What do you think?
Rate this book
Americanism: The Fourth Great Western Religion
What does it mean to “believe” in America? Why do we always speak of our country as having a mission or purpose that is higher than other nations?
Modern liberals have invested a great deal in the notion that America was founded as a secular state, with religion relegated to the private sphere. David Gelernter argues that America is not secular at all, but a powerful religious idea—indeed, a religion in its own right.
Gelernter argues that what we have come to call “Americanism” is in fact a secular version of Zionism. Not the Zionism of the ancient Hebrews, but that of the Puritan founders who saw themselves as the new children of Israel, creating a new Jerusalem in a new world. Their faith-based ideals of liberty, equality, and democratic governance had a greater influence on the nation’s founders than the Enlightenment.
Gelernter traces the development of the American religion from its roots in the Puritan Zionism of seventeenth-century New England to the idealistic fighting faith it has become, a militant creed dedicated to spreading freedom around the world. The central figures in this process were Abraham Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, and Woodrow Wilson, who presided over the secularization of the American Zionist idea into the form we now know as Americanism.
If America is a religion, it is a religion without a god, and it is a global religion. People who believe in America live all over the world. Its adherents have included oppressed and freedom-loving peoples everywhere—from the patriots of the Greek and Hungarian revolutions to the martyred Chinese dissidents of Tiananmen Square.
Gelernter also shows that anti-Americanism, particularly the virulent kind that is found today in Europe, is a reaction against this religious conception of America on the part of those who adhere to a rival religion of pacifism and appeasement.
A startlingly original argument about the religious meaning of America and why it is loved—and hated—with so much passion at home and abroad.
Modern liberals have invested a great deal in the notion that America was founded as a secular state, with religion relegated to the private sphere. David Gelernter argues that America is not secular at all, but a powerful religious idea—indeed, a religion in its own right.
Gelernter argues that what we have come to call “Americanism” is in fact a secular version of Zionism. Not the Zionism of the ancient Hebrews, but that of the Puritan founders who saw themselves as the new children of Israel, creating a new Jerusalem in a new world. Their faith-based ideals of liberty, equality, and democratic governance had a greater influence on the nation’s founders than the Enlightenment.
Gelernter traces the development of the American religion from its roots in the Puritan Zionism of seventeenth-century New England to the idealistic fighting faith it has become, a militant creed dedicated to spreading freedom around the world. The central figures in this process were Abraham Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, and Woodrow Wilson, who presided over the secularization of the American Zionist idea into the form we now know as Americanism.
If America is a religion, it is a religion without a god, and it is a global religion. People who believe in America live all over the world. Its adherents have included oppressed and freedom-loving peoples everywhere—from the patriots of the Greek and Hungarian revolutions to the martyred Chinese dissidents of Tiananmen Square.
Gelernter also shows that anti-Americanism, particularly the virulent kind that is found today in Europe, is a reaction against this religious conception of America on the part of those who adhere to a rival religion of pacifism and appeasement.
A startlingly original argument about the religious meaning of America and why it is loved—and hated—with so much passion at home and abroad.
240 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 2007
8 people are currently reading
146 people want to read
About the author
David Gelernter
33 books65 followersLibrarian Note: There is more than one author by this name in the Goodreads database.
David Hillel Gelernter (born March 5, 1955) is an artist, writer, and professor of computer science at Yale University. He is a former national fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and senior fellow in Jewish thought at the Shalem Center, and sat on the National Endowment for the Arts. He publishes widely; his work has appeared in the Wall Street Journal, New York Post, LA Times, Weekly Standard, Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, and elsewhere. His paintings have been exhibited in New Haven and Manhattan.
He is known for contributions to parallel computation and for books on topics including computed worlds ("Mirror Worlds"), and what he sees as the destructive influence of liberal academia on American society, expressed most recently in his book America-Lite: How Imperial Academia Dismantled Our Culture (and Ushered in the Obamacrats).
In 1993 he was sent a mail bomb in the post by Ted Kaczynski, known as the Unabomber, which almost killed him and left him with some permanent disabilities: he lost the use of his right hand and his right eye was permanently damaged.
(From Wikipedia)
David Hillel Gelernter (born March 5, 1955) is an artist, writer, and professor of computer science at Yale University. He is a former national fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and senior fellow in Jewish thought at the Shalem Center, and sat on the National Endowment for the Arts. He publishes widely; his work has appeared in the Wall Street Journal, New York Post, LA Times, Weekly Standard, Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, and elsewhere. His paintings have been exhibited in New Haven and Manhattan.
He is known for contributions to parallel computation and for books on topics including computed worlds ("Mirror Worlds"), and what he sees as the destructive influence of liberal academia on American society, expressed most recently in his book America-Lite: How Imperial Academia Dismantled Our Culture (and Ushered in the Obamacrats).
In 1993 he was sent a mail bomb in the post by Ted Kaczynski, known as the Unabomber, which almost killed him and left him with some permanent disabilities: he lost the use of his right hand and his right eye was permanently damaged.
(From Wikipedia)
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 11 of 11 reviews
December 24, 2016
This bizarre book acutely, perceptively traces the Puritan lineage of what the author describes as Americanism, from the founders up through Abraham Lincoln and Woodrow Wilson, Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush. In that journey, Puritanism is transmogrified into Americanism, or 'American Zionism', which is a new biblical religion.
Americanism is Christian, but with a particular emphasis on the Old Testament and ancient Israel, its adherents seeing in America a new Israel, a new chosen people.
Standing athwart the secularist framing of America's history, Gelernter shouts 'stop!' America's origins were deeply religious, Puritan more specifically, and that seed remains--if in an altered form--today. The founders advocated freedom of religion, not indifference to it, and the framing that casts them as avid, intentional secularists is misleading.
Gelernter's analysis of America's traditions of liberty, equality, and democracy, as well as the desire to spread this American Creed to the world, being deeply rooted in its Puritan founding is profound and illuminating. As is his persistent insistence that this American religion is a neo-Judaizing form of Christianity (applying Scriptures to America that ought to apply to the Church.) What is strange is his belief that this is a good thing. And not only believing that, but exalting this American Zionism in the most lofty tones.
While, to someone of a reactionary (and Orthodox) bent (like myself), his accurate analysis should not inspire praise but utter horror. Noting the religious, biblical character of the founders, and other crucial persons in American history like Lincoln, is all well and good, but Puritanism with its "zeal not according to knowledge" is a profoundly dangerous force. And the judaizing which Gelernter (himself a Jew) praises so highly is literally the first Christian heresy, one that arises during the timeframe of events covered in the New Testament. That these forces formed the basis of the nation is telling, and not something to be celebrated unequivocally (if at all).
Also, while Gelernter perceptively traces the transformation of Puritanism into Unitarianism, and later Americanism, he eventually loses the plot. He casts contemporary secularists and leftists as having abandoned this Puritan-based Americanism of the founders, Lincoln, Wilson etc., but that is not exactly correct. Americanism always had the seeds of Universalism within it, and it has since transformed into this. The desire to spread the American Creed to the globe, which he recognizes, especially with Woodrow Wilson, is the basis of this Universalism. This is the progressivism, the secularism, that Gelernter sees as simply antithetical to Americanism, rather than a new mutation of it.
But that's precisely what it is. As Puritanism became, eventually, post-Puritan, so too did Americanism become post-Americanist in its globalist, universalist incarnation.
Near the end of the book (published in 2007) Gelernter writes presciently that "the next great American religious revival will start, my guess is, on college campuses--and it will start fairly soon. The need is great." And indeed it has! The fervor with which campus SJWs are, in a manner of speaking, excommunicating heretics, burning witches, and demanding fidelity to a set of dogmas is quite religious indeed. They also act in the name of the same gods of the Puritan-American Creed: liberty (or liberation), equality, and democracy (though one might add 'progress'). And they still have a sacred belief in a chosen people, in a new Israel, but it's not Americans. It's the global oppressed.
When Americanism, with its liberal Creed, ultimately begins to look eerily like Marxism, reactionaries are not surprised in the least. Neocons like Gelernter, on the other hand, are poised to miss the deep continuity between the Americanism they love and the post-Americanism they think they hate.
Americanism is Christian, but with a particular emphasis on the Old Testament and ancient Israel, its adherents seeing in America a new Israel, a new chosen people.
Standing athwart the secularist framing of America's history, Gelernter shouts 'stop!' America's origins were deeply religious, Puritan more specifically, and that seed remains--if in an altered form--today. The founders advocated freedom of religion, not indifference to it, and the framing that casts them as avid, intentional secularists is misleading.
Gelernter's analysis of America's traditions of liberty, equality, and democracy, as well as the desire to spread this American Creed to the world, being deeply rooted in its Puritan founding is profound and illuminating. As is his persistent insistence that this American religion is a neo-Judaizing form of Christianity (applying Scriptures to America that ought to apply to the Church.) What is strange is his belief that this is a good thing. And not only believing that, but exalting this American Zionism in the most lofty tones.
While, to someone of a reactionary (and Orthodox) bent (like myself), his accurate analysis should not inspire praise but utter horror. Noting the religious, biblical character of the founders, and other crucial persons in American history like Lincoln, is all well and good, but Puritanism with its "zeal not according to knowledge" is a profoundly dangerous force. And the judaizing which Gelernter (himself a Jew) praises so highly is literally the first Christian heresy, one that arises during the timeframe of events covered in the New Testament. That these forces formed the basis of the nation is telling, and not something to be celebrated unequivocally (if at all).
Also, while Gelernter perceptively traces the transformation of Puritanism into Unitarianism, and later Americanism, he eventually loses the plot. He casts contemporary secularists and leftists as having abandoned this Puritan-based Americanism of the founders, Lincoln, Wilson etc., but that is not exactly correct. Americanism always had the seeds of Universalism within it, and it has since transformed into this. The desire to spread the American Creed to the globe, which he recognizes, especially with Woodrow Wilson, is the basis of this Universalism. This is the progressivism, the secularism, that Gelernter sees as simply antithetical to Americanism, rather than a new mutation of it.
But that's precisely what it is. As Puritanism became, eventually, post-Puritan, so too did Americanism become post-Americanist in its globalist, universalist incarnation.
Near the end of the book (published in 2007) Gelernter writes presciently that "the next great American religious revival will start, my guess is, on college campuses--and it will start fairly soon. The need is great." And indeed it has! The fervor with which campus SJWs are, in a manner of speaking, excommunicating heretics, burning witches, and demanding fidelity to a set of dogmas is quite religious indeed. They also act in the name of the same gods of the Puritan-American Creed: liberty (or liberation), equality, and democracy (though one might add 'progress'). And they still have a sacred belief in a chosen people, in a new Israel, but it's not Americans. It's the global oppressed.
When Americanism, with its liberal Creed, ultimately begins to look eerily like Marxism, reactionaries are not surprised in the least. Neocons like Gelernter, on the other hand, are poised to miss the deep continuity between the Americanism they love and the post-Americanism they think they hate.
August 9, 2011
This book speaks the truth about the fact that America should be thought of as a religion first and foremost. The problem with the book is that it is written from the perspective of a devout neoconservative Americanist who feels at liberty to browbeat the reader into worshiping as he does. I couldn't finish this book, because despite the author's obvious intelligence, it was full of willfully ignorant calls to blind faith. In short, the author is correct in his basic assumptions, but he is a typical piece-of-shit death worshiper.
February 23, 2008
While the scholarship behind this book is impeccable, I disagree with the basic premise behind it - that Americanism is, essentially, a Biblical religion and America a Biblical republic. I have often said that Americanism is my religion for precisely the opposite reason - it is a secular philosophy and a secular republic. Even so, this one is definitely worth a glance.
April 2, 2019
This is perfect for the paper I'm writing now.
September 2, 2007
This book gets two stars for a few nice turns of phrase and an enjoyable smattering of quotations from dead presidents on the subject of religion. But, based on the book jacket, I thought I was about to enjoy a detached, anthropological investigation and analysis of cultural phenomena such as people chanting "USA!" at September 11 memorials or hanging signs that say "I love Jesus" next to American flags. I couldn't have imagined anyone could write a manifesto in favor of so-called American Zionism without irony.
The author, David Gelernter, claims that Judeo-Christianity and specifically Puritanism, when pervasive in American culture and used to address modern political issues, led to the growth of a new religious movement that he calls "Americanism."
The significance of Americanism today is related to the debate about spreading American-style democracy throughout the world. Turning to the United Nations to solve conflicts would be like a strapping young boy abdicating his responsibility to stop playground skirmishes and instead turning to his mother. (p. 205) This comment assumes that the proper way to enforce order is to promote our own point of view through physical prowess. Why it is inappropriate to turn for help to a mother-figure—as with the mother/young son metaphor, the mother is wiser, has more actual moral authority, and might be able to bring peace with fewer fist fights—is not explained.
“Chivalry” refers to the willingness to sacrifice personal happiness to bring democracy and a biblically-inspired political worldview to other countries. Gelernter writes, "whenever you hear the phrase democratic chivalry, think ‘American Zionism.’ … Chivalry and not secularism inheres in the idea of America—but it is chivalry with an American twist. This chivalry is a profoundly serious religious ideal—a Judeo-Christian idea—a biblical idea." (p. 36)
Gelernter approves of the positive term “activist” for those who support spreading American Zionism through invading other countries and who are “glad of any prudent opportunity to spread the Creed.” (p. 202) He seems unaware of the variety of arguments against the invasion and subsequent occupation of Iraq. One such argument, certainly, is that we have no business spreading democracy anywhere at any time, but a more commonly heard argument is that this particular invasion was not prudent at all because it ignored the recommendations of those with scholarly, military, or direct cultural experience in Iraq. While admitting that the sought-after weapons of mass destruction were never found in Iraq, Gelernter claims that “obviously” President Bush sincerely believed there had been weapons (p. 203). He ignores the fact that many Americans believe there was some level of manipulation or conspiracy.
In defending the invasion of Iraq as “chivalrous” in principle, Gelernter fails to acknowledge that it has nevertheless failed to create a peaceful democracy and that there is near-unanimous consensus that it was imprudent from the start, which in turn entails that even prudent American Zionists should never have supported it. He also does not address the issue of how the invasion was initially marketed as necessary to defend ourselves, and only later re-packaged as a chivalrous adventure to free the Iraqis. Other legitimate questions about the invasion, such as the oxymoron of invading Iraq to spread democracy when the invasion itself was never voted on by Congress as required by our own democracy’s Constitution, are not touched with a ten-foot pole.
My understanding of why people mix Christian fundamentalism with American nationalism is somewhat more informed, but still incomplete.
The author, David Gelernter, claims that Judeo-Christianity and specifically Puritanism, when pervasive in American culture and used to address modern political issues, led to the growth of a new religious movement that he calls "Americanism."
The significance of Americanism today is related to the debate about spreading American-style democracy throughout the world. Turning to the United Nations to solve conflicts would be like a strapping young boy abdicating his responsibility to stop playground skirmishes and instead turning to his mother. (p. 205) This comment assumes that the proper way to enforce order is to promote our own point of view through physical prowess. Why it is inappropriate to turn for help to a mother-figure—as with the mother/young son metaphor, the mother is wiser, has more actual moral authority, and might be able to bring peace with fewer fist fights—is not explained.
“Chivalry” refers to the willingness to sacrifice personal happiness to bring democracy and a biblically-inspired political worldview to other countries. Gelernter writes, "whenever you hear the phrase democratic chivalry, think ‘American Zionism.’ … Chivalry and not secularism inheres in the idea of America—but it is chivalry with an American twist. This chivalry is a profoundly serious religious ideal—a Judeo-Christian idea—a biblical idea." (p. 36)
Gelernter approves of the positive term “activist” for those who support spreading American Zionism through invading other countries and who are “glad of any prudent opportunity to spread the Creed.” (p. 202) He seems unaware of the variety of arguments against the invasion and subsequent occupation of Iraq. One such argument, certainly, is that we have no business spreading democracy anywhere at any time, but a more commonly heard argument is that this particular invasion was not prudent at all because it ignored the recommendations of those with scholarly, military, or direct cultural experience in Iraq. While admitting that the sought-after weapons of mass destruction were never found in Iraq, Gelernter claims that “obviously” President Bush sincerely believed there had been weapons (p. 203). He ignores the fact that many Americans believe there was some level of manipulation or conspiracy.
In defending the invasion of Iraq as “chivalrous” in principle, Gelernter fails to acknowledge that it has nevertheless failed to create a peaceful democracy and that there is near-unanimous consensus that it was imprudent from the start, which in turn entails that even prudent American Zionists should never have supported it. He also does not address the issue of how the invasion was initially marketed as necessary to defend ourselves, and only later re-packaged as a chivalrous adventure to free the Iraqis. Other legitimate questions about the invasion, such as the oxymoron of invading Iraq to spread democracy when the invasion itself was never voted on by Congress as required by our own democracy’s Constitution, are not touched with a ten-foot pole.
My understanding of why people mix Christian fundamentalism with American nationalism is somewhat more informed, but still incomplete.
April 11, 2010
The author, a Jew, argues that a belief in America, and in a set of American ideals or creed, has become a religion in itself in America and worldwide. Based largely on Old Testament conceptions of America as a new Israel, a second Promised Land, and the Puritans especially as a Chosen People, the religion gained strength from the revolutionary era up until the Civil War. Lincoln, the author argues, was the greatest priest of this religion, and his speeches have the emotional resonance of sermons. His death cemented the power of the religion in American political and social life. Presidents from Wilson and Truman to Reagan and George W. Bush have believed in this Creed, and it has shaped much of their foreign policy outlook. Great book.
July 17, 2012
I read this book, and now I need to read it again; because I forgot so much in it! Gelernter's point though, is very important, so I wish everyone would read it. There is a founding faith in America that is not doctrinaire, as all human religions had been until the reformulation of historic political and religious thought in our Constitution. So we see the Tea Party defending our national "scriptures;" while progressives advocate the long leash of a "living document" that morphs with the times.
January 7, 2013
Great book.
Woodrow Wilson was a Progressive bastard though.
Woodrow Wilson was a Progressive bastard though.
September 18, 2019
DELIRIO PUROO
June 27, 2008
I was somewhat disappointed by this. Its a good idea: casting American Creed as a kind of religious faith, one that is compatible with Judeo-Christian beliefs, but I felt that he didn't write it very well, and failed to explore the idea with sufficient depth or clarity.
January 15, 2009
This book was good in parts and appalling throughout.
Displaying 1 - 11 of 11 reviews