S
Shaant
Guest
Faith, doubt & the dangers of groupthink.
Photo by Nathan Dumlao on Unsplash
While different in many ways, religion and politics are linked inextricably in our world. Perhaps the most significant sign of their interrelationship is the way ideologies came to be rooted in belief. In both cases, these are systems for moral decision-making, defining what is right or wrong, who fits in and who does not.
So, what happens when we explore the intersection of the two? When politics is more than policy? When religion is more than faith?
Even for myself, the challenge is the groupthink that exists within both systems. Religion, as an organized group, has an inherent sense of belonging. As an individual, it can provide answers to some of the most profound questions in life or offer an identity with which to ground yourself. Politics, in a sense, does that too.
But when these two forces collide, it becomes almost impossible to differentiate meaning. Faith, no matter what it is, becomes more about an ideology. Politics starts to make less sense in terms of reasoned dialogue and more in terms of devotion to something.
I can say Iβve seen this in action, and it is concerning.
Just like any other hardcore ideology, politics can be used as a tool for control, consumed the same way as a religion.
The Trump administration in America was the biggest example of this. Religious ideology was used to create policies that blurred the lines between church and state. It wasnβt just about steering moral behavior; it was about making belief into government.
The perils of blind loyalty
When I think about the perilous overlap of religion and politics, I remember a conversation I had the other day with some friends. They insisted that politicians get elected based on values and ideologies, rather than facts.
They also had the impression that political belonging often resembles a faith, not to God, but to a person or a doctrine that requires complete fidelity.
This isnβt something Iβve only noticed on the periphery. I see the inclusive way in which people engage in βtribalβ politics often negates reason. The facts tend to matter less.
In this environment, disloyalty to the party, or a party ideology, is seen as more of a sin than an error. This is how echo chambers arise and feel more powerful.
What I find most frightening is how this collective belief can disguise itself as truth in reality, but is really just an act of loyalty.
This behavior goes beyond a political fracture. It moves toward an emotional commitment.
Much like a religion, defending the ideology or leader with such fervor often overshadows facts.
The very spirit of dissent can become demonized, and even criminalized.
Political loyalty can take on a life of its own, where followers cannot imagine any other way of living.
And that is when politics becomes dangerous.
Shared ideologies and the need for belonging
I canβt help but wonder how this translates to my own life. Iβve sought knowledge and experience in different cultures, namely India and the U.S. This notion of shared beliefs affecting behavior is not strictly a βWesternβ phenomenon.
There is also a strong integration of politics and religion in India, especially in the current contexts of nationalism and religious populism. I have witnessed political figures in my home country take advantage of religious ideologies to create national identity, and itβs been startling.
It really is remarkable how this plays out. When political loyalty is fused with faith, the line between reality, fact, and pure manipulation can become tenuous.
I once had a conversation with a colleague in the U.S., who described his political position as a conservative. He stated that the basis of a specific policy he supported was not about the efficacy of the policy itself, but in connecting to a βhigher purpose.β
It wasnβt about policy; it was about supporting a leader or a movement that he believed was ordained by something beyond the political realm, something tied to his faith and purpose.
We see the same dynamic in religious groups. Faith is not only a personal journey but a communal one. In terms of politics, especially today, we see the same desires to belong and find meaning.
But then I started to ask myself: What does it mean for us when belief in a political system starts to take hold of our thinking so thoroughly that it negates our ability to be receptive to opposing belief systems?
It is easy for the need to belong, to support a cause or person, to lead to an ideological prison where doubting is blasphemy.
In that context, religion and politics are performed as exclusion, not inclusion.
The danger of groupthink and the price of dissent
The most significant lesson I learned was the prevalence of groupthink in both religion and politics and how harmful this can be for the individual.
In my personal experience, when dissenters question the status quo, they are often isolated. There are countless examples, but I recall one where an individual questioned the entanglement of religion with politics. He was shunned by his community.
The same thing occurs on the political side. If you disagree with the group and speak out, youβre automatically branded as a traitor or an outsider.
Whenever a belief system demands such allegiance, this kind of outcome is always possible. If you stray too far from the ideology, the group cannot function.
This is when dissent weighs most heavily. It isnβt simply a case of losing an argument. Itβs the loss of a part of you when this process begins.
Iβve come to realize that in both religion and politics, the need for shared, consensual thinking becomes so powerful that independent thinking and critique are seen as threats.
I have personally felt this heavy pressure.
As a Hindu, I have often found myself walking a fine line between faith and belief. My own spirituality is not always in line with the conventional viewpoint, so I have faced significant backlash from my own community because of it.
The same can be said of any discussion regarding politics. To think differently, to disagree with a party, to ask why certain policies are being implemented, these are often seen as disloyalty. And in some situations, disloyalty is judged as unforgivable.
But hereβs the problem: this is exactly what is wrong.
Both systems, religion and politics, thrive on discouraging autonomous thinking. They thrive when people are not questioning or asking for an examination of assumptions.
When we become entrenched in beliefs, and that belief becomes institutionalized to the point of exclusion, on all sides, neither side is able to evolve or progress.
The quiet power of independent thought
At the end of it all, I learned that there is value in the ideological borderland. I donβt have to anchor my identity to rigid belief systems.
Itβs easy to follow. Itβs easy to be swept up in the passion of a movement. But real change occurs when we step away from the need to align ourselves with others and value independent thought over sheer passion.
What if we brought the same scrutiny to our conceptions of religion and politics? What if we became dissatisfied with merging them and recognized their dangers? What if we developed our own independent thought?
Perhaps we would start to create a world with fresh definitions of diversity of thought. And perhaps, diversity of thought would be a value that is not only tolerated but appreciated.
Perhaps faith in God and faith in our political systems would cease to imprison us and bind us in our identities.
And we could once again breathe as individuals who have the right to dissent.
The freedom of thinking beyond belief
In a world where allegiance to an ideological or religious position can seem like a perennial loyalty, it is important to recognize something vital.
It is the value of our own independent thinking, that willingness to step away from the party line, that ultimately produces authentic freedom.
When we choose to think for ourselves, we reclaim our autonomy. We break free from the shackles of unquestioned loyalty and start to see the world with clarity.
That, I believe, is where true freedom begins.
What If Religion Was Treated Like Politics (and Vice Versa)? was originally published in Activated Thinker on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.
Continue reading...
