In recent decades, \u201cbig tent\u201d conservatism has seemed on the brink of collapse, its poles buckling under competing constituencies with \u201cvalues\u201d voters in one corner pitted against fiscal conservatives in the other. Discussions among academics and media pundits suggest these are two distinct categories of Republicans\u2014the former made up of mainly working-class white evangelicals and the latter historically comprised of higher-income whites. Republican politicians must seek the favor of both special interests, appealing not only to traditional social issues\u2014gay marriage and abortion\u2014but also to economic fare such as reducing government and lowering taxes.<\/p>\n
This distinction is central to Thomas Frank\u2019s engaging analysis of the popularity of conservatism in the American Midwest in his 2004 bestseller What\u2019s the Matter with Kansas? Frank championed the narrative that working-class Americans vote against their economic interests, having been lured into the GOP tent largely with what he sees as insincere religious rhetoric. \u201cThe people at the top know what they have to do to stay there,\u201d writes Frank, \u201cand in a pinch they can easily overlook the sweaty piety of the new Republican masses, the social conservatives who raise their voices in praise of Jesus but cast their votes for Caesar.\u201d<\/p>\n
However compelling this dichotomy may be, it is a false one. As a researcher and social scientist, I have found that economic perspectives are indelibly tied to religious cosmologies. Voters need not choose between God and mammon. Instead, they tend to see their money, the market, and the economy as a reflection of their God.<\/p>\n