Mormons came to believe that the American nation was a failed experiment that they needed to redeem. Now, they tried to redeem it through electoral and political processes at their disposal. They pulled their votes together and voted as a block according to however Joseph Smith told them to because they believed that was the best way to make sure that politicians listened to them and followed their interests. Um, Joseph Smith eventually runs for the US presidency in his in his final year uh in an ill-fated campaign. He ends up becoming the first person in American history to be killed while a US presidential candidate. One of these ironic pieces of American trivia. But they also take more radical steps. In Joseph Smith's final few months, he introduces uh a theocratic council that he calls the council that they call the Council of Fifty that was meant to introduce a new quasi world government and embryo a bridge system that was going to allow the world to shift into millennial reign. And they're pretty clear that it was going to be based on theocratic authority that Joseph Smith as the prophet, priest, and king was going to restore God's law into uh the world. Um, they even write a new constitution or at least try to write a new constitution that uh the first words instead of "We the People" it's "We the People of the Kingdom of God." Um, and it it critiques all existing governments and constitutions for failing to recognize God's law. And then when Joseph Smith is killed and the Mormons are forced out of Nauvoo, uh they denounce America as a failed experiment, saying that democracy is prone to fail because we give too much authority to fallible individuals and that only a nation based on God's law will survive. Now, patriotism and connections to nationalism are of course rung deep within the Latter-day Saint tradition. So once they're settled out in what is now Utah, uh within a year the U the end of the US-Mexico War means that that territory which they initially settled in was northern Mexico is now part of the United States. So they once again inaugurate this awkward dance between trying to establish more sovereignty and autonomy while existing within the American nation. and they tried to craft American nationalism in a way that could fit their uh their religious mindset. So, so the Kingdom of Nauvoo was at one point a check on American nationalism while still in their minds an a culmination, a creation of what they believe were the true American values, but it has to be an experience in the American context to be fulfilled.

Okay. And and now it's interesting to me uh that in in this part of the you know just after this in the article you to you get us to the 20th century and you say that the 20th the dawn of the 20th century inaugurated a new age of Mormon political alliance. And this was interesting. You say while most lay saints leaned toward the populist policies of the Democratic Party, an increasing number of influential leaders identified as Republican. and talk about that because I think the words Democratic Party and Republican Party mean very different things now than they meant back then. So, just explain kind of how that all fits together.

There are few things taken more for granted in modern-day America than that Mormons are predominantly Republican and that the LDS and GOP are acronyms that typically go together. But that had not always been the case. In fact, in the 19th century, when the Republican Party was founded in the 1850s, one of their primary targets were the Mormons uh in 1856 when they create their first national platform for the Republican Party. One of the planks of that platform was to eradicate the twin pillars, twin pillars of barbarism, slavery and polygamy. So, Republicans and one of the first things that the Republican Party does when they come into power during the Civil War is pass legislation, the Moral Anti-Bigamy Act, which which criminalized polygamy in the Western territories, directly targeting the Mormons. And so, Mormons and the Republicans were dire enemies throughout much of the 19th century. Now, that starts to shift around 1890 when the LDS Church publicly uh forfeits polygamy, although it took much longer time for them to really give up polygamy. and they and several church leaders uh started forging a relationship with Republican operatives because they saw that was an alliance that was going to give Utah more uh opportunity. It was going to eventually lead to Utah statehood. And so there were actually some backroom dealings and some pragmatic alliances that that made several LDS leaders um align with Republican operatives in the 1890s and the first decade of the 20th century. The problem was is we had several decades of the LDS Church hating the Republican Party. And when the Mormons created their own political party in Utah known as the People's Party, the People's Party platform closely aligned with the Democrats because like the Democrats, they were all about local autonomy. They were against federal intervention. They did not want the Republican government in their lives. And this was at a time when the Republican government was the activist government that was trying to police the private morals. Um, so in the early 20th century you had many LDS leaders who were now trying to forge this Republican alliance and you had many LDS members who were you know, leaned Democrat. So the state of Utah was a swing state for the first half of the 20th century. Um, it wasn't until the 1960s uh the tumults over the Civil Rights Movement and and social revolts um that that Mormons in Utah moved in a similar direction as whites in the American South toward the Republican Party. And 1964 ends up being the last time that the state of Utah votes for a Democrat uh in for president when they voted LBJ. And ever since then, Utah became pretty ruby-ribbed Republican.

Okay. And um, so it sounds like you're saying then they had these very what we would now identify as conservative uh leanings towards race and stuff like that. And so in the same way that that like you know there was this Southern Strategy for the Republicans, the the LDS would have been targets for that too.

Yeah, very much so. I think they were many were not comfortable with the Civil Rights Movement. Many were not comfortable with the social revolution. Many were not comfortable with the changes going on in gender. Um, and so the the calls for law and order and appeals to the traditional family and a nostalgic yearning for for a bygone age that was lost but never really existed. Those same types of messages that drew a lot of evangelicals in the South are also going to draw white Mormons in the Mountain West.

Okay. Yeah, that makes sense. And I don't know if this is backing up or if this is right around this time. Uh, but you you talk about David O. McKay as the the LDS president. He became president 1951. It seems like that's where some of this shift started to happen towards the Republicans.

David O. McKay is a good embodiment of the shift. Now, he was quite conservative but moderate in his conservatism. But one of the things that he was pretty adamant about was being an anti-communist. And like many other Mormons, they were very rapidly anti-communist during the Cold War era. And so you had this leader of the church in the 1950s and 1960s who represented someone who used to be a bit more moderate and might have swung between the parties, but eventually, but grows more and more conservative. So by the end of the 1960s, he was a committed Republican just like many of the congregants in the LDS tradition.

Okay. So tell me if I'm skipping something important here because I I want to get to this um this thing about adding in the phrase "under God" into the Pledge of Allegiance because that painting that you referenced, that painting is called One Nation Under God. And if you go to the website, it's sort of a um it's it's a talking about this as this wonderful thing that that was accomplished to put um "under God" into into that, you know, Pledge of Allegiance. Uh, how did the Mormons play a role in this? Uh, how does this play into your story that you're that you're telling us here?

Yeah, I don't know if the Mormons were a driving force in creating that, but they were part of the broader cultural milieu. So at people might think that America has always had "One Nation Under God" as a national motto, but it was it actually wasn't until the 1950s and when Dwight Eisenhower was president with this fusion of right-wing evangelicalism and Republican politics uh coming to a culmination of what some scholars call the ceremonial deism of the 1950s where in response to the Cold War where you are trying to make America look different from the Soviets. Well, the Soviets are uh are atheists. They're communists. So, that means the Americans have to be Christian and capitalist. And so, you you have this infusion of religious rhetoric. Uh, Kevin Cruz in his wonderful book, One Nation Under God, about this dynamic of the 1950s and 1960s, he calls this Christian libertarianism, this this merging of of a of a libertarian republican republican ideology with Christian language that just like God in the Bible is very much about allowing people to exercise their agency and act as as free people so too should Americans be able to exercise their ideology. One of the the great cultural expressions of this was Cecil B. DeMille's movie The Ten Commandments, which comes out during this time. Um, the original movie featured Cecil B. DeMille speaking before the audience coming out behind a curtain and saying that this is a modern story of of the people of God versus a state, almost comparing Ramses to an to a socialist control. And so you get this fusion of Christian nationalism with right-wing politics. And Mormons participated in this in part because for the first time that Christian nationalism was not built around particular dogmatic boundaries. Meaning that Mormons used to be excluded from the Christian nationalist imagination because they were not Protestant. They did not fit within, you know, the the traditional evangelical boundaries. But the American Christian nationalism in the wake of World War II was very interdenominational. Scholars call it "Trifaith America," where you had the Catholics, the Protestants, and Jews willing to work together and create this diverse religious image. Dwight Eisenhower, who's president at the time, was famous for saying that for America to operate successfully, it has to have a religious character. And I don't care what that religion is, right? Leaving up that denominational uh identity to groups that can fit under this broader ecumenical umbrella. And so Mormons are able to participate in that discourse for the first time, which was intoxicating, I'm sure, because it allowed them to gain the privileges and the acceptance that they had long wanted. And so that Christian nationalism in the 1950s was one that Mormons embraced with gusto because for the first time they were part of the team.

Okay. And so I might be skipping something here. So if I am, let me know. But I want to eventually get you to today talking about how Christian nationalism plays out today. But in getting there, I'd like you to talk about you mentioned the role of media in in helping to shape this narrative and and so if it makes sense for you to talk about that now in terms of getting us to where we are today.

Yeah, I think that the merging of Mormons with this right-wing Christian nationalism in the 1970s and 1980s was far from assured because unlike the Christian nationalism of the 1950s, which was often much more ecumenical and broad-minded and people from both political parties could largely take part in it. The 1970s and 1980s had a bit more of a rough edge. it was a bit more partisan and this is actually during a time when many evangelicals are having a new found concern over cults. I mean, this is the the time of of Jim Jones and and you know, eventually moving into like the Branch Davidians in Waco, where there's a fear of there are some groups that claim to be Christian but really aren't. Uh, and so there was this prominent anti-Mormon film, The God Makers, which I uh which which was quite crucial in this creation of this counter-cult movement among the evangelicals. Um, but Mormons were able to overcome those obstacles in the 1970s and 1980s because they learned how to package their faith and their participation in ways that fit this new right uh religious right identity. So, for instance, media was one of the ways they did that because they pushed a big media blitz in the 1970s and 1980s of having these commercials or inserts in the into the the uh into national magazines and newspapers that emphasized what they had in common, which was the family. Many of your listeners might remember these commercials of "Family. Isn't it About Time?"

Yeah, I remember all this. Yeah, those were the the Mormon depictions of finding a commonality of the family at the very moment when the family became this divisive partisan tool. I mean, the in the wake of Roe v. Wade with the rising women's liberation movement and then of course when you get into same-sex marriage and and homosexuality and issues that Mormons are embracing this image, this symbol uh this idol for the religious right in ways that the religious right were like, actually, the Mormons might be allies. And so I think there was actually a pretty poignant moment when in the early 1980s um Jerry Falwell and his Christian Broadcasting Network was was asked to show The God Makers and these other counter-cult things. And he's and he responds, "No, I don't want to promote The God Makers because the Mormons are people we might be able to work with and I don't want to offend them." Um, and so I think the the Mormons were able to to successfully use media to defang the counter-cult movement and they were also able to prove that they were workable and usable and successful allies in these new culture wars that the religious right was adopting.

Okay. So this gets us up towards today then. Um, I'm very curious just how you would describe what Christian nationalism looks like among Mormons today. And, and I'll ask it in this way. What what might be different between, you know, based on what you know about, you know, say the right-wing evangelical Christian nationalist movement versus what would be the goals? Are they would they be the same? Would they be different? Uh, what does that look like?

It's a good question. Um, I would say that if you looked at the history of Mormon Christian nationalism over the last four decades, so since, you know, the rise of the religious right, the key theme of that story is the dissolution of the difference between Mormon Christian nationalism and evangelical Christian nationalism. I think there used to be a particular strain of Mormon Christian nationalism in which Mormons were a bit more unique. It was a much more liberal-minded. it was a much more particular Christian nationalism that recognized um, you know, a more gregarious nature to opponents um and also being kinder on some topics like being multi-racial. Mormons had long been uh supporters and defenders of immigration, for instance. Mhm. But over the last decade, especially with the rise of the MAGA movement, much of Mormon Christian nationalism has become synonymous with evangelical Christian nationalism. It's much more anti-immigrant. It's much more exclusionary. It's much more partisan. Um, now, that's not unanimous among many Mormons. There there are some Mormons who are trying to maintain, you know, what used to be called the Utah way of politics. Um, but the people who symbolize that, like Mitt Romney, no longer really have a place within the religious right, and they're cast aside in favor of people like Senator Mike Lee, who is much more indicative of the much more partisan and rugged uh, Christian nationalism that is willing to go on the attack. Um, I think there are some elements of Mormon Christian nationalism that that that crop up. I mean, Mormon scripture, Joseph Smith's revelation referred to the founding fathers being inspired and the constitution being a divine document. Uh, what that particular means has changed over the years, but you still have those identities uh cropping up. You have some prominent Mormon authors like Tim Ballard, who was known for his Operation Underground Railroad uh and for the movie that came out based on him a couple years ago uh about, you know, confronting uh child slavery in the world. Um, where he wrote a series of books where he basically baptized prominent American figures like George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, saying that they were secretly influenced uh whether it be in the George Washington hypothesis book or the Lincoln hypothesis book. But in general, even those expressions of of a distinctive Mormon Christian nationalism are still largely an an appendage to evangelical Christian nationalism because those figures are not just turned Mormon, but they're turned partisan Republicans.

Okay. Um, and so I think in large part, you even see recently the radicalization of Utah's Republican Party. Uh, that they are uh acting like you might find the Republican Party in Alabama and Florida. And so I think there used to be some distinctive elements of Mormon Christian nationalism, but those are largely disappearing with the rise of or the magnification of the religious right.

So, um, so let me try out a thesis on you then and tell me tell me if this if this is, you know, what you think about this. Um, it sounds like what you're saying is that in the same way that I would say, uh, evangelical Christianity, uh, as it relates to Christian nationalism is not theological, it's tribal, it's it's cultural. Would you say that's pretty much what you're dealing with then, too?

I think it's definitely becoming that way. One of uh one of I think one of the best books in recent years, I'm sure you and many of your your listeners know is Christian Hof's Dumise Jesus and John Wayne. And I think her the the primary argument in that book um about evangelicals is also true about Mormons, which is when when so many evangelicals came out and supported Donald Trump in 2016, it surprised a lot of people because they're like, "Donald Trump does not fit the theological and moral foundations of what we believe evangelicalism is." But what uh Hof argues in Jesus and John Wayne is actually that's based on a fraudulent understanding of what evangelicals has evangelicalism has come to be. It's not a set of beliefs and morals. It's a set of cultural practices. It's it's patriarchy. It's the tribalism that you mentioned. And I think for Mormons that's largely the case as well. And I think one of the most uh persuasive evidence of this recently was during COVID uh in 2020, 2021, the LDS Church, the institution headquartered in Salt Lake City, was very concerned with, you know, the spread of the virus and so they they put out a statement saying that members of the faith should go out and get vaccinated and you should also wear masks in church. Now, that's a prophetic directive from church leaders. And if anything, Latter-day Saints are typically known for being lockstep followers of those in charge. And yet, for many in the church, that council conflicted with their tribal identity. They're like, "Well, I'm learning from, you know, Fox News or or my right-wing sources or Joe Rogan that these vaccines aren't trustworthy and masks aren't working." And so, they didn't do it. And so the LDS Church in a very rare moment of acknowledging that they don't have control over the culture had to issue more statements saying, no, we really mean it, guys, this is something we want you to do, and still Latter-day Saints did not. And I think that showed that there are some elements of the LDS Church who are taking their cues from their cultural affiliation rather than their religious tradition or their ecclesiastical leaders.

Okay. So, so I'll ask this. Um, in, you know, in the article you talked, like I mentioned before, early in the 20th century, uh, the lay people in the LDS were more culturally conservative, which was at that time aligned with the Democratic Party and the leadership was more Republican. Is there still that is there a reverse or is there the same sort of alignment now between the leadership and the and the people or are they pretty aligned at this point?

Yeah, it's a good question. Um, I mean, the basic answer is we don't know where a lot of the LDS leadership fit on the political spectrum. Unlike LDS leaders a century ago who made their political opinions well-known. Now church leaders are quite sincere in their pushing that they want to appear politically neutral and they don't want to speak out on political issues. There are some prominent figures who uh, you know, have spoken out on tribalism um and trying to uh recognize the rule of law. Um, but typically it's shades of conservatism rather than a true political uh divide. I mean, it has gotten to such a point to where a couple decades ago, the LDS Church sent one of their authorities, Marlon Jensen, who is who was an LDS Seventy, which was an ecclesiastical step below the apostles, to go do an interview with the New York Times, to say you can still be a Mormon and and Democrat. That's okay because the common assumption is that everyone is Republican. But I do think it's noteworthy that they didn't send an apostle or someone in the LDS First Presidency to do that because there might not have been a a Democrat willing to speak out on that. So I I think there there might be a divide. I I imagine that many in the LDS church uh are along on a spectrum of conservatism. I don't think you have many progressives in LDS leadership. Um, but it it's all speculation on on where they fall and the distance they might have from the the laity. Although I will note that I think by sheer temperament and background, many in LDS leadership are traditionalists, meaning that they like, you know, traditions and institutions and they want to trust experts. Um, where one of that's goes against the grain for much of right-wing populist culture now. So that might be a point of division, but it's one of probably few.

Yeah. Yeah. And I I'm curious, uh, you know, I cite quite often the statistic, people on my channel probably get tired of hearing it from me, that around 80% of white evangelicals voted for Donald Trump uh, in all three elections and even in the primaries, which is, you know, something that's important for people to remember. And, uh, I don't know the statistics for the LDS, but I would guess it might even be higher than that. So it's it's very similar.

So in 2016, the figures were a lot lower because Evan McMullin, who ran an independent campaign, he was Mormon and he was based out of Utah. And so he actually took a lot of the Mormon votes. So I don't remember the numbers specifically, but I think the the surveys from 2016 were around 61% of Mormons voted for Trump. But in 2020 and 2024, when that Evan McMullin option wasn't there, that number jumped up to I think around 71% uh uh 70 to 80, depending on the polls. So Mormons were as reliable Trump voters more than any other group save white evangelicals.

Okay. Yeah. And and so I'm going to I'm going to bring us towards a close here um by asking you know some sort of more practical things about like right now. Uh, I'm curious, you know, so you mentioned Evan McMullin and uh, I what I want to ask you about is are there dissenters in the ranks? Are there known dissent? Like I would say I'm a dissenter from the the broader 80% of white evangelicals. Are there dissenters? Is Evan McMullen one of them? And more specifically, what would they be saying? What are the dissenters saying?

Yeah, let me give perhaps the best example of these dissenters because Mormonism has long had a history of more diversity than in in background and ideas and, you know, common

Perception allows. Mhm. Perhaps the best example of the dissenters from the MAGA movement within Mormonism is a wonderful organization known as Mormon Women for Ethical Government, um, MWeG. And they, they, uh, they're based in Utah, but they have chapters in many states throughout the nation. And they put out statements, they work with legislators, and they try to find a more compassionate way to politics. And they've spoken out on the radicalism and extremism of the Republican party. So I think the Mormon Women for Ethical Government is one example of these dissenters.

You have others like Mitt Romney, who was, you know, the Utah senator and before that the GOP presidential nominee, who has spoken out against radical MAGAism. But I think it's noteworthy that he realized he probably couldn't be reelected in Utah, which is why he chose not to run for a second term. And you have other people who tried to embody this middle way of politics, like Spencer Cox, the governor of Utah, who has largely given in to MAGA rhetoric and, and as because they recognize that you can't function in today's Republican party without kissing the ring. Um, and so I think there are some dissenters, but they're remarkably few.

Um, a couple years, I think it was a 2022 electoral, uh, congressional group coming in, that was the first time that there was not a Mormon Democrat in the US Congress. That often, most of, of course, Mormon congressmen at the national level are Republicans, but there had always been a few who were Democrats. And it was either 2020 or 2022 that was the first time there was not a Mormon Democrat in quite a while, which shows that those dissenting voices are becoming more and more marginal within the LDS tradition. Yeah.

Well, this is, this has been fascinating. I just want to give you a couple minutes here to, uh, first of all, tell me anything I should have asked you. But then secondly, uh, I'd like you to just, uh, talk about, you know, your books, uh, or anything if there's a certain book that you would want to direct my listeners to who aren't experts on all of this, uh, sort of an introduction. So, well, thanks. I really appreciate that.

Well, we've mentioned before, I wrote a book called Kingdom of Nauvoo: The Rise and Fall of Religious Empire and the American Frontier. That's been out for for a few years, and that talks about a particular story as an example of democratic collapse in American history. The book over my shoulder, uh, is American Zion: A New History of Mormonism. That's been out for about 18 months now. Uh, it's just out in paperback, too. So there, there's a cheaper copy out. If you're wanting a general introduction to the Mormon tradition, I hope this book can serve that purpose.

Um, then you, you're very kind to mention my YouTube channel, Professor Benjamin Park. I try to put out, uh, three videos a week. On Monday, I Mondays I put out videos that are a, um, a deep dive on a particular historical subject. On Wednesdays, I do videos that are connecting the past to the present, providing some context to something that's in the news or the media or television, movies. And then on Fridays, I try to peel back the curtain on historical work to provide background and sources so that people can become experts on these topics that usually, you know, allow other overspecialized nerds to do.

Um, and so my books and articles are my attempt to enter this, uh, discourse, and I would love to have people join me on that, uh, road to discovery. Well, I really appreciate you sharing that knowledge with us here and coming on, coming on to here. And this has just been wonderful to hear to hear you talk about these things, to get to know you a little bit. Dr. Benjamin Park, I just thank you so much for being here. It's been a great privilege. Thank you. Yeah. And thank you everybody for listening.