My students find the idea of American civil religion extremely compelling (half a week is devoted to it), whereas i think it's merely another word for nationalism and doesn't resemble a religion whatsoever. Kinda interesting teaching something you disbelieve and still having students like it
For clarity, do you conflate specifically American civil religion with nationalism or all civil religion with nationalism?
I've never read anything on other nations' civil religions, so i couldn't say
I wish I still had jstor access so I could track down a decent source to send if only to put American civil religion in context, but I think it might be worth looking into. I know it's low-hanging fruit, but the Roman imperial cult/ worship of 'Roma-as-goddess' could be inroads to that discourse.
there is library and the genesis of things, shortened to libgen, that one need only add .li to the end to find such forbidden materials
I'll own it, I was not aware of this particular resource. Thanks for the heads-up!
I think the popularity of this idea is somewhat indicative of a rather shallow understanding of what religion actually is. Nationalism frequently borrows from religion, and American nationalism certainly has strong religious components, but that doesn't make it a religion of its own.
I mean a shallow understanding societally; I'm not singling out your students in particular.
While I can’t speak for what the student are thinking, it does remind me of a broader issue in modern society where a lot of people are desperate to find some form of greater meaning in their lives, but often turning to the wrong avenues to give themselves that sense of meaning, like nationalism.