The two branches of the American statist religion

The American statist religion seems to have two branches, both of which coalesced in the mad “progressive” Wilsonian rush into WWI: America as a “Christian” nation with a duty to “save” the world with “democracy”. Read 8 pages of “The War for Righteousness” by Richard Gamble. The declaration of war was passed on Good Friday, 1917 and that was not a coincidence.

Since then, the Democrat “progressives” have dumped the “God” part of the religion, while the Neocon "progressives" have adopted a strange “dispensationalist” version where “Christians” and the USA have a duty to help Israel steal more land and induce WWIII and the “rapture”. (I have had the recent unfortunate experience of debating an entire army of Mark Levin types who “like” genocide of the Palestinians). The Neocons actually seem to believe that Obama is a liberal peacenik who simpathizes with radical Islam. They think Libertarians do too, while the left “progressives” think Libertarians hate everyone (and left "progressives" sure HATE us). Both sides seem to think the US government has magical powers to cure things, but they disagree about what those magic powers are and to whom and how they should be applied. Both sides worship FDR as their God.  The Democrats believe the Holy Magic of the U.S. government saved the economy from the Great Depression and it must do so again and again.  The Republicans believe the Holy Magic of the U.S. government saved the world from the Nazis and rebuilt Germany and Japan.  The fact that the Germans and Japanese just went back to being Germans and Japanese does not seem to impact the story line.  Both sides believe a significant part of the other side's story. As such, the U.S. government has magical powers to transform foreign countries through the application of Keynesian economics and/or war for democracy. The fact that democracy in a multi-cultural environment generally leads to ethnic strife including genocide matters not at all.  The concept that there might be something wrong with their vision does not compute.  Each side insists that folks who disagree are evil and/or stupid.

Both sides are still gung-ho about imposing their religion upon everyone else and the rest of the world. When their endeavors blow up in their faces, it’s because the opposing “progressive” side (left or Neocon) just didn’t do it right.

I suspect this is the real reason why we have such trouble even defining basic terms with the statists.  This would also explain the instantaneous success of Keynesianism.  Even more troubling is the realization that with this statist religion being fundamental to the statist belief system, the statist is not going to be in the mood to hear that his or her life's work has been for naught. And they are really not going to be in the mood to hear that they and their belief systems are basically the worst problems facing mankind.  Unfortunately, both Libertarianism and Austrian School analysis are based upon that grim conclusion.