Mission and vision

Before the war in Ukraine broke out, I worked on international projects with Russian, Ukrainian, and Dutch students. When introducing myself to a project team, I sometimes described myself as a freedom-loving Westerner. Perhaps that was a bit of a cliché, but it was certainly not untrue: we often associate the East with authoritarian forms of government (think of China and Russia) and the West with freedom and democracy.

Today, however, that is no longer a cliché – nor a self-evident truth. The leader of the Western world, the United States – once “the land of the free” – has fallen into the clutches of an autocrat, Trump, and a clique of oligarchs surrounding him. Step by step, they are dismantling the democratic rule of law in the United States. The only “arguments” Trump offers are that he is great and fantastic. Those who oppose him must suffer. Obey or suffer – that seems to be the new motto.

The American population can roughly be divided into two groups. On one side are the people fighting for their freedom and opposing Trump and his oligarchs. On the other side are the Trump supporters and the indifferent. Yet we should not focus too much on Trump himself: if he were to die or resign, the divisions in society would not disappear. After all, Trump personifies the authoritarian leader – the man who, in his own words, will solve all problems. The Trump supporter therefore represents the person who follows such a leader and is willing to sacrifice the basic rights of others – often unaware that, sooner or later, his own rights will erode as well.

In the United States, a large group of people support this kind of strongman. Opposing them are those who believe in freedom, the rule of law, and democracy. And then there is the group that couldn’t care less – the indifferent.

If freedom-loving people do nothing to resist Trump and his clique, the rule of law and democracy will crumble. Only by resisting and standing up for their freedom can they hope to turn the tide. The outcome of this struggle will have far-reaching consequences for freedom throughout the Western world. Freedom-minded people in countries such as the Netherlands, England, Germany, France, and Spain also have an interest in seeing this struggle resolved in favor of liberty. Inaction only serves authoritarian leaders and their oligarchs. Everyone who values freedom must therefore contribute to this struggle – each in their own way.

My contribution lies in combating one of Trump’s and his oligarchs’ key allies: nationalist Christianity. By this, I do not mean the modest believers who pray for their fellow human beings in church every Sunday, but those Christians who seek to restrict women’s and gay rights, abolish abortion rights, and believe the United States should be a predominantly white and Christian nation. My criticism is not directed at the Christian faith as such, but at the arrogant and intolerant version of Christianity that supports authoritarian leaders like Trump and seeks to curtail the freedoms of those who think differently. I oppose the kind of Christianity that claims to possess objective truth and, on that basis, denies others their freedoms. Of course, a Christian may choose not to have an abortion – but, as I will show, they have no right to intimidate women at abortion clinics, make them feel guilty, ban the teaching of evolution, or incite hatred against homosexuals.

Essentially, there are three groups of Christians. The first is convinced of its own righteousness and refuses to engage with dissenters, believing it possesses the truth. This group seeks only power and to impose its will on others. The second consists of Christians who do engage in dialogue with dissenters and believe they have compelling arguments to convince others of their rightness. And then there is a third group: modest believers who view their faith as a personal matter, without the desire to convert others.

The first group is impervious to rational argument, and the third is harmless. Therefore, I focus on the second group. Through my essays and stories, I aim to show that this group lacks compelling arguments to persuade dissenters. In my historical trhiller What Joseph Knew, I take my readers on a rational and emotional journey, hoping that by the end they will recognize that the claim of objective truth on which this second group bases its faith – and which it believes justifies restricting the freedom of others – is built on quicksand. Download the scientific back up for this claim here.