It began with a discussion of journalism, in particular, a post by a fellow historian, Gerry Bowler. Bowler decried the collapse of journalism in the 21st century. (He writes from a Canadian perspective, but much of his analysis is relevant to the US as well.) He wrote: “The absence of a vigorous adversarial press led to politicians and pressure groups being able to establish certain Grand Narratives that could not be challenged—only one set of opinions could be held about Covid, climate change, sexual identity, or Indian Residential Schools. Public disgrace, de-platforming, mob violence, or loss of employment was the fate of those rash enough to express a contrary voice. Now important voices are calling for ‘deniers’ to be jailed.” Bowler quoted journalist Terry Glavin as saying that the lack of a public forum for free debate is fatal to liberal democracy, as the search for truth is replaced by “state-enforced belief.”

In a private discussion with me about Bowler’s post, a journalist acquaintance asked me, “What, in your opinion, is the new dominant ideology?”

Now that is a very good question. What is at the heart of the now dominant ideology? We can see its outworking in issues such as abortion, the “right to die,” LGBTQ rights, etc. But what is at its heart? What is its core belief? What holds all of these movements together?

We could call it “woke.” But that is a rather imprecise and unhelpful term. Woke to what? It is more an insult than a definition.

A term used a couple of generations ago to describe the rising and now dominant ideology is more precise: secular humanism. The modern dominant ideology is certainly humanist, in that it raises human opinion to the level of ultimate truth. It is also secular, in that it opposes any god or religion that would challenge the supremacy of human authority.

The new dominant ideology also has something to do with human rights. But not human rights as traditionally defined. The Enlightenment definition of human rights focused on freedom of thought, freedom of belief, freedom of religion, freedom of expression, and freedom of assembly. Those human rights are now under attack by the dominant ideology.

I think it more accurate to say that the new worldview is all about my human rights. That is, at the core of the new ideology is a deep streak of selfishness, the attitude that “I have a right to do whatever I want and get whatever I want, with no consequences and no criticism.” This is taught in the schools, as children are told, “Follow your dreams. You can be whatever you want.” Even if the child has no aptitude or ability. The teaching is reinforced when every student is given a pass. This attitude translates into terrible singers demanding their right to be on American Idol because “This is my dream.” It is evident in LGBTQ individuals demanding the right to be leaders in churches (and other institutions), regardless of whether this would be good for the church or whether their beliefs match the church’s. The church is expected to change its beliefs to suit them. This attitude is evident in people pursuing personal sexual pleasure and then avoiding the consequences by aborting the resultant children or dumping them on the state to raise. It is evident in spouses divorcing because they both expected the other spouse to do all of the giving and none of the taking. It is evident in drug addicts’ expectation that society should provide them with free drugs and free accommodation while giving up nothing in return. It is evident in criminals expecting to escape punishment because of their race or past trauma or the failure of society to support them—or simply because of the widespread idea that there is no such thing as right and wrong, morality being an obsolete social construct. It is evident in politicians assuming that corruption is just the way the system operates and it does not really harm anyone. It is evident in environmentalists’ naïve expectation that we can eliminate carbon emissions without eliminating jobs or reducing our standard of living, that we can have our needs met without ever chopping down a tree or excavating a mine, that we will never have to make hard choices. It is evident in the general attitude that the state (that is, everyone else) is obligated to provide me with whatever I need or want.

As a Christian and a citizen, I believe that I have an obligation to love my neighbor, assist the needy, help the helpless, care for the natural world, and treat all races equally. But I also believe that all of us have an obligation to do the same. It is not all about me.