Two weeks after writing about the fervor of the late Terri Schiavo's "Christianist `supporters,'" Hendrik Hertzberg of the New Yorker last month described Representative Tom Delay as a "hard-right Christianist crusader." A few months before, soon after US President George W. Bush was re-elected, the conservative Weekly Standard reported that an Ohio cartoonist had sent out a communication deploring "militant Christianist Republicans."
Obviously there is a difference in meaning between the adjectives Christian and Christianist. Thanks to Jon Goldman, an editor at Webster's New World Dictionaries, I have the modern coinage of the latter with its pejorative connotation. "I have a new term for those on the fringes of the religious right," wrote the blogging Andrew Sullivan on June 1, 2003, "who have used the Gospels to perpetuate their own aspirations for power, control and oppression: Christianists. They are as anathema to true Christians as the Islamists are to true Islam."
Not such a new term. You have to be careful about claiming coinage, as I learned to my rue (my 1970s baby, workfare, turned out to have been coined earlier; same with neuroethics). In 1883, W. H. Wynn wrote a homily that said "Christianism -- if I may invent that term -- is but making a sun-picture of the love of God." He didn't invent the term, either. In the early 1800s, the painter Henry Fuseli wrote scornfully that "Christianism was inimical to the progress of arts." And John Milton used it in 1649.
Adding -ist or -ism to a word usually colors it negatively, as can be seen in secularist. In One Nation Under Therapy, Christina Hoff Sommers and Sally Satel coined therapism to mean "the revolutionary idea that psychology can take the place of ethics and religion," which they believe undermines the American creed of "self-reliance, stoicism, courage in the face of adversity and the valorization of excellence." Therapists (a neutral term -- indeed, masseurs like to upgrade their job description to massage therapist) won't like therapism, which is intended to be disparaging.
As Christianist, with its evocation of Islamist, gains wider usage as an attack word on what used to be called the religious right, another suffix is being used in counterattack to derogate those who denounce church influence in politics. "The Catholic scholar George Weigel calls this phenomenon `Christophobia,'" the columnist Anne Applebaum wrote in the Washington Post. She noted that he borrowed the word from the American legal scholar, J. H. H. Weiler. The word was used by Weigel "after being struck by the European Union's fierce resistance to any mention of the continent's Christian origins in the draft versions of the new, and still unratified, European constitution."
Phobia, which means "fear of," was doing fine as a medical term until recently. "Phobias are irrational fears," says Elaine Rodino, a psychologist in Santa Monica, California. "They are not just `sort of fears;' they are full and intense and uncontrollable." An anxiety psychologist in Chicago, David Carbonell, says that "the clinical term phobia is not doing well. Often it's appended to another word to indicate a wide range of dislikes that may have nothing to do with the core meaning of avoidance as a response to powerful fear. I just fielded a request for an interview on `nudophobia.'"
These range from Islamophobe to Christophobe, both of which were used in the Oct. 23, 1997, edition of the Independent in London. They include Dean-o-phobe in a 2003 New Republic article, when Jonathan Chait confessed, "It's not entirely clear to me why I've taken such an intense dislike to Howard Dean."
Today's negative connotation of the suffix -phobia (the ailment) or -phobe (the person) comes from the political-social accusation of homophobia. The original meaning, according to the OED, is "fear of men, or aversion towards the male sex." Chambers' Journal in 1920 wrote of a woman whose "salient characteristic was a contempt for the male sex represented in the human biped ... The seeds of homophobia had been sown early."
Many doctors take umbrage at the general use of their suffix in words like Francophobe for "one who calls French fries `freedom fries;'" they don't like the way it dilutes the scientific seriousness of the term about an irrational fear. But professions don't own their words. Mathematicians also gripe about the theft of their beloved parameters, to no avail; common usage has a way of snatching a specific word or suffix to do more general semantic work.
Let the listener or reader beware: -ist and -phobe, more often than not these days, are suffixes tacked on to words to turn them into fierce derogations. If this is alarmist, then I'm a lexiphobe.
EXUBERANCE
When Alan Greenspan, the Federal Reserve chairman, sagely warned rabid stock touts and gullible investors about irrational exuberance in 1996, he used an adjective to cast a pall over a beautiful noun. Ever since, the word exuberance -- rooted in "fruitful, fertile," related to a cow's uber, "udder" -- has picked up an old sense of excess.
Comes now one of the world's best-known psychiatrists to the word's rescue. Professor Kay Redfield Jamison of Johns Hopkins, author of the best seller An Unquiet Mind and co-author of a doorstop-size classic medical text on manic depressive illness, has given us an uplifting reading experience: Exuberance: The Passion for Life.
"Words for desolation come apace," Jamison notes, "those for exuberance less so ... In part this is because the language for melancholy is such a rich and nuanced one." She's right: It's enough to make us a pack of dispirited, despondent, Gloomy Guses.
But what of the synonymy of cheer? Sprightliness, enthusiasm, exultation, spiritedness, buoyancy, elan, ebullience -- all these upbeat, elated words are there to back up exuberance.
This is probably apocryphal, but I once heard a literary legend about Robert Louis Stevenson, a man of wide mood swings. In an early draft of A Child's Garden of Verses, he supposedly had a line that read, "The world is so big and I am so small, I do not like it at all, at all." Rather than depress youthful readers with that unhappy thought, he changed it to the memorable expression of exuberance: "The world is so full of a number of things, I'm sure we should all be as happy as kings."
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations