Meet the New Puritans, Same as the Old Puritans

A crime of sorts had been committed. The offense was not criminal; nevertheless, de-facto mores oftentimes matter more than actual law. The offender had broken a sacrosanct standard of contemporary society, and guilt was imputed to him by the masses and the elite alike. The time for retribution had come. Revulsion and a sense of disdain rested on those present. All that was left was to hand over the reprobate to the wolves, who demanded that justice be done, and the sin committed be cleansed through acts of inward contrition and outward weeping and gnashing of teeth. If accepted, societal banishment might be avoided. If not, so be it.

We might assume the above scenario is historical in nature, describing a bygone era when an individual’s private and public lives were intertwined and monitored by guardians of civic virtue, when an individual’s personal struggles with sin were not a private matter but indicative of a communal failing and thus needed to be remedied in the public square in the harshest of fashions. Such failings put others in the community in danger of breaking their own covenant with their God. Immediate and consequential action needed to be taken, repentance displayed, and a message sent. The scene could be a picture of our Puritan forefathers here in America.

Yet, this is not the case. The puritanical principles that led those in New England to adhere to such a rigid cultural and societal hierarchy birthed a contemporary heir, one that more closely aligns with the description above. This Puritan progeny holds that the world can be made perfect through temporal efforts; that contemporary society is inherently flawed and must be restructured to their beliefs and standards; that a strict dichotomy exists between good and evil, with no shades of grey between them; and that everything, no matter how minuscule, is of cultural significance and reflects an individual’s moral worth and values. Therefore, the above scenario could involve citizens of Massachusetts Bay Colony accusing a fellow colonist of drunkenness, idle pursuits, or gambling, or it could involve today’s progressive faction anachronistically calling for reprimands for real or perceived acts of racial, gender, or sexual insensitivity; canceling individuals for cultural appropriation; shaming those accused of toxic masculinity; or labeling anyone with an opinion different from the accepted orthodoxy with any of a wide array of phobias. This is the unremitting point of Noah Rothman’s The Rise of the New Puritans: Fighting Back Against Progressives’ War on Fun.

Rothman, previously associate editor at Commentary, where he wrote on politics and culture, recently joined National Review. His latest book reveals the true inheritors of the Puritan ethos, comparing the two through a thematic approach, and exposes the chinks in the armor of these new purveyors of Puritanism. Each chapter examines a shared value (piety, prudence, austerity, fear of God, temperance, and order) and how both the old and new orders have weaponized and used them to instill fear in those they wish to control.

Rothman guides the reader through a litany of depictions of Puritans past and present. A fine example comes in chapter 2, in which he examines “doing the work” to rid oneself of subconscious discriminatory thoughts and patterns of behavior, and to gain the self-realization of total depravity and one’s complete and utter dependence on salvation through Christ. Michael P. Winship, professor of history at the University of Georgia, describes it this way: “It was only when sinners realized through protracted, anguished self-examination how completely lost they were that they could truly understand how completely they needed Jesus” (Hot Protestants: A History of Puritanism in England and America, 2018).

Salvation, Rothman argues, was, therefore, “the fruition of an emotional process culminating in acceptance of the incontestable fact that ‘you had not the slightest power to save yourself.’” Beginning to bridge the gap between the two iterations, he argues that for the original Puritans, “performative guilt was not just a prescription for despondency, though depression was probably an unavoidable by-product. Rather, their severity allowed individuals to seek redemption and deliverance while also exhibiting obedience to the religious powers that be. Salvation could be yours so long as you were willing to work toward it — the operative word being ‘work.’”

Rothman then compares this to today’s never-ending “work,” or “struggle,” to come to terms with one’s own racist, sexist, or homophobic inner self through reflection; to make outward acknowledgments and repent of one’s depraved nature; and to engage in a continuing effort to inform others of their particular social shortcomings. The connection becomes sharper as Rothman describes how the New Puritans view antiracist efforts: “As it relates to combating discrimination, antiracism posits that the internalization of racist ideas is not just a personal moral failure. It is an inescapable result of the conditions into which you were born — a fall from grace that influences nearly every aspect of the community to which you belong.” The New Puritans see the work of introspection as “a spiritual quest. The labor is both the means to an end and the end itself. If there is any joy in it, it is derived from exalting your own deficiencies and accepting that you cannot achieve salvation on your own.” Within this argument is what perturbs Rothman most, and it is the New Puritans’ Achilles heel: the insatiable appetite to see others as miserable as they are.

In order to be a part of this new cohort, you “have to take yourself far too seriously,” Rothman observes. “You must become hypersensitive toward the conduct of your neighbors. You must be thin-skinned, self-conscious, and consumed with that which is beyond your immediate control. You must be miserable — or, at least, miserable to be around.” The New Puritans view anything done merely for pleasure (sports, hobbies, time spent with family) as a betrayal of the ever-present need to focus all your time and energy on the myriad issues and so-called threats of the day.

“No longer is the American left comfortable with hedonistic pursuits — not those, at least, that are not tempered by a grand social purpose,” Rothman writes. “To the New Puritan, all society’s engines must be harnessed to restore a lost paradise — a moral conviction if there ever was one. Enchanting diversions and happy frivolities are distractions to be avoided or even forbidden.”

Rothman’s polemical work does offer hope to those who see this New Puritanism advancing ever faster. The hope lies in history repeating itself and in the use of mockery as a tool. “There’s a reason why we don’t remember the old Puritans fondly,” Rothman points out. “Despite their noble works and lasting achievements, popular culture regards them as miserable parodies of themselves.” The old Puritanism eventually lost its power, moral authority, and capacity to stifle dissent. “Once Puritanism and the Victorian tastes into which it evolved were defanged,” writes Rothman, “the Puritans became objects of scorn.” Just as the old Puritanism’s “blind zeal paved the way for its own demise,” with a little luck so, too, will this New Puritanism face its comeuppance. Truly, how long can an ideology last when it is based on the demonization of entire sections of the population, the complete destruction of societal and cultural norms, and on making oneself miserable in the process? The sooner the better, but patience is advised.

©2024 New Oxford Review. All Rights Reserved.

To submit a Letter to the Editor, click here: https://www.newoxfordreview.org/contact-us/letters-to-the-editor/