As part of the upcoming @CRightcast project, I've been spending some time breaking down the building blocks of the fundamentalist ideology I was part of for many years. It's tough because — like many complex systems — the important themes are easily obscured by doctrinal details.

That isn't to say that specific doctrines aren't important. But the "religious right" is a messy conglomeration of groups that, in many situations, insist the other members are heretics. For folks outside the culture, it feel like an extended game of "No True Scotsman."

For me, understanding what I was a part of and unpacking its impact on how I saw the world required stepping back from the specific points of theology and doctrine, and looking at the patterns they formed; the ways of seeing, understanding, and responding.

That helped me see and start to unpack abusive patterns that existed not only in Christian fundamentalism, but in other communities I encountered that shared similar foci without the religious component.

Three of the strongest threads were Certainty, Purity, and Legitimacy. The seemingly-sudden twist of this past decade — seemingly "average" Christian groups embracing an authoritarian leader who spat on their doctrines and stated values — was disappointing but not surprising.

…Because authoritarian movements are obsessed with many of the same themes, even if the themes take different shapes in non-religious contexts. The underlying themes, as it turns out, are a lot more important to many adherents than the doctrines they insist are the bedrock.

For me, "Certainty" was a profound one. By that, I don't mean that fundamentalists or authoritarians are necessarily *certain of themselves* — rather, that there is an obsession with the one's own experience of certainty.

My break with the practice of "evangelism" and "apologetics" came when I realized that my core motivation was not helping others, but salving my need for certainty by convincing others — or at least winning arguments with them.

It takes other forms, too. External order (personal discipline, rigid gender roles, social conformance, etc) soothes the uncertain soul; explicit hierarchies of authority remove the uncertainty of personal agency; and Providential narratives assure that The Future Is Known.

Loads of seemingly unrelated threads in fundamentalist doctrine trace their way back to that providential theme: End Times eschatology and apocalyptic beliefs may sound scary, but they provide a fixed, certain outcome in an uncertain world.

They provide reassurance that no matter what happens, "the end of the story has already been written," and the good and righteous will ultimately triumph; that each of us has a role in the story, a purpose that matters even if it is not immediately apparent.

The thread of "Purity" is related, but has its own unique twists. It's not simply about sexuality — rather it's about the idea of being Wholly What One Should Be. Kierkegaard doesn't get a lot of traction in fundie circles, but Purity Of Heart Is To Will One Thing does resonate.

In protestant religious fundamentalism in particular, this idea of purity is tangled up in a catch-22; without purity we're doomed, but our corrupt and fallen nature means we will always fall short. Even the smallest compromise taints everything.

God is the actor that breaks that cycle, purifying us. We are indebted totally and utterly, and can never repay it. More importantly, this way of understanding makes "Purity," "Righteousness," "Goodness," a state of being rather than an assessment of intention, action, or impact.

Some branches of Christian theology make this explicit: one of the principles of "hyper-calvinism" is that humans are literally incapable of doing good things, because they are not *spiritually good* until God purifies them.

The natural corollary: even "good" acts are evil when done by someone who is not in a state of existential or spiritual purity. By the same token, even seemingly monstrous acts are forgivable (indeed, already forgiven, perhaps even good) if done by someone who is In The Right.

In addition to the ideas of totalizing absolutes, and deep unworthiness, the importance of "separateness" springs naturally from this view of purity. If I'm impure, I'm doomed — but impurity can be subtle, even invisible. Isolation and separation is the safest route.

For a small community of like-minded people, that can mean self-isolation. If those people are numerous and influential, though, "impurity dooms us, and must be identified and isolated" can take obvious and horrifying forms. It finds easy scapegoats.

The final foundational theme is Legitimacy — the state of being normal, accepted, *recognized* as proper and good. It isn't unrelated to the themes of certainty and purity; in many ways this need for legitimacy is a natural outcome of those fixations.

The fixation on purity and its totalizing nature, the horror at half-measures and uncertainty… leads naturally to a need for *exclusive* legitimacy. It isn't enough to be seen as normal; others must be *abnormal*. It's not enough to be accepted; others must *not be*.

Years ago, @SlacktivistFred coined the shorthand "RTCs" to describe American fundamentalists. It was short for "Real True Christians" emphasizing that their unifying belief was not a particular doctrine, rather the conviction that they were Real Believers while others were not.

I've said many times that fundamentalism's deepest horror isn't atheism, or satanism, or any oppositional force: it's other strains of the same faith, alternative ways of believing that threaten the need for Exclusive Legitimacy.

Projection naturally compliments this hunger for legitimacy. "It's not my opinion, it's God's word" is not simply a statement of belief. It shifts responsibility for that belief to a higher, unassailable authority. It's a denial of one's own potentially-imperfect perspective.

The impulse to isolation and totalizing purification is projected outward as well — "The Secular World" is not simply a culture with different values but an inherent assault on the purity and legitimacy of those who are Good. The existence of the Impure is an assault on The Pure.

None of these themes is one specific doctrine; different and contradictory beliefs fan fill these conceptual roles in different sects. And none are exclusive to religious belief; coincidentally many are also defining characteristics of political authoritarianism and fascism.

After decades of experience and study, I've come to the conclusion that the deeply intertwingled relationship between the religious and political right in America is a story of complimentary pathologies. A relationship in which each partner stokes the others' worst tendencies.

It's one of the reasons I'm… perhaps not *excited*, but certainly thankful for the opportunity to collaborate with @kristinrawls on this project. She's approached these issues as a journalist for years, and brings rigor and context that has been eye-opening for me.

Her deep dive into the role of Norman Vincent Peale and his influence is a great example; condemned on theological grounds by many fundamentalists, Peale's horror at "negative thinking" still mirrors the theme of totalizing purity, and contributes to "the right" in key ways.

Using the podcast to zoom in on the specifics — events, movements, personalities, and cultural expressions — that embody the movement… Then contextualizing them in the shift to open authoritarianism our country's experiencing.

@JeffSharlet's work is similar in that regard (this thread https://twitter.com/JeffSharlet/status/1322963941878833158 is a perfect example). I hope @CRightcast can contribute, helping journalists (and everyone) recognize its themes, cues, and vocabulary in current events and popular culture.