i did not yet understand that the right to identify with certain ideas had to be earned.”
- Jordan Peterson, Maps of Meaning
Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain
and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor.
“All this I will give you,” he said,
“if you will bow down and worship me.”
Jesus said to him, “Away from me, Satan!
For it is written:
‘Worship the Lord your God and serve him only.’”
Then the devil left him, and the angels came and attended him.
- Matthew 4: 8-11
If I'm honest, this chapter is at the heart of the discussion on technology. it is the aspect of the technology revolution that threatens the fundamental structure of our communities the most. It forces us to contend with ideologies, and ideas- zeitgeist'n like we have never had to before. Therefore to contend we must learn to critically evaluate not only the information/media consumed, but turn around that inner eye to examine our own culture and what foundational blocks are being eroded for good, and which should we maintain.
Slide 3: Intro: The Gods of Our Time
Today is not going to be a technical type of presentation. Because this week is about the messages within the content we consume.
Disclaimer: there is obviously the chance that we won't agree on some of my points, or even the worldviews and philosophies that I think are the greatest threats, versus the ones you might see. Also, I am going to completely avoid addressing the biggest area of impact, which is illicit or erotic content, that has come to dominate so much of the media we consume- think of next week as a continuation of this particular presentation.
Slide 4: So I told you in my message 3 weeks ago, that the focus of today is Zeitgeists. (here I must add that I attempted to give context for the term zeitgeist through a writing by N.T. Wright, where he spoke about the ancient view of the world as governed by spirits or gods: "we go to war but in a meta-sense it is Zeus going to war against Poseidon." Today we more easily understand this through ideas, philosophies, or even mass corporations that pervade and "govern" western thought- essentially Paul's Powers and Principalities)
I was trying to come up with a way of defining and understanding the word used in social philosophy - zeitgeists
•Zeitgeists = the Powers and Principalities: “entities and values- ways of viewing the world (worldviews) that take over culture and become greater than the “sum total of people involved.
These “new big things” that define our era become the atmosphere or spirit (geist’n) of the time in which we live. Spirit or Power- like Paul And N.T. Wright noted, that these zeitgeist’n gain control because we let them.
Slide 5: The Zeitgeists are the underlying meanings and messages of the trends and perpetuated fashions and influences of our culture. So there are the physical elements:like social media,
gaming, hookup culture, The Marvel Franchise, popular shows, etc. And these zeitgeisten promote certain powers: (i.e. individualism, liberalism, sexualism, secularism, patriotism- anything that ends in an “ism”)
As Hutterites, when we speak of our isolation, it is these powers that we usually are talking about because we were able to largely remove ourselves from the world, that is, the influence of some of these powers for a long time. But by living in the midst of mass media, where every belief, opinion, and ideology of today’s popular culture bombards us the moment we turn on our phones- this is no longer the case. We are geographically isolated but mentally assimilated. That means we are getting the full force of cultural influence, but none of the personal interaction with the people behind them. There is a risk to that.
If we want to use our technology- our phones, iPad, and computers with purpose and intent, and to truly better our lives, we must be aware of and be able to identify the zeitgeisten -the powers and principalities- promoted on them. Using with intent requires the time management and self-control I address in previous chapters. But this chapter delves into ideas and worldviews themselves;- while the other chapters focused on our heads, this chapter is about our hearts: we need to be able to see how certain powers and principalities- zeitgeist’n- are reshaping our Hutterian and Christian imaginations, and how this influence has the potential to reshape our foundations if we are not careful.
Slide 6: This is also where I tell you that this is the last of the presentations that I wrote. The past chapters were responses to the testimonies I received of mismanaged time, high expectations of social media, and exposure at too young an age. But what of the content itself? Other chapters involve preparation and purposeful re-evaluation of our use. The other chapters lent themselves to talk about how we can limit screentime, or reorient our priorities, But sometimes, and this is the case with mass media, there is exposure no matter what we do. We need to stop thinking we are somehow sheltered from ideas and beliefs that are contrary to our own, because we are not. The Zeitgeisten – the powers and prinicipalities of the world around us are quite literally within our hands, and we are far too relaxed about what this means. The Zeitgeist of popular music, shows, movies, and people are entertaining, but that entertainment sells us more than enjoyment. The underlying meaning and narratives promoted by the Zeitgeist perpetuate the harmful values that we associate with godlessness: a world governed not by Christ, but with powers.
The Paradoxes of Content:
...like deep darkness. They do not know what makes them stumble
Proverbs 4:19
What do I mean when I say Mass media:
Pop culture or rather, Popular culture is one of the parts of media that we enjoy:
The problem with mass media is in the name. To log on to Twitter, Instagram, or Reddit, or merely read headline news sites and click on recommended articles on facebook or links on whatsapp, is to be exposed to thousands of people and ideas at the click of a button. T. The issue lies in the ceaseless and rapid exposure to ideologies, worldviews, and “facts” that we have no defences to combat in our minds, and at too rapid a speed to properly think through or catagorize in our minds. Mass media also means there are no walls. No breaks. Just always new/novel information. It means that Everything -from Jennifer Lopez dancing at the superbowl, to Ricky Gervais having a go on Christianity in his comedy special on YouTube- to elon musks new twitter scandal -is there for us to consume.
The original intent of mass media was to solve the problem of singular media, which meant a viewer or average person was one receiving one narrow, biased take on a situation- this all changed after WW2, is how hitler was able to influence the entirety of Germany, and how North Korea is still holding on to their population- through limiting their exposure to other media. Today we have options. It is the sheer amount of options that creates a problem,. Where in the past you woud read one take on a situation and wonder if it’s the truth, we now have thousands of opinions- from informed news sites, to a bystanders observation on the ground,a dn we still don’t know if it’s the truth. This litteral “mass of media’ creates huge problems. Three of them.
Slide 7: The First paradox of mass media is this: the more information we are bombarded with, the less we think.
“Ideas unapplied are just arbitrary facts until we place them into the framework of our values and vision,” comments Thomas Sowell in his book, Conflict of Visions.
It is the difference between reading an entire article completely through, and only skimming headlines. Headline skimming has destroyed our ability to engage with new information and has rendered the ideas only aimless facts floating in our heads.
(think of how people have delt with those with different views on the 2016 us election, covid 19, or climate change: we aren’t having engaged and informed conversations, but rather the conversation is about who has the saddest annectode, the bigger number, or more shocking fact on their side.)
We are not contending with the ideas. We are not thinking. We read and listen and watch and laugh and gasp and snicker at headlines, YouTube videos, memes, and celebrity nonsense. But we do not learn.
The tempo and speed of today’s entertainment and mass media format have left no time for contemplation, and so potentially harmful or beneficial ideas are never contended. They become meaningless, arbitrary facts. To actually benefit from anything new we expose ourselves to, we have to contemplate the messages. We have to think. Thinking is taking two opposing things and honestly pitting them against each other, until you discard one. But how many contradictions do we read in a given day? Indeed, today’s news is so deeply biased, bipartisan, and divided, that everything is either yes or no, good or bad, or both. Everything is in conflict.
Mass media is a culture that does not think. Everyone is scared to answer with “I don’t know,” because being woke is ultimate goal. We headline skim, repost, and like to appear knowledgeable, but we rarely delve into any given topic and explore both sides completely impartially, and then contend both ideas against our worldview. And worse still, the setup of online conversation is a shorted format: word caps on tweets, word lengths in articles, picture and quote based news. There is no lengthy dialogue, no lengthy debate or conversation.
8: The second paradox of mass media is this: The more mew information, ideas, and sensations we are exposed to, the less meaningful they become.
Thnk of the cup analogy for understanding what a zeitgeist is. Dr. Peterson points out that when we learn anything, we learn first of an objects physical meaning: its shape, its place, its definition. And then we learn of its applied meaning in the world: What is the context? is it harmful to me? Insightful? How is it when I interact with it? Can I apply it to real life? Everything around us- both objects and ideas have a meaning, and that meaning is established by how we engaged with and apply the ideas and objects against our views of the world, and then either tweak our worldview to accommodate the new understanding, or thrown the idea out as valueless. Ideas are rendered either good or bad, worthless or valuable. We know the meaning of a broom is helpful for sweeping. We know the meaning of Marxism is bad because of the results it has when applied.
The Internet and mass media have however changed the format in which we learn and discover ideas.
· Dysney’s frozen, while a fun movie for children, is a political effort to move away from the princess being saved by the prince.
· Oceans 8, and Hustler’s catchy music and stacked cast of some of the most beautiful women in the industry glorifies sex work and workers.
· Twitter and facebook claims to be a free speech platform but actively ban alternative view under the guise of “hate and violent speech.”
· Meanwhile Instagram changes its algorithm during the black lives protests a year ago, burying coverage of the attacks under the new algorithm promoting influencers and leud content.
· Modern music hides messages of sexuality, sexual libertinism, and the pursuit of pleasure as the ultimate goals of life.
When we start to recognize that everything as having a hidden meaning and a hidden view of the world within itself, we can begin to recognize the powers and principalities that work behind the scens of the media we consume. The Zeitgeist of DC films, Harry Styles, and The Mandalorian may not sell a deeply corrosive message in themselves, but we apply meaning to it.
But here is the problem: by engaging with the content, we give it meaning. We are saying to it: you are important to me, when it has nothing of value for us in the long run: this is our handing over of controle- our time, energy, priorities- to powers and principalities.
This wave of meaningless content that we have given meaning to has two different affects; We can love a movie or song We grow emotional; we connect to the art of it; the message to sends. We listen to the song on repeat or watch three seasons in the span of a week. This is giving undo meaning to valueless content. It is a short obsession with often a shallow and falsely deep message, that if applied and played out, isn’t all the great.
The other affect is that we choosing to not absorb any meaning at all. We forget the Ticktock or YouTube compilation instantly after watching. This creates the affect of the first paradox- where we are washed in is waves of facts that roll right off as we choose to mindlessly scroll and absorb every empty message without a thought.
Slide 9: The 3rd paradox of mass media is this: Even though our generation is more exposed, less innocent, and more knowledgeable of the world due to mass media, we are just more confused.
Jordan Peterson sites the parable of the blind men and the elephant:
let’s apply it here: Some great thinker (not me) once said that a person who read one book and believed it was a blind follower. A person who read two was conflicted. But a person who read 10 was wise. I wonder what they would say to the reader of thousands of non-book ideas -all different and conflicting- telling you that Trump is good, women are bad, and Blake Lively is Pregnant. Only to be followed immediately by another three ideas telling you the economy has been fixed by the Republicans, women are better than men, and Blake Lively was actually joking all along. What should we believe?
One would think that the more of the elephant the blind men can touch, the more they would know, the more they would see. But information without experience is meaningless. We are not learning. Just because we have no contradiction for a given argument does not mean we should believe it. The man who touches only the elephant’s truck or watched Fox News, knows nothing, or rather knows exactly as much nothing as the person touching the trunk- listening only to CNN. because they only see what they were given to see. They have not experienced. They have not earned that knowledge by seeking it out and studying its validity. It was merely thrust upon them. It is the blind acceptance of one interpretation among millions.
Equally however, the blind man whois placed at each of the various parts of the elephant will still have no concept of what an elephant is. They will be simply confused, and more than that, demoralized. It is us, scrolling through the debates, the twitter wars, the different news sites, and conflicting thinkers. Mass media means too much information too fast. So fast that there is no time to process.
But as humans, we find ways to process some kind of meaning out of the mass of content. We need to latch on to something that seems real when we view, and most of the time, this takes the form of a celebrity or influencer. We latch on to a caricature of an idea we value. We can indeed learn from them and recreate the good we see in them in ourselves.
As celebrities became household names and the internet promotes their image everywhere, we forget that what is popular is also what is most shallow. A person, just like an idea, that is liked by many, most often in so because they have been so watered down that its values are digestible to a large audience. The Age of Celebrities also means that this is the era where a reality star sits in the Whitehouse. Where a Kardashian practices law, and where my adds on YouTube are 21-year-old guys telling me how I too “can become wealthy in no time!” by dropping out of school too. Celebrities are the embodiment of a zeitgeist. We forget sometimes that the majority of what we see of any person of influencer is an image created by an entire team of managers and assistants, by the Hollywood aura.
Moreover, young people latching on to an influencer, modern hero, or celebrity is corrosive if overvalued. Riana, BTS, and Beyoncé do not share our values. They have prioritised false beliefs in their lives such as fame, beauty, and pleasure which has gotten them to the top. Virtues of humility, respect, and love will not do that. They are famous because a) they promote digestible, and shallow ideas. B) they are Beauty and Sex Icons for today’s generation. And c) They advocate messages of sexuality, pursuit of pleasure, and materialism within music because that is what people want to hear. We become confused by the messages promoted online, particularly by people we admire because they do not apply to us. Especially not within the framework of huttarian culture. We hold them up to what we have been taught, and see there is a clear value difference.
Slide 10: The Hidden Meanings in Popular Culture:
Let your eyes look straight ahead; fix your gaze directly before you. Give careful thought to the[c] paths for your feet
Proverbs 4: 25-27
What are messages and ideas being promoted behind the scenes of popular culture? To be fair, the majority of them are good messages. Disney remains an expert at telling happy ending stories that promote love, happiness and friendship, and music primarily talks about good times, and fond memories. The highest grossing movies of this decade continue to be The Marvel franchise’s films, which have the hero arch at the basis of everything. But we forget too often that the safe content is created by an ever-increasingly secularized society and entertainment industry. If the ultimate good is no longer christ-centered, there are other ideals and philosophies- powers and principalities are taking his place.
As said earlier, we need to be able to identify these modern values and stack them against our beliefs. Content does not have to influence us, especially when we can become aware of the narratives they are trying to perpetuate.
To start understanding these powers and principalities, we have to understand stories
popular culture gives us stories. Narratives are the lifeblood of civilization. As Hutterites, we have a story that we tell to make sense of our faith, culture, and heritage. It is a story of persecution and flight. It is a story that highlights themes of pacifism, community, and gellassenheit. Our narrative, in contrast with the narrative of today’s popular culture are obviously very different in what they value. Narrative trends are seen in the stories that are told today: narratives about working hard from the bottom to the final rise to fame. Themes of victimhood, privilege, and pursuit of pleasure permeate the air of modern culture. And these are the narratives we digest in mass media.
Another difference in modern culture’s story and our own is the difference of who the main character is. For the Hutterite, it is our cultures that we tell the story of. We tell the story of the Hutterites, because our individual stories are small subplots of our greater legacy. More than that, as a Christian, our lives are subplots of the greater story of salvation.
But to the celebrity; To the influencer; They are the main character. It is their name that is glorified. The legacy and priority within their narrative is themselves. Mass media sells a message of self above all else. The self is promoted on social media platforms especially, where our image that we choose to display allows us to mimic miniature celebrities. The first major ideology we digest daily by popular culture online is this: Individualism.
11: Individualism
I lied. There is a 4th paradox. It is this: The more truths (with little ‘t’s’) available, the more unreachable Truth (with a capital “T”) becomes. Truth, as defined by author Richard Weikart, are the objective and irrefutable Truths in the world. To the Christian, Truths with capital T’s exist, These Truths beginning with God and Christ set the stage for our story. For our narrative that has the foundation in something absolute. truths (small t) are different. These are our individual dialogues and stories.
If we are created in the image of God, we are miniature walking reflections of his holiness and goodness. But only reflections -truths. Our truths are subjective and corrosive. Our personal narratives shift and change every time we learn or discard information. More than that, our truth can be falsified by contrasting against the Truth (big T).
Individualism is the movement in popular culture to extol the self above all else. As discussed in chapter 3, Individualism and individuality are different. Individuality is “to have ones’ own meaning, one's own ideas and boundaries. It is to value one's own preferences, principles, intentions, and perspectives (Neufeld).” Individuals are us, within our colonies. Individuals are the unique personalities that make up our communities. We need people who know who they are to properly run a Community.
Individualism is different. It is the philosophical belief that the needs, desires and beliefs of one person override those of the community. It is essentially Celebrity culture: the culture promotes success, fame, and “do what makes you happy” values. The promoting of the self over the rest, creates a selfish and apathetic culture. The community is abandoned for the individual’s agenda: individualism drives our language of “after 5 o clock im not on colony time anymore” or “my gilt is my business” or agnitz dreib’m
I strongly believe Individualism will be what breaks down Huttarianism, where the end goal is no longer the preservation of something larger than ourselves, but only, merely ourselves.
Two things primarily drive the zeitgeist or principality of individualism. Celebrity and influencer culture in combination with the rise of social media. The era of YouTube, Instagram, and Ticktock stars is also the era where people rose to fame through promoting themselves online on their own platforms. Lives glorified online hide deeply false narratives of life. Society would collapse if everyone only looked out for themselves. Individualism promoted online sells not only caricatures of who the people are, but discards actual virtues like selflessness, dignity, and humility.
The Spectrum of messaging: "which is worse"
While we might be tempted to begin a debate on where we as a church find ourselves on the political spectrum, the message of Christ is that we exist not as part of this dialogue but as a church should represent an alternative to this binary spectrum. Rather we exist beyond these parameters. For example, if all human life is valued, one might find themselves labeled on the left for their stance on gun protocols but right in their stance on the sanctity of life in the abortion debate.
Left wing
According to popular culture, freedom should extend into everything. Freedom means no restriction within reason and no judgments. The online world today promotes the self, and that means that every expression of that self must be glorified and accepted. To speak against ideologies fundamentally counter to our own is to be slapped with labels meant to illicite fear, but also to minimize the view of the person opposed. N.T. Wright defines the left as the "side of Lust"- the values that ultimately promote the self through complete freedom of emotions. The feelings of the individual trump the state of the majority. The truth of one is greater than the Truth of the environment.
The following topics are selected under the umbrella terms of "left and right" because of how we tend to view these topics. I want to be sensitive and honest. please note that I do not want to ascribe a way of viewing these cultural phenomena, I merely want to ask if we are equipped to engage in these difficult conversations.
Dialogue on the Gay Agenda:
In 2017 Disney announced the introduction of an “openly gay character” in its live-action remake of Beauty and the Beast. A cameo in the Disney film Frozen also created an uproar in right Christian circles when the character at the “Wondering Oaken’s Trading Post and Sauna” represented a family of two dads with their 4 children. Ever-increasing cameos and characters in Storks, Big Hero 6, and Zootopia beg several questions that need to be pointed out: what does this mean for Christian viewers? it is no surprise to anyone that the hutterian stance on this subject is the fundamentalist reading of scripture, where sexuality is limited to the parameters of sacred marriages of heterosexual relationships: a man and a wife embodying and idealizing the image of Christ and his church. The Family as well sits at the center of our cultural values: the nuclear family represents the church and christ as they care for the smallest and most vulnerable. Thus when we engage with these movies, what is our approach? is participating in the viewing of afilm outright support of these subtle messages? Is watching the film acceptance? Can we continue to watch them, now knowing the changing narratives that Disney, Pixar, and other film studios will only increasingly try to sell us?
Indeed, where better to begin normalizing, desensitizing, and promoting the “acceptance movement” than in PG films marketed to children? May i be so controlversial as to say there is nothing wrong with these cameos? These characters are presented as a normalizing of the reality of the new social scene, where this representation brings in the money. Characters of non-heterosexual orientation are being featured more as more people come out as gay, lesbian, non-binary, trans, etc. film reflects culture. Hutterites are horrified because we do not reflect western culture . The smiling nuclear family is no longer a reality for much of today’s society, and for films to stay relevant and relatable to their primary audience -which is really not Hutterites- they will show single or mixed households. the problem for us lies in that It is the promotion of a narrative with no conversation of the negatives of this reality lived out.
Our conversations with children have to be more nuanced. we cannot forever stick to the two dimensional “se sei shlicht.” ou must be the first to have a dialogue about the secrecy of marriage, the role of family, and harm in its disturbance as a reality of a fallen world.
Jonathan Paguea uses the example of the scene from storks to explain the difference:
(By simply pausing the movie storks at that scene and going “that is wrong” does your child know what it is about the scene exactly that is wrong: you’ve paused the movie on a scene of two smiling people holding a baby- your child you are teaching your child to be homophobic: having a dislike or pedjudice against queer people.. does your child understand what is wrong is not the smiling people, nor the loving family they provide for the baby they hold. Did you also go on to pause on the single mother and explain that this is wrong as well, not the single mother, who is a good mother, but that the image represents a broken depiction of marriage and family) and this might mean we have to learn to understand eh problem more deeply ourselves.
A Dialogue on Feminism:
Historically, Christianity was the first religion to grant women equal status to males. Jesus continually and subtly raised the woman around him to a place of equality, as he saw them as more than property, which the Old Law or Jewish, Greek, and Roman society did, They were given a voice, were the first witnesses of the resurrection, and granted personhood value by the early church. We often forget how revolutionary it was for Jesus to talk with all the women around him; To give them so much as attention, and to value them. We forget that all the history and cultures before largely did not value women as even people- that only in the 19th and 20th century were woman allowed to leave abusive husbands, own property, publish their work, have jobs outside the home, or even lobby for their own rights. It was over a thousand years after christ’s identifying them as such that in the 20th century women were finally legislated as “persons” by the rest of mainstream society. Feminism began as a movement of women asking men for the right to basic things such as voting, buying property, and to be valued as persons.
What we see on media today is the third wave feminist movement whch directly coincided with the “failure to launch” crisis of 10-20 years ago, where a generation of boys did not step up and become men. It is seen over and over again that the erosion of the family structure- of the male living up to their ideal- resulted in women taking up the slack. WFeminism in itself is not bad. It is this particular new type of feminism where rather than equality, which jesus presented, that the movent goes beyond, to women demanding opportunities and bennifits over men, demanding respect and status requardless of how they behave or act. When we have the dialogue on feminism, we need to ask where it came from. It came from the masses of single mothers, and teenage pregnancies. Of a culture that shunned rather then helped struggling people. It is this conversation about the place of a women in a Christian church and community that has not been had for too long. It is not as simple as teaching girls what it means to actually be a woman. We need to also teach men how to be men. We need to ask why young girls are gravitated towards this skewed message of womanhood.
First wave feminism was about the right speak. Second wave feminism was about the right to vote. Third wave feminism was about the right to freedom of action, expression, and acceptance of all, regardless of their actions, ideologies, or choices. It is a mockery of the past heroic actions of women. And it teaches a deeply flawed narrative of what it is to be a woman and feminine.
Young Hutterite girls are logging onto Instagram; they follow feminist icons like Riana, Beyoncé, and Zendaya. Their message appears to be one of empowerment, equality, and the forging of a lasting identity for woman in a world where they have been historically silenced by men.. For the Christian and for the Hutterite however, these are false narratives. They promote empowerment not through self emptying and raising up our neighbors in selfless act, but rather through sexual expression. They promote equality, not through services of grace, but rather through a lens of “acceptance and tolerance of all.” And they promote identity, not thorugh a letting go of self to an identity in chrsit, but through individualism. Think of the impact this will have on a 14-year-old creating her first Instagram account, taking Buzzfeed quizzes, or pinning away on Pinterest. Does she know what her role and value is within Hutterite society? Do we glorify this role enough? Do you have this conversation with your daughter about why these beautiful celebrity women can be liked, but can simply not be admired as ideals to live up to?
A Dialogue on Sexuality:
In her book Love Thy Body, dr. Nancy Piercy explores this broken social value:
The promotion of sex and sexuality is growing more prevalent online to be viewed by a younger and younger audience. Every platform, from Twitter to Ticktock to Reddit, not only promote sexual freedom, but also make access to lurid content easy acceptable. In the chapter following this one, this topic will be explored in much more detail, but I will touch on the simplest aspects of it. Today’s Hutterite can log on to any platform or explore the page of any celebrity icon and be faced with sexualized imagery. Within poses, expression and even captions themselves, there is the implications of it. This era of sexualization targets primarily women, but also men. But both are targeted differently. Think of the swimsuit experiment sited in the Social media chapter: Dr. Sax points out in Girls On the Edge, that the objectification of the male body is often one that displays the male ideals of power, strength, dominance, while the objectification of the women’s body through the music, shows, and advertisement industries display a small, demeaning, and submissive image.
The irony of it is that the mass objectification is bullheaded by celebrities supporting the empowerment movement and sexual libertinism. They say, “If men can sleep around, so can we and not be judged for it.” It seems obvious that Men can’t, or at least shouldn’t sleep around, and neither should women. Yet it is through this empowerment movement that women are objectified and demeaned further and told they are nothing but their sexual identities. This pervasive message is dehumanizing and degrading at its core.
Then there is the marketing of sex and sexualization to a younger and broader audience:
1. The Superbowl halftime performance -complete with poledancing, sexual songs, dances, and a lack of basic clothing by Shakira and Jennifer lopez- was watched by millions throughout America.
2. Modern music displays a trend towards the glorification of sex and pleasure: Ariana Grande’s “God is a Women,” Taylor Swift’s “False God,” and Daughtry’s “Baptised” are examples of songs with lyrics that have deified sex.
3. The PG13 films now allow for nudity, sexual innuendos, jokes, and intercourse scenes as long as the couple is in general shadow.
4. Videogames depict their female characters in exaggerated proportions for the same of attracting a wider audience.
The result is men and women growing up with skewed ideals of the opposite gender, while growing insecure of their place within their own. Being bombarded with imagery of the perfect male and female body create insecurity because ideals are unachievable but remain desired.
Within the Hutterite worldview, Sexuality is something sacred, and sex something to be conserved. In the beginning, we were created in the image of God; Jesus became man and ascended with his human body; and that in the end, we will be given new and perfect bodies. Moreover, the body is called the “Temple of God.” The profundity of the examples, and depth of the language should make it clear to us that the displaying of the body as merely an object of pleasure is a shallow and empty view that devalues not only the body, but the person as well.
Popular culture sells us a misleading and deeply harmful narrative of sexuality and sex. It can be encountered by merely logging onto a platform or googling a word out of curiosity. As said before, this information, this imagery, and this degradation of the body will be encountered, and is encountered at a younger and younger age, no matter how cautious you, the parent are. We have to understand that the average age of exposure to sexual or pornographic imagery is as young as 11.
This is an insane problem that is seriously underplayed. I encourage parents who doubt this to go to YouTube, go to the music section in the trending tab, and watch the top three videos now. no amount of filtration, limitation, or prevention will, in the era of mass media, keep your child from being exposed to the sexual revolution in some form. This however should not stop us from trying. We need to beat the world to this education.
Firstly, every community should have a solid filtration system on their internet, and data should not be given to anyone under at least 18 years old. Next, we can educate. Teach your child what the role of their sexual identity within the Christian context. Teach them to value their bodies as something sacred and not to be flaunted, in person or online, and this means the bodies of others must be respected even if they do not, meaning an attemot to avoid engaging this content. .
Many of these ppwers and principalities- these zeitgeist’n have never been directly addressed by any Hutterite pastor. Young people are bombarded by a new and pervasive set of temptations made more accessible and appealing by the availability of it on our devices. We need to be told and shown exactly where they mislead. All these ideologies are deeply appealing. They have glorified and glamourous messages, and for some, it is very difficult to articulate a proper counterargument.
Flip Side: Skewed Traditionalism
Having now explored the far-left swing of media online, what of the other side? The internet is not made entirely of blind progressives. Where N.T. Wright called the left the side of lust, The right is the side of Greed:t ehe frantic hording of all that you can aim to posses. It si the American dream, it is capitalism, it is patriarchal injustic and racial violance. It si no better than its left neighbor uyet we sit far to comfortably on this side far too often, forgetting we should be appart from both. There are extremists on the other side as well, and some of their ideologies are just as harmful if we are not aware of them. There is the political nationalism, the mass exposure to alternative interpretations of Christianity,the promotion of indivudualism through freedom and finally, our instinctual reaction to all of this: shutting off our connections to mass media and the world as a defence. All of these are as harmful to our culture as any of the other ideas so far discussed. But because they run so much closer to home, or because we are more inclided to right-wing media, this can be harder to see.
Materialism.
To be happy, we are told by popular culture, we must meet our physical desires. Materialism has two definitions. The first is the idea that there is only the physical world. There is no spiritual. If there is only the material, where there are only material/physical desires to meet. Advertising promotes physical products that will fulfil the needs and wants of people: good food, new clothes, fun times. Everything is advertised. This promotes Materialism in its second meaning: the accumulation and buying of many, many things. The Capitalism that was America, is devolving into something reflecting consumerism and corporatism more and more every day, and the message promoted online is one that says that to be happy we need things.
Film and Music now commonly promote products within their production. The feel-good narrative promoted by the song or film now commonly will end with a product that can be bought. Celebrity endorsement is even more common. Our favourite faces sell beauty products, beer, and more. While trying to bewitch us with their smiles, they subtly tell us we aren’t good enough, but their product will fix that. The Hole inside eevery person, they say, can be filled, not with Christi, but with objects, people, and experiences. The shallowness of materialism and the message is perpetuated by media in all forms telling us more is more. If Hutterites buy into this mindset (pun intended), where will this leave us? It is an ideology of discontent and overvaluing of products over people.
The Patriotic Hutterite
So...is Trump good? The automatic answer of a Christian should definitively be a resounding no, but somehow this Republican government has received a Christian pass by many Hutterites due to both their more “Christian supporting” policies, and the fact that they identify as Republican. As Hutterites, we should be separate from the world. To align entirely with a “wiltlingeh” political party goes contrary to this expression. Much like celebrity culture, the movement of politics onto mass media forums has made them continual buzz topics, and we are given no political break. Much like celebrities as well, we tend to forget that they are flawed.
The far-right of mass media no longer promotes true Christianity any more than the far left. Both push political agendas that, if we jump along for the ride too strongly, we would lose our traditions and parts of our culture, specifically our pacifistic foundation. Pacifism is one of the foundational narratives of the Huttarian legacies. Born out of the Stebler group who left Nickolsburg rather than fight, our entire history is one of nonviolence, choosing to flee rather than engage or align with violence of any form. Indeed, the last story of governmental confrontation is that of the Hofer brothers choosing to die rather than so much as hold a gun. Where are we today?
Traditionalistic, right leaning, and nationalistic content fills the majority of older Hutterite news and media feeds. But just like any media, not viewing both sides, and seeing the entire picture leads to a limited view of reality. Pacifism translates to “peacemaker.” When Jesus said, “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God,” we determined to make this a fundamental aspect of our culture. Writers like Riedeman, Erenpreiss, and even Hutter wrote that even political involvement promoted violence to some extent, because governments were required to be violent. No we do not agree with the choices of our govournments, but the solution is not to consume only the propaganda of the opposite side- this fuels aour discontentment. We vote for the party that best reflects our interests to nonviolence, but today, it has become outright political alignment and nationalism in many cases. There is a strong link between the modern nationalistic Hutterite and how political agendas and values are thrown at us like the rest of media. It has become mindless entertainment and a distraction unto itself.
A Christian is not called to mass insurrection, merely to love their neighbor as themselves. How can we do this if we continuously engage withbiased content, reposting catchy, witty posts that call the other side “sheep” ignorant “lefties” and “snowflakes.”
Freedom to Express:
Freedom is a strange belief pushed by the zeitgeisten but one we often overlook or take for granted.
(compare freedom on left vs. right “they are focused on different causes, but are still saying the same thing of promotingthe individual)
Like all the other promoted worldviews of popular culture, it appears good. In the same way truth is a shallowed Truth and Individualism is the shallowed individuality, Freedom as expressed by popular culture, especially online, is different from the freedom a Christian and Hutterite describes as their belief.
Freedom is being redefined as a right on its own. We are free to do anything and act in any way. Mass Media goes further to exacerbate the value of physical freedom, in that expression is everything. And everything done is expression. The freedoms of choice, expression, and action are used in the film industry more and more, as an excuse to include imagery and content that previously was contained within more mature rated films. Is this freedom of expression? Who is this expression for? Children? Rights come with responsibilities, especially to the younger demographic who often have no choice but to see the content posted. How much freedom of expression is too much freedom? When it offends? When it harms? Who is the gatekeeper of these judgments?
Indeed, we see popular Media platforms deliberately filtering out content, with next to no logical explanation for why. Mass public service sites like Facebook, Instagram, and YouTube should not document, delete, or demonetize information based on what is being said. If we allow for freedom of expression in one direction, it must be extended just as far in the other.
Hutterites showed their discontent with the current global situation as well as the infringement on our rights by our govournt in an act of physical protest not to long ago. But one thing we need ot ask is how much of a role media played in ensighting our fury.
The message of freedom displayed by popular culture is also one based on materialism. It is the view that we have the right to pursue desires and pleasure as we see fit, as long as it does not hurt anyone else. No one has the right to limit our freedoms. “It is your choice” we often hear said online. This morally flawed and deeply harmful view of existence creates mental enslavement to the pursuit of an unattainable high. The philosophy of freedom as promoted by popular culture is not aligned with the freedom described in Christianity, nor the freedom of reality itself. Popular culture and celebrities brandish freedom as a get-out-of-jail-free card for all actions, regardless of the consequences they have, or the audience forced to view:
· Billie Eilish claiming freedom with her body as she “finally” removes her baggy clothes.
· The LGBTQ+ community claiming freedom to promote their beliefs above all others.
· Headlines glorifying freedom for women through abortion.
· “it is for fredoom that chrisit has set me free” touted along with “F-Trudeua” signs
· Rappers praising freedom from the police and gang violence in theghettos gained from wealth, influence, and sex, within their music.
· People filming their altercation with management and employees as they are asked to put on masks- saying it Is an infringement on their freedoms.
We all know freedom-talk. Because we all know what it feels like to be restrained. These are deeply flawed, dangerous interpretations and narratives of freedom that mass media and popular culture headline. We have been blessed with a culture and society that tells us that there is a freedom greater than a material right, but one that is a freedom from the enslavement of these prinicipalities promoted online.
Alternative Christianity.
As discussed before, what is the Truth? Hutterite practice an entirely unique expression of Christianity, with our own set of traditions, interpretations, and even philosophies and philosophers. We come from a culture that deeply values the preservation of the old, and that value is at the very least being tested, and at worst, being undermined by the influx of “new” traditions and Christian interpretations. It is not so much that these interpretations are wrong, but that they cannot be lived out in our culture, which is a communal, and not an individual expression of faith.
We often hear elders and pastors showing concern -as the should- when Hutterite youth go beyond Hutterite literature for answers. The defence I and my peers offer is that this is a consequence of the lack of new and upgraded information by our culture to combat the progressivism around us. One example being the Chapters in Riedemann’s work, required reading for baptism, that focuses of infant baptism. Society has moved beyond this. It has moved to much greater crisis like abortion, sexual libertinism, euthanasia, and secularism. And there is no new dialogue nor counterarguments being written by Hutterites. If our history is not advancing, progressing, and updating to meet the demands of popular cultur then it is eroding and stagnating.
My fellow Huttarian youth and myself go beyond Hutterite literature and writing, to other Christian answers on these matters for answers to these questions of, “Why can I not accept the LGBTQ+ community?” and, “What is wrong with the sexual revolution?” There is dialogue we can have with adults and community members, yes; but there is no definitive work being written and so we go elsewhere. Indeed, there are very credible and insightful works on these topics written by christen thinkers, such as Hank Hanegraff, Paul VanderKlay, Leonard Sax, Nabeel Qureshi, Ravi Zacharias, Francis Chan, and so many more. But they are not Hutterites. They teach Christianity within the context of their own church, be it Anglican, catholic, modern, or whatever else. Haegraff is Orthodox, Vanderklay is Calvinist, and Chan is evengelical.
There is also the guidence from non-Christian thinkers altogether. Figures like Jordan Peterson, Ben Shapiro, Johann Hari, and and others can have very powerful and accurate ideas. But they are not Christian. What they say may be good, but it is not entirely right. These mainstream influencers may perhaps be able to give guidance towards living a Christian life if their ideas are applied properly and carefully, but they cannot provide guidance within the context of the Hutterite expression of that faith.
The qualities of gellassenheit, pacifism, community, and selflessness that are fundamental to the Hutterite expression are not the fundamental values of many other Christian groups and denominations and certainly not of most non-Christians. Yet they are who we turn to for advice, because no Hutterites are writing or talking publicly about contemporary concerns with the same depth and involvement that they are.
These preachers and public speakers are a form of media consumption. Its better than bingeing ticktocks and youtube, yes, but its can become a wall in its own right, where we fail to contend ourfavourite voices, allowing them to shape us, instead of the community we are supposed to participate in.
The Fetal Position: A Dialogue of Change?
The last impact technology has on Huttarianism that I will address is not so much a result of something perpetuated by technology but is our reaction to technology itself. Hutterites have fled physical persecution for the majority of our history: from Moravia to Slovakia, to Romania, to Russia, to America, to Canada. Now when we face a more indirect threat to our traditions, our values and customs, is not our reaction to do the same? To curl up, get rid of phones, the internet. Take away our children’s technology so that the world stays out. The biggest concern of my peers to this project was what will stop parents from taking it as an excuse to just take away our phones. What if the reaction isn’t re-evaluation and bigger conversations and actual meaningful actions, but just more shutdowns and restriction and isolation fromt herest of the world? And that is my fear. But playing defence against society has never worked. We were able to flee physical threat, but a silent and invisible one cannot be outrun; not in the Global village. The static culture, the one that does not progress, is the one that in the end always loses. Always disappears and fades to nothing.
We need to play offence again. Even though in our history we fled, we never stopped learning, writing, and dialogue- with the world and its power and principalities, nor with eachother. We never stopped mission and conversion. There was always a flow of new and modern knowledge in the veins of the faith that kept the Huttarian culture alive. But what keeps us alive today?
Taking away your child’s phone severs the last string of influence you as a parent have. Think about it: right now, your child is exposed to these alternative ideas and values. Do you think this will stop merely because they have no phone? There are computers, laptops, even your phone that can be used and are used to brows and enjoy content. A teenage will not be stopped by a parent taking away one single thing. In the same way we discussed in chapter 2, that attachment cannot be stopped simply with cold turkey abstinence. Ideas and popular culture will not be stopped by removing the device. But what can be done is building dialogue, relationships, and establishing new or updated ideas.
Build relationships with your child. Become aware and educated in what they are watching and consume, build a relationship where they can be comfortable coming to you for help, or at the very least, know that it is an option and know every time they engage in content, they know exactly what you do and do not approve of. Perhaps most importantly, show them why the meaning in our culture extends beyond the shallowness of the powers and princip[alities of society’s values. Point out the shallowness of mass media and popular culture. I maintain that until a certain age certain sites, all social media, and even access to a device should be severely limited, if only for physical and mental development. But at a certain age, a level of trust must be granted.
So how can we learn from the internet then? How can we overcome the confusion, the mindlessness, and the lack of thought? How can a blind man know an elephant? Well, he can begin by reading and studying it; he can have it described by those he trusts that do see it; more than that, he must do more than just touch. He must feel along its entire trunk and see that eventually, it connects to a tusk. Then an ear, a head. He will find that as everything connects, it is no longer disjointed, opposing, and confusing. It is all, merely, an elephant.
Now that I have thoroughly dried out this metaphor, what I mean to say is that is all boils down to Truth and values.
The answer to the crisis of mass media doesn’t lie in destroying this tool for opportunity because there is so much good that we lose with that. Will we give up the podcasts, the videos, the music and the connection, merely because we have not learned to engage with the content and risks that come along with them? Of course not. I too fear for my generation; for the number of friends and peers I have who struggle with the impact technology has had on them. I imagine the fear of parents is so much more than that. But I do know that many of the answers lie within rebuilding our meaning. Reestablishment of our priorities and values and a regaining our ability to identify them combat the power and principalities behidnt he content we watch.
Above all else, guard your heart, for everything you do flows from it.
Proverbs 4:23
Comments