Podcasts about post reconstruction america

This week Josh and Will address the issue of morality and the politicization of it by many on the right. To help them unpack this very complex topic they speak with Dr. Anthea Butler, who is the Geraldine R. Segal Professor in American Social Thought, and chair of the department of Religious Studies at the University of Pennsylvania. Their conversation traces the racist exploitation of the Bible during the slavery era, and resulted in the creation of the Negro Bible. They then turn towards modern day politics and talk about how the Republican Party has drifted away from the days of Lincoln and evolved into their civil war opponents, the Dixiecrats. During this very energetic interview, you will learn how the Bible has been perverted in order to gain moral superiority over those whom they consider "the other", and some insight as to what this portends for 2024. Guest Bio:Anthea Butler is Geraldine R. Segal Professor in American Social Thought, and chair of the department of Religious Studies at the University of Pennsylvania. A historian of African American and American religion, Professor Butler's research and writing spans African American religion and history, race, politics, Evangelicalism, gender and sexuality, media, and popular culture. You can find more of her writing and public engagement at Antheabutler.comProfessor Butler courses include Religion from Civil Rights to Black lives Matter, Religion in the African Diaspora, God and Money, Religion and American Politics, and Ritual and Practice in Religious Studies. She is a member of the graduate group in the History department at Penn. Butler's recent book is White Evangelical Racism: The Politics of Morality in America.  Her first book is Women in the Church of God in Christ: Making A Sanctified World, Both are published by Ferris and Ferris/UNC Press. Her next book project in progress is Reading Race: How Publishing created a lifeline for Black Baptists in Post Reconstruction America.Support the showTo learn more about the show, contact our hosts, or recommend future guests, click on the links below: Website: https://www.faithfulpoliticspodcast.com/ Faithful Host: Josh@faithfulpoliticspodcast.com Political Host: Will@faithfulpoliticspodcast.com Twitter: @F8thfulPolitics Instagram: faithful_politics Facebook: FaithfulPoliticsPodcast LinkedIn: faithfulpolitics

In this episode Ekemini and Christina are sitting at the table with Dr. Anthea Butler for a Behind The Book Episode for her newest book, White Evangelical Racism: The Politics of Morality in America. Anthea Butler is Associate Professor of Religious Studies and Africana Studies at the University of Pennsylvania. A sought-after commentator on the BBC, MSNBC, CNN, The History Channel and PBS, Professor Butler regularly writes opinion pieces covering religion, race, politics and popular culture for NBC Think, Religion News Service, The Washington Post, and CNN. Her books include Women in the Church of God in Christ: Making A Sanctified World, published by The University of North Carolina Press. Her current projects include two books for UNC Press, White Evangelical Racism: The Politics of Morality in America, out in March 2021, and Reading Race: How Publishing created a lifeline for Black Baptists in Post Reconstruction America. Professor Butler was awarded a Luce/ACLS Fellowship for the Religion, Journalism and International Affairs grant for 2018-2019 academic year to investigate Prosperity gospel and politics in the American and Nigerian context. She was also a Presidential fellow at Yale Divinity School for the 2019-2020 academic year. Professor Butler currently serves as President Elect of the American Society for Church history, and is also member of the American Academy of Religion, American Historical Association, and the International Communications Association. She has also served as a consultant to the PBS series including God in America and the American Experience on Aimee Semple McPherson. Recently she served as a consultant for two forthcoming series on PBS: Evangelicalism and Billy Graham, and the Black Church in America. A historian of African American and American religion, Professor Butler's research and writing spans African American religion and history, race, politics, Evangelicalism, gender and sexuality, media, and popular culture. Purchase King of Kindergarten here: https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/556838/the-king-of-kindergarten-by-derrick-barnes-illustrated-by-vanessa-brantley-newton/ Black Women, join Truth's Table Black Women's Discipleship Group on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/groups/truthstablediscipleship Support Truth's Table: Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/TruthsTable PayPal: https://www.paypal.me/TruthsTable Merchandise: https://teespring.com/shop/truthstable?pid=46&cid=2742

Buckle up! We have the incredible Dr. Anthea Butler with us today to talk about her new book White Evangelical Racism.  Dr. Butler joins Tyler and Jemar to talk about the importance of understanding social and political power, the popularity of a multi-ethnic approach to racial reconciliation, and so much more. This is not one to miss!  Associate Professor of Religious Studies and Africana Studies at the University of Pennsylvania. A sought-after commentator on the BBC, MSNBC, CNN, The History Channel and PBS, Professor Butler regularly writes opinion pieces covering religion, race, politics and popular culture for NBC Think, Religion News Service, The Washington Post, and CNN. Professor Butler was awarded a Luce/ACLS Fellowship for the Religion, Journalism and International Affairs grant for 2018-2019 academic year to investigate Prosperity gospel and politics in the American and Nigerian context. She was also a Presidential fellow at Yale Divinity School for the 2019-2020 academic year. Her books include Women in the Church of God in Christ: Making A Sanctified World,  published by The University of North Carolina Press. Her current projects include two books for UNC Press, White Evangelical Racism: The Politics of Morality in America, out in March 2021, and Reading Race: How Publishing created a lifeline for Black Baptists in Post Reconstruction America.

It takes a brave historian to take on the orthodoxy regarding the rise and fall of lynching in the United States. That orthodoxy holds that lynching in the South was a ‘system of social control’ in which whites used organized terror to oppress blacks. You can find this thesis in numerous monographs, textbooks, and in the popular press. It’s one of those things “everybody knows.” But according to Robert Thurston’s provocative new book Lynching: American Mob Murder in Global Perspective (Ashgate, 2011) the standard ‘social control’ line is inadequate. It cannot explain when lynching started or when it ended; why lynching occurred in some places often and others never; and why the period in question witnessed a considerable amount of intra-racial lynching. The ‘social control’ thesis fails because it tries to put a square peg (the evidence) in a round hole (the concept of systematic oppression through terror). Thurston shows that lynching, though hardly accidental, was simply too occasional and too random to be called ‘systemic.’ He argues that lynching was–and remains where we find it today–a collective response to political instability, especially instability caused by a lack of legitimate and effective authority. When people don’t trust the sheriff or there is no sheriff, they are going to take matters into their own hands. This sort of ‘rough justice’ is wildly imperfect: the mob often gets the wrong man. And it is not only about justice: the mob often cynically takes the chaos provided by ‘rough justice’ to settle old scores, some of which may be racist (Post-Reconstruction America) or classist (Revolutionary Russia) or both. But there is no ‘system’ here, except in the sense of a widespread pattern of collective action triggered by a reasonably common political situation, namely the lack of legitimate, effective authority. Thurston’s emphasis on authority (or the lack of it) in explaining lynching enables him to present a new thesis as to why lynching abated considerably in the U.S. after 1892. The primary reason, he says, is that Whites succeed in creating a true system of social control, namely, Jim Crow. What was chaotic and unstable became structured and steady, though in a manner that to us (rightly) seems manifestly unjust. Thurston also points to other factors that contributed to the decline of lynching, for example the rising status of blacks in the South and changing international attitudes about race. These factors–Jim Crow, black advancement, anti-racism–did not destroy a ‘system of social control.’ They simply made ‘rough justice’ impracticable for and  unacceptable to most white and black citizens. This is an important book and should be widely read and discussed. I hope that Ashgate will bring out a paperback edition, or that the author will be persuaded to write and publish a shorter, popularly-oriented version. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

It takes a brave historian to take on the orthodoxy regarding the rise and fall of lynching in the United States. That orthodoxy holds that lynching in the South was a ‘system of social control’ in which whites used organized terror to oppress blacks. You can find this thesis in numerous monographs, textbooks, and in the popular press. It’s one of those things “everybody knows.” But according to Robert Thurston’s provocative new book Lynching: American Mob Murder in Global Perspective (Ashgate, 2011) the standard ‘social control’ line is inadequate. It cannot explain when lynching started or when it ended; why lynching occurred in some places often and others never; and why the period in question witnessed a considerable amount of intra-racial lynching. The ‘social control’ thesis fails because it tries to put a square peg (the evidence) in a round hole (the concept of systematic oppression through terror). Thurston shows that lynching, though hardly accidental, was simply too occasional and too random to be called ‘systemic.’ He argues that lynching was–and remains where we find it today–a collective response to political instability, especially instability caused by a lack of legitimate and effective authority. When people don’t trust the sheriff or there is no sheriff, they are going to take matters into their own hands. This sort of ‘rough justice’ is wildly imperfect: the mob often gets the wrong man. And it is not only about justice: the mob often cynically takes the chaos provided by ‘rough justice’ to settle old scores, some of which may be racist (Post-Reconstruction America) or classist (Revolutionary Russia) or both. But there is no ‘system’ here, except in the sense of a widespread pattern of collective action triggered by a reasonably common political situation, namely the lack of legitimate, effective authority. Thurston’s emphasis on authority (or the lack of it) in explaining lynching enables him to present a new thesis as to why lynching abated considerably in the U.S. after 1892. The primary reason, he says, is that Whites succeed in creating a true system of social control, namely, Jim Crow. What was chaotic and unstable became structured and steady, though in a manner that to us (rightly) seems manifestly unjust. Thurston also points to other factors that contributed to the decline of lynching, for example the rising status of blacks in the South and changing international attitudes about race. These factors–Jim Crow, black advancement, anti-racism–did not destroy a ‘system of social control.’ They simply made ‘rough justice’ impracticable for and  unacceptable to most white and black citizens. This is an important book and should be widely read and discussed. I hope that Ashgate will bring out a paperback edition, or that the author will be persuaded to write and publish a shorter, popularly-oriented version. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

It takes a brave historian to take on the orthodoxy regarding the rise and fall of lynching in the United States. That orthodoxy holds that lynching in the South was a ‘system of social control’ in which whites used organized terror to oppress blacks. You can find this thesis in numerous monographs, textbooks, and in the popular press. It’s one of those things “everybody knows.” But according to Robert Thurston’s provocative new book Lynching: American Mob Murder in Global Perspective (Ashgate, 2011) the standard ‘social control’ line is inadequate. It cannot explain when lynching started or when it ended; why lynching occurred in some places often and others never; and why the period in question witnessed a considerable amount of intra-racial lynching. The ‘social control’ thesis fails because it tries to put a square peg (the evidence) in a round hole (the concept of systematic oppression through terror). Thurston shows that lynching, though hardly accidental, was simply too occasional and too random to be called ‘systemic.’ He argues that lynching was–and remains where we find it today–a collective response to political instability, especially instability caused by a lack of legitimate and effective authority. When people don’t trust the sheriff or there is no sheriff, they are going to take matters into their own hands. This sort of ‘rough justice’ is wildly imperfect: the mob often gets the wrong man. And it is not only about justice: the mob often cynically takes the chaos provided by ‘rough justice’ to settle old scores, some of which may be racist (Post-Reconstruction America) or classist (Revolutionary Russia) or both. But there is no ‘system’ here, except in the sense of a widespread pattern of collective action triggered by a reasonably common political situation, namely the lack of legitimate, effective authority. Thurston’s emphasis on authority (or the lack of it) in explaining lynching enables him to present a new thesis as to why lynching abated considerably in the U.S. after 1892. The primary reason, he says, is that Whites succeed in creating a true system of social control, namely, Jim Crow. What was chaotic and unstable became structured and steady, though in a manner that to us (rightly) seems manifestly unjust. Thurston also points to other factors that contributed to the decline of lynching, for example the rising status of blacks in the South and changing international attitudes about race. These factors–Jim Crow, black advancement, anti-racism–did not destroy a ‘system of social control.’ They simply made ‘rough justice’ impracticable for and  unacceptable to most white and black citizens. This is an important book and should be widely read and discussed. I hope that Ashgate will bring out a paperback edition, or that the author will be persuaded to write and publish a shorter, popularly-oriented version. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

It takes a brave historian to take on the orthodoxy regarding the rise and fall of lynching in the United States. That orthodoxy holds that lynching in the South was a ‘system of social control’ in which whites used organized terror to oppress blacks. You can find this thesis in numerous monographs, textbooks, and in the popular press. It’s one of those things “everybody knows.” But according to Robert Thurston’s provocative new book Lynching: American Mob Murder in Global Perspective (Ashgate, 2011) the standard ‘social control’ line is inadequate. It cannot explain when lynching started or when it ended; why lynching occurred in some places often and others never; and why the period in question witnessed a considerable amount of intra-racial lynching. The ‘social control’ thesis fails because it tries to put a square peg (the evidence) in a round hole (the concept of systematic oppression through terror). Thurston shows that lynching, though hardly accidental, was simply too occasional and too random to be called ‘systemic.’ He argues that lynching was–and remains where we find it today–a collective response to political instability, especially instability caused by a lack of legitimate and effective authority. When people don’t trust the sheriff or there is no sheriff, they are going to take matters into their own hands. This sort of ‘rough justice’ is wildly imperfect: the mob often gets the wrong man. And it is not only about justice: the mob often cynically takes the chaos provided by ‘rough justice’ to settle old scores, some of which may be racist (Post-Reconstruction America) or classist (Revolutionary Russia) or both. But there is no ‘system’ here, except in the sense of a widespread pattern of collective action triggered by a reasonably common political situation, namely the lack of legitimate, effective authority. Thurston’s emphasis on authority (or the lack of it) in explaining lynching enables him to present a new thesis as to why lynching abated considerably in the U.S. after 1892. The primary reason, he says, is that Whites succeed in creating a true system of social control, namely, Jim Crow. What was chaotic and unstable became structured and steady, though in a manner that to us (rightly) seems manifestly unjust. Thurston also points to other factors that contributed to the decline of lynching, for example the rising status of blacks in the South and changing international attitudes about race. These factors–Jim Crow, black advancement, anti-racism–did not destroy a ‘system of social control.’ They simply made ‘rough justice’ impracticable for and  unacceptable to most white and black citizens. This is an important book and should be widely read and discussed. I hope that Ashgate will bring out a paperback edition, or that the author will be persuaded to write and publish a shorter, popularly-oriented version. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

It takes a brave historian to take on the orthodoxy regarding the rise and fall of lynching in the United States. That orthodoxy holds that lynching in the South was a ‘system of social control’ in which whites used organized terror to oppress blacks. You can find this thesis in numerous monographs, textbooks, and in the popular press. It’s one of those things “everybody knows.” But according to Robert Thurston’s provocative new book Lynching: American Mob Murder in Global Perspective (Ashgate, 2011) the standard ‘social control’ line is inadequate. It cannot explain when lynching started or when it ended; why lynching occurred in some places often and others never; and why the period in question witnessed a considerable amount of intra-racial lynching. The ‘social control’ thesis fails because it tries to put a square peg (the evidence) in a round hole (the concept of systematic oppression through terror). Thurston shows that lynching, though hardly accidental, was simply too occasional and too random to be called ‘systemic.’ He argues that lynching was–and remains where we find it today–a collective response to political instability, especially instability caused by a lack of legitimate and effective authority. When people don’t trust the sheriff or there is no sheriff, they are going to take matters into their own hands. This sort of ‘rough justice’ is wildly imperfect: the mob often gets the wrong man. And it is not only about justice: the mob often cynically takes the chaos provided by ‘rough justice’ to settle old scores, some of which may be racist (Post-Reconstruction America) or classist (Revolutionary Russia) or both. But there is no ‘system’ here, except in the sense of a widespread pattern of collective action triggered by a reasonably common political situation, namely the lack of legitimate, effective authority. Thurston’s emphasis on authority (or the lack of it) in explaining lynching enables him to present a new thesis as to why lynching abated considerably in the U.S. after 1892. The primary reason, he says, is that Whites succeed in creating a true system of social control, namely, Jim Crow. What was chaotic and unstable became structured and steady, though in a manner that to us (rightly) seems manifestly unjust. Thurston also points to other factors that contributed to the decline of lynching, for example the rising status of blacks in the South and changing international attitudes about race. These factors–Jim Crow, black advancement, anti-racism–did not destroy a ‘system of social control.’ They simply made ‘rough justice’ impracticable for and  unacceptable to most white and black citizens. This is an important book and should be widely read and discussed. I hope that Ashgate will bring out a paperback edition, or that the author will be persuaded to write and publish a shorter, popularly-oriented version. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

It takes a brave historian to take on the orthodoxy regarding the rise and fall of lynching in the United States. That orthodoxy holds that lynching in the South was a ‘system of social control' in which whites used organized terror to oppress blacks. You can find this thesis in numerous monographs, textbooks, and in the popular press. It's one of those things “everybody knows.” But according to Robert Thurston's provocative new book Lynching: American Mob Murder in Global Perspective (Ashgate, 2011) the standard ‘social control' line is inadequate. It cannot explain when lynching started or when it ended; why lynching occurred in some places often and others never; and why the period in question witnessed a considerable amount of intra-racial lynching. The ‘social control' thesis fails because it tries to put a square peg (the evidence) in a round hole (the concept of systematic oppression through terror). Thurston shows that lynching, though hardly accidental, was simply too occasional and too random to be called ‘systemic.' He argues that lynching was–and remains where we find it today–a collective response to political instability, especially instability caused by a lack of legitimate and effective authority. When people don't trust the sheriff or there is no sheriff, they are going to take matters into their own hands. This sort of ‘rough justice' is wildly imperfect: the mob often gets the wrong man. And it is not only about justice: the mob often cynically takes the chaos provided by ‘rough justice' to settle old scores, some of which may be racist (Post-Reconstruction America) or classist (Revolutionary Russia) or both. But there is no ‘system' here, except in the sense of a widespread pattern of collective action triggered by a reasonably common political situation, namely the lack of legitimate, effective authority. Thurston's emphasis on authority (or the lack of it) in explaining lynching enables him to present a new thesis as to why lynching abated considerably in the U.S. after 1892. The primary reason, he says, is that Whites succeed in creating a true system of social control, namely, Jim Crow. What was chaotic and unstable became structured and steady, though in a manner that to us (rightly) seems manifestly unjust. Thurston also points to other factors that contributed to the decline of lynching, for example the rising status of blacks in the South and changing international attitudes about race. These factors–Jim Crow, black advancement, anti-racism–did not destroy a ‘system of social control.' They simply made ‘rough justice' impracticable for and  unacceptable to most white and black citizens. This is an important book and should be widely read and discussed. I hope that Ashgate will bring out a paperback edition, or that the author will be persuaded to write and publish a shorter, popularly-oriented version. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/african-american-studies