EXCERPT: Book shows only Christian principles guiding governance can save the West
An Excerpt from Christ or Collapse: The Case Against Godless Government by prof David Millard Haskell.
This is an excerpt from David Millard Haskell’s new book, Christ or Collapse: The Case Against Godless Government, which argues that the norms and values of Christianity must once again guide public life, a project he describes as a return to Traditional Conservatism. A professor and social scientist, the book expands on Haskell’s previous scholarship proving progressive claims are scientifically invalid and lead to harm while conservative norms and values rooted in Christianity lead to unmatched flourishing. Out just this week, Christ or Collapse is already ranked #1 in the categories of philosophy and religion and comparative government. Publisher College Press has provided Juno News with an excerpt from Chapter 1.
David Millard Haskell is a social scientist and cultural commentator. For over two decades, he has served as a professor at Wilfrid Laurier University.
I’m for progress. I want to state that from the outset because throughout this book I’ll be critiquing progressives. I’ll also critique classical liberals and libertarians, though not as harshly, since their downfall is more about what they fail to do rather than what they actively do. Regarding my critique of progressives, it shouldn’t be confused with a dislike for progress. As I said, I’m for progress.
Today’s progressives—sometimes called the Left, liberals (distinct from classical liberals), or simply the “woke”—are not for progress. Their collective ideas and actions, often described as cultural Marxism, critical social justice, or “wokeism,” revert us to humanity’s darkest days. They infect society and make it sick. Regardless of the name given to the disease, you can recognize its symptoms as they manifest in our North American schools, government organizations, and businesses.
For instance, under progressivism one observes the elevation, “sanctification,” or “sacralization”[1] of cultures, identities, and values not rooted in the historical ethos of the majority population—White, heterosexual, Christians. Instead, elements associated with the majority, especially norms and values stemming from Christian tradition, are often demonized.
Another symptom of this disease is the rationalization and valorization of discrimination. Specifically, the public narrative insists that discrimination is a good thing if applied against the majority population. Of course, this narrative is embedded in a larger discourse surrounding equity (legislating preferred outcomes) replacing the “outdated” notion of equality (legislating fair opportunities).
As progressive ideals triumph, real cultural advances are reversed. Paradoxically, progressives are not actually for progress. I realize that is confusing, and they want to create confusion; confusion helps them get what they want. As you will see, almost every term used by today’s cultural and political Left is a linguistic lie: at first glance, it suggests something positive and beautiful, but its true meaning and application are something ugly. For example, in Leftist speak, anti-racism is actually about being racist to Whites, being pro-choice is about negating all choice for a baby in the womb, and celebrating LGBT means punishing anyone who favors traditional marriage or questions why the public square is overrun by Pride flags.
In the real world (not the world that the Left is trying to pretend into existence) progress means achieving gradual improvement. Related to people, this gradual improvement is witnessed at the level of society and at the level of the individual. Overall, things get better. We know what real progress looks like. For generations, the West set the standard for personal freedom, equality before the law, community building, public civility, and economic opportunity. And within the West, the United States and Canada stood as the clearest and most successful embodiments of those achievements.
From their founding onward, both nations advanced steadily, expanding liberty and prosperity decade by decade. Then progress in those core areas stalled. The pattern of decline tracks directly with the rise of progressives in government, cultural institutions, and academia.
Beginning after World War II—accelerating sharply in the 1960s—harmful progressive ideas, especially regarding morality, gained influence across society (explained further in Chapter 6). Like termites weakening floor joists, the rot is mostly unseen until the collapse. Now, we see clear signs of our society’s ethical and civil collapse. Compared to our parents and grandparents, we see deterioration, not improvement, in personal freedoms, equality before the law, community building, public civility, and economic opportunity.
An Insufficient Worldview
I’ll concede that there has been some good news of late. In both the U.S. and Canada, right-leaning politicians proclaiming anti-woke rhetoric have found some limited favor with the populace.[2] In the U.S. in particular, there seems to be a growing, cautious rejection of certain aspects of progressive ideology.
However, there remains significant cause for alarm. These positive actions are not sufficiently supported by a sustaining philosophy or comprehensive worldview. Specifically, the statements of the key politicians leading this charge suspiciously lack specifics or conviction on what should replace woke ideology and culture.[3]
Simply put, they are clear about abandoning the path to woke destruction, but their map forward has very few lines drawn on it.
Where any lines appear on their map forward—indicating a guiding philosophy—they are usually faint and indirect: a loose libertarianism that tells the state to stand back, or narrow pathways defined almost entirely by economic and financial priorities. There are no specific roads to cultural renewal. This is a problem because a flourishing society does not arise simply because government regulation declines. High employment, low inflation, and GDP growth are necessary but not sufficient for the rebuilding and permanence of a successful nation.
A society abounding in civility, personal freedoms, equality before the law, community building, and economic prosperity tempered with integrity rests on a very specific moral foundation. Just as a society built on progressive ideals becomes sick and declines, a particular moral foundation is the starting point from which a healthy, flourishing society arises. In every case, the dominant morality of a people—what they deem right or wrong; good or evil—will be reflected in their culture and enacted in their laws.
It’s said that politics is downstream from culture, but culture is downstream from the morality of the majority. Promote the wrong moral direction—or do nothing and leave it to chance—and society is eventually lost.
It often seems the case that the elite of our conservative leaders believe that doing nothing is itself a meaningful action. For all their talk of hating political correctness, most of our elite political champions on the Right treat public discussion of moral direction as taboo and regard moral non-intervention as though it were a principled stand.
Be honest: how often do you hear leaders in the upper echelons of North American conservative parties directly addressing pornography, prostitution, abortion, or the excesses of the homosexual agenda? For the good of our nations, our leaders should be discussing these issues—and they don’t.
When standing before their home crowd, they love to trumpet what they’ll make more free—more free speech and more free markets. However, when it comes to any talk of what should be less free—activities clearly at odds with the West’s historical moral values, yet where public consensus is most strongly anti-conservative—the best they can muster is a lukewarm, “Well, that’s for the individual to decide.” And that’s the best-case scenario.
More often than not, ignorant of, unmoored from, or hostile to a Christian foundation, they renounce true conservative norms and values and become political eunuchs, and most perverse of all, they parrot the talking points of liberals. They add insult to injury by condemning and censoring political allies who dare to take a traditional stand rooted in that faith, casting them as out of touch with the times or intolerant of “diversity.”[4]
In short, on core moral issues our “leaders” on the Right can’t or won’t speak, leaving the Left to define and shape them in the public square. Thus, the map they provide offers no clear route to lasting cultural and political renewal. These current leaders say little about how to truly progress.
In his book Mere Christianity, published in 1952, Oxford University professor and philosopher C.S. Lewis seems prophetically inspired. In his comments on “progress,” he provides the antidote to the liberal sickness that currently infects our culture. He writes:
If you are on the wrong road, progress means doing an about turn and walking back to the right road and in that case the man who turns back soonest is the most progressive man... And I think if you look at the present state of the world it’s pretty plain that humanity has been making some big mistake. We’re on the wrong road. And if that is so, we must go back. Going back is the quickest way on.[5]
Following the prophetic words of C.S. Lewis, this book calls on citizens of the West, especially those in North America, to commit to true progress. We must commit ourselves to “going back,” to “doing an about-turn and walking back to the right road.”
“The right road” to which we need to collectively return is primarily a moral path, for which a particular worldview serves as a compass. It’s a path of belief and behavior that, when followed, brings peace, prosperity, and maximum, sustainable liberty. I agree with C.S. Lewis: That right road, that moral path, is the values and customs of the Christian faith.
The purpose of this book is to convince readers that cultural renewal—indeed, societal survival—depends on making the affairs of state and legal frameworks reflective Christian norms and values. For those squirming uncomfortably and murmuring that I’m advocating for a theocracy, you’re wrong. Before delving into specifics, let me clarify: This book champions Traditional Conservatism as a distinct political philosophy, separate from Christianity as a religious system. Though related, they are not identical. To accept the premise of Traditional Conservatism—that Christian norms and values must guide governance—one need not follow Jesus. But one must follow the evidence.
Endnote for Chapter 1 Excerpt
1. For example, Eric Kaufmann, The Third Awokening: A 12-Point Plan for Rolling Back Progressive Extremism (New York: Bombardier Books, 2024).
2. Tristan Hopper, “Young Canadians Now More Politically Conservative than Their Elders,” National Post, October 7, 2024, https://nationalpost.com/ opinion/young-canadians-now-more-politically-conservative-than-their-elders.
3. Currently, Canada’s most conservative provincial leader is Alberta Premier Danielle Smith. Over the course of her career, she has purposely distanced herself from Christian social values. See Brent Graveland, “Wildrose Leader Tells Candidate Forum She’s Pro-Choice and Supports Gay Rights,” The Canadian Press, April 13, 2012, Global News, https://globalnews.ca/news/232469/wildrose-leader tells-candidate-forum-shes-pro-choice-and-supports-gay-rights-3/.
4. For example, J. P. Tasker, “Pierre Poilievre Disagrees with Conservative MP Who Wants to Vote against Same-Sex Marriage,” CBC News, June 3, 2024, https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/poilievre-same-sex-marriage abortion-1.7222881.
5. C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity (New York: HarperCollins, 2001; originally published 1952), 28.