Why a 'redneck'?

I was thinking recently that I should re-visit the issue of why I chose a term such as redneck to describe this blog. The inspiration came about one day on Wikipedia, when I was reading through various pages and found the one focused on the aforementioned, and often pejorative term. Towards the middle of the article, I found the following quote:

"Author Jim Goad's 1997 book The Redneck Manifesto explores the socioeconomic history of low-income Americans. According to Goad, rednecks are traditionally pro-labor and anti-establishment and have an anti-hierarchical religious orientation."

Well, thinking about it, these three characteristics generally apply to me. In terms of being pro-labour, i'm not exactly the most union-friendly person on Earth, but I do believe that workers should not be exploited, as they are, even today in my home state of North Carolina due to "right to work" and "open shop" laws. While, in some instances, labour unions have proven to be overly burdensome on industry, many countries (i.e. Germany) have effectively included a labour voice in industry and have reaped economic rewards. Many people in America might contest me on this, but, lest I ask my critics, have you ever been outside America, especially to Europe? If one has seen these systems in action first hand, I invite comments and criticism; otherwise, frankly, I don't see where there is any viability in arguing against my assertions without due experience. Substance is one thing, and rhetoric is something far different. Reflective of this, I seriously doubt I would be labeled the most "free enterprise" inclined individual around, though I definitely believe in relatively free trade, and am anti-protectionist.

Being anti-establishment is generally a description with which I would concur. I have serious issues with establishment and positions of authority, particularly those in whom I see a desire to manipulate due to greed or a lust for power. Of particular concern to me are those who use morality or religion to further their own desires or objectives. There are too many who sit in the pulpit and claim a moral mandate who, in themselves, are only motivated to raise themselves above others. Good examples of this about in the so-called "Christian Right" who seek to impose theocratic values on American society. I am not a revisionist who believes in a theistic glory plot, where all the Founding Fathers were "Great Men of God" who wanted to create the new Zion in America. In my view, those leading America in its nascent stages were more likely deists than anything else, and were more engaged with the anti-religious ideas of the Enlightenment than any desire to institute Judeo-Christian Values. This is not to say that I do not subscribe to some of the aforementioned ideals, but I will elaborate on this point further in this post.

The third characteristic of a redneck is an anti-hierarchial religious orientation. Of all the three, this one, as the cliche goes, "hits the nail on the head." I don't believe in wearing one's faith on one's sleeve, a view which is not shared by many prominent politicians, but I do have a deep seated belief in the greatness and value of Jesus Christ, both as a historical and religious figure. Digressing from the hackneyed, over-simplified paradigm of Jesus being a static character limited by the Bible and somehow conveniently in agreement with fundamentalists, I see Jesus as a radical, a revolutionary, and the most perfect being who ever existed. Many claim to find Jesus by having some sort of religious epiphany; I would argue that my belief and value that I find in Jesus is derived from the fact his attitudes were simplistic yet deep to the point that they have remained unmatched by anyone else in the human experience.

Jesus hated the establishment; it was, as one relatively familiar with Christian doctrine would know, the establishment, namely the Pharisees of Roman Judaea, who were responsible for his demise. Jesus associated with the unholy, the ostracised, and the poor. He was not generally seen with the "holy rollers" of his time, and was keen on sincerity and love, not the pretence of adherence to dogma or doctrine. He was not keen on power for himself, and encouraged others in an egalitarian fashion which, by modern American standards, would be considered left wing in the extreme. Jesus was, in the end, for the little guy and the underdog, and that is what makes him real to me. Conversely, my view of religion is reflective of this understanding.

I shun the hierarchy of the church, and, while I consider myself nominally a Methodist, have a great deal of admiration for the Quaker model of worship, which emphasizes the priesthood of the believer and the equality of congregants. I am inherently suspicious of all who wish to elevate themselves above others in the worship of any deity, and hence am hesitant to put my trust in institutions such as the clergy. In the end, I believe I am a purist in the Protestant tradition, believing in the value of the individual and his experience with God, putting that above doctrine or any other construct which has been devised to systematise Christianity since its foundation.

So, as these three areas generally apply to me, hence, I am a redneck.