Mormonism Groomed Us for Fascism - Ep. 1382

Religious Authority and Authoritarian Movements: What Mormon History Reveals About Susceptibility to Fascism

On January 7, 2021, one day after the Capitol riot, religion scholar and podcast host John Dehlin released a provocative examination asking whether Mormonism groomed its adherents for fascism. The timing was deliberate. As footage circulated of Trump supporters storming the nation's Capitol, Dehlin noticed something that troubled him: Latter-day Saints appeared among those crowds at disproportionately high rates, supporting Trump at levels comparable to white evangelical Christians. This observation sparked a deeper question that deserves serious examination by both scholars and believers: Do certain religious structures and theological emphases create psychological and cultural conditions that make followers more susceptible to authoritarian political movements?

This is not a question about whether Mormonism is fascism, nor is it a partisan attack on any particular faith community. Rather, it asks how institutional religious practices, specifically those centered on charismatic leadership, doctrinal conformity, and in-group/out-group thinking, may inadvertently condition believers to accept authoritarian rhetoric and leadership in secular contexts.

The Case for Institutional Conditioning

According to Dehlin's analysis in "Mormonism Groomed Us for Fascism," the parallels between authoritarian religious structures and fascist political movements are striking and worth examining systematically. The argument rests on identifying specific theological and institutional practices, then mapping them onto documented characteristics of authoritarian movements.

The most fundamental parallel concerns veneration of charismatic leadership. In Latter-day Saint theology and practice, church leaders occupy an exalted position. Members sing "Follow the Prophet," attend to prophecies and revelations delivered by a single president, and are taught that questioning leadership authority constitutes rebellion against divine will. Temple covenants historically included promises to sustain leaders unconditionally. While this structure differs markedly from secular fascism, the psychological mechanism functions similarly: concentrated authority, reduced critical distance, and moral permission to defer judgment to a leader figure.