On Friday, August 13, 1965, a small, beat-up cargo ship set sail from Calcutta. In addition to the crew, one passenger, A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami, disembarked in New York City with 40 rupees, a three-month visa, and a mission to bring Krishna consciousness to the Western world. 

60 years later, thanks to vigorous public engagement, widespread distribution of religious literature, and the highly visible practice of chanting “Hare Krishna” in public spaces, the success of Bhaktivedanta Swami’s mission can be seen in the many hundreds of temples and centers established around the globe, the many millions of books distributed, and the thousands of festivals held around the world every year.

A well-timed liberalization of US immigration laws helped, but the one essential thing that made it possible for His Divine Grace, A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, to come to the United States of America and plant the seed for the worldwide Hare Krishna movement that we have the privilege of participating in today is the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, which says:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

The first section of this Amendment, known as “the Establishment Clause,” is particularly significant for members of the Hare Krishna Movement. Thanks to the First Amendment, Srila Prabhupada could freely speak to anyone and everyone about Krishna consciousness, chant the holy names in public spaces, and establish ISKCON under New York’s Religious Corporation Law.

The political circumstances that provided a legal foundation for the humble origins and phenomenal growth of the Hare Krishna movement clearly illustrate how spiritual movements exist within political contexts. This means that caretakers and proponents of spiritual movements have a duty to respond meaningfully to surrounding political conditions. 

When it was adopted in 1791, the First Amendment was only applied to Federal law. In 1925, the United States Supreme Court ruled that it also applied to states, and, in 1947, the Court drew on Thomas Jefferson’s metaphor of “a wall of separation between church and State” for its decision in a landmark case, Everson v. Board of Education.

This decision stands as one of the most influential rulings on the intention of the Establishment Clause insofar as our government’s relationship with religion is concerned. Listen to the clear and comprehensive language Justice Hugo Black used in writing the majority opinion:

“The ‘establishment of religion’ clause of the First Amendment means at least this: Neither a state nor the Federal Government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions or prefer one religion over another. Neither a state nor the Federal Government can, openly or secretly, participate in the affairs of any religious organizations or groups and vice versa.”

The separation between church and state, clearly defined in this decision, was the necessary political condition for Srila Prabhupada to come to the United States and preach the message of Lord Chaitanya.

What if the wall of separation between church and state were to be dismantled?

This is not a rhetorical question because it’s actually happening right now. Lawmakers across the country are working very hard to demolish the wall of separation between church and state in the United States.

For example, in Oklahoma, the state school superintendent ordered public schools to incorporate the Bible into lessons for grades 5 through 12. The order made it clear that adherence to the mandate was compulsory and strict compliance was expected, adding that “The Bible is an indispensable historical and cultural touchstone. Without basic knowledge of it, Oklahoma students are unable to properly contextualize the foundation of our nation.”

This last phrase clearly implies a connection between church and state that contradicts the intention of the First Amendment’s “Establishment Clause.”

This past November, a federal judge temporarily blocked a Louisiana law requiring every public school classroom to display a specific, state-approved version of the Ten Commandments commonly used by Protestants that also happens to match the version used in the 1960 movie, “The Ten Commandments” starring Charlton Heston in the role of Moses.

According to Robert Jones, president of the Public Religion Research Institute, this law’s real intent is to privilege a particular expression of Christianity: “It is less about the ideas and more about its use as a symbol, a totem, that marks territory for a particular religious tradition.”

Which makes it all the more significant that President Trump also voiced support for displaying the Ten Commandments in public schools after Louisiana law was passed. Whatever else you may think of President Trump or his policies, this should be a matter of great concern for any minority religion in the United States.

How much of a minority are we? From the inside, the Hare Krishna Movement looks big. ISKCON News is full of stories about how our movement is growing and our influence is spreading.

But when we look from the outside, we can see that the Hare Krishna movement in the United States amounts to only about 750,000, including full-time devotees, dedicated practitioners, and worshippers who regularly visit our temples on Sundays. That makes us only about .2% of the total US population and only 22% of the 3,370,000 Hindus in the United States, comprising a mere 1% of the population, compared to 70% who identify as Christian. 

Every study I have looked at shows that among those who identify as Christian, over 102 million identify as Christian Nationalist Adherents or Sympathizers. That’s 30% of the total US population. This means that Christian Nationalists outnumber Hare Krishna devotees by well over 100 million people.

The good news is that an overwhelming majority of people in the United States are not sympathetic to the objectives of Christian Nationalism. The bad news is that Christian Nationalists have acquired a disproportionate amount of power in the United States government.

So what is Christian Nationalism? For starters, it’s not Christianity per se, nor is it even a religion, lest you think I’m criticizing a religion. Christian Nationalism is a political ideology based on the idea that the United States was founded as a Christian nation and, therefore, should be a Christian nation today and in the future.

In other words, Christian Nationalists believe that, in the United States, laws should be based on a particular set of conservative Christian values and that being a Christian is synonymous with being a real American.

This means that those of us who don’t belong to this particular religious group should not be considered real Americans. This ideology resolves in something akin to the conclusive political maxim of George Orwell’s Animal Farm: “All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.”

Christian Nationalism is an ideology of blatant inequality that clearly runs counter to our philosophy and values. We’re enjoined to see not just the spiritual equality of all people, but of all beings: “The humble sages, by virtue of true knowledge, see with equal vision a learned and gentle brāhmaṇa, a cow, an elephant, a dog and a dog-eater [outcaste]” (Bhagavad-gita 5:18).

Krishna makes his inclusive disposition abundantly clear in the Bhagavad-gita, which is reflected in the self-evident diversity of ISKCON congregations: “As all surrender unto Me, I reward them accordingly. Everyone follows My path in all respects, O son of Pṛthā” (Bhagavad-gita 4:11).

Our Founder-Acharya made it abundantly clear that our theology does not paint God into a sectarian corner and that sectarian religious identities, as well as national identities, are just temporary bodily designations (upadhis): “‘I am American, ‘I am Indian,’ ‘I am Hindu,’ ‘I am Muslim,’ ‘I am Christian.’ With this upādhi, we are acting. But bhakti means without upādhi.”

A political ideology that reinforces both a sectarian religious identity and a national identity is an uber-upadhi that flies in the face of our beliefs about the nature of material identities and the transcendental nature of bhakti. 

So, how much power do Christian Nationalists really have, and how did they get it?

By now, most devotees in the United States have probably heard of Project 2025: a 900-page manual for a radical restructuring of the executive branch of our government in accordance with Christian Nationalist priorities.

Project 2025 was published by The Heritage Foundation, an activist conservative think tank. Many former Trump administration officials contributed to its creation, and many of those contributors are now current Trump administration officials in positions of extraordinary power. An analysis by Time magazine found that nearly two-thirds of Trump’s 57 executive actions in just the first four days of his second term “mirror or partially mirror” proposals from Project 2025.

So, what’s the problem? What’s the danger of this? You might think that injecting religion into government is a good thing. After all, we have this verse from the Srimad Bhagavatam: “This King, Mahārāja Pṛthu, is the best amongst those who are following religious principles. As such, he will engage everyone in the pursuit of religious principles and give those principles all protection. He will also be a great chastiser to the irreligious and atheistic (those who are against religious principles)” (Srimad Bhagavatam 4.16.4).

Okay, so what if Trump fancies himself a King, and his ministers are imposing religion on the citizens? Isn’t that better than a secular or atheistic government? No, it’s not and here’s why: First, let’s take a closer look at the above verse. The words and phrases in this verse are about dharma: principles of religion, not a sectarian interpretation of a singular form of faith.

Our interest is in promoting universal principles of religion, and to do that, we need the protections provided by the separation of church and state.

It’s important to note that, beyond any superficial appearance of similarities, our Gaudiya Vaishnava worldview differs from that of Christian Nationalism in many significant ways:

1. Christian Nationalism’s core worldview is a fusion of religion, racial identity, and nationalism that views the US as a divinely ordained Christian nation. We accept the US as a multi-faith environment that isn’t divinely ordained to be anything in particular, and we don’t think that God plays favorites based on religious, racial, or national identities. 
2. Christian Nationalism sees Christianity in general, and Evangelical Protestantism in particular, as the only true path, which provides a rationalization for intolerance of other faiths. We see bhakti as a universal path while respecting diverse faith traditions, and we actively participate in interfaith conversations.
3. Christian Nationalism is adamantly opposed to diversity, equity, and inclusion, and promotes the dominance of Christian culture while marginalizing other religions, secularism, or anything remotely progressive. Krishna consciousness, by contrast, is exceptionally inclusive and pluralistic, emphasizing spiritual unity beyond external material designations.
4. Christian Nationalism promotes a kind of morality that emphasizes strict gender roles, patriarchy, and opposition to LGBTQ+ rights. Srila Prabhupada, on the other hand, had to constantly push back against his male disciples who wanted to limit women’s service opportunities, and he accepted gay disciples, many of whom he gave Sannyasa and made leaders in his movement.
5. Christian Nationalism seeks to align the state with its version of Christian morality and governance. While we tend to be politically neutral, we promote the idea of governance based on varna-dharma principles rather than on conceptions of caste or creed.
6. Finally, Christian nationalism’s social vision is one of a hierarchical society where Christian values and aesthetics dominate public life. Our social vision is grounded in universal dharma, spiritual equality, and cooperative service to Divinity and humanity.

Krishna consciousness promotes spiritual inclusivity and sees governance as ideally informed by universal ethical principles rather than sectarianism. Christian Nationalism is exclusivist and politically charged, aimed at enforcing a specific sectarian framework on society.

In her sworn testimony before Congress about the threat of Christian Nationalism, Amanda Tyler, executive director of the Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty, said, “Conflating religious authority with political authority is idolatrous and often leads to the oppression of minority and other marginalized groups as well as the spiritual impoverishment of religion.”

I’ve also heard Christians who oppose Christian Nationalism say that it not only threatens our republic, it belittles their faith, that it’s a fixture of the empire, not of the Kingdom, which refers to Jesus’s reply to the Pharisees “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s” (Matthew 22.21), which is understood as an instruction on how Christians should separate earthly political authority from divine spiritual authority.

So what should we do? Should we do anything?

Bhaktivinode Thakur exemplified engaged Vaisnavism in the modern era. While deeply immersed in bhakti, he also engaged in social and political reform, such as combating caste discrimination and addressing corruption. He demonstrated how a devotee could balance spiritual focus with responsible worldly engagement.

Lord Chaitanya took direct action when the Chand Kazi threatened the right to engage in harinama sankirtana, showing us how spiritual movements unfold within and are required to respond to their surrounding political environments.

We can also see how deeply Krishna’s actions are connected to politics in the Mahabharata as he orchestrated events leading to the battle of Kurukshetra.

If the Supreme Personality of Godhead is not indifferent to worldly affairs, how can we justify inaction when the one essential political condition that made it possible for Srila Prabhupada to come to the United States and plant the seed for the Hare Krishna Movement is under attack?

With the opportunity to participate in Srila Prabhupada’s mission to deliver the Western countries comes the responsibility to defend our right to preach the message of Lord Chaitanya on Srila Prabhupada’s behalf.

What can those of us who live in the United States do?

Number One: Practice Joyfulness. Krishna consciousness is a practice that is “joyfully performed.” Doubling down on our spiritual practices is a formula for generating inner joy, and joyfulness is a form of resistance. Don’t let the chaos-makers live rent-free in your head 24/7. Shut them out, cultivate joy, and radiate that joy out into the world.

Number Two: Get Angry. Once the battle of Kuruksetra started, Krishna reminded Arjuna of how rotten the Kauravas were just to get him angry so that he would fight with determination. Would Arjuuna not have experienced spiritual bliss as he manifested his anger in the course of being an instrument of Krishna’s will? We can be joyful and angry at the same time, following in Arjuna’s footsteps.

Number Three: Take Action. Don’t allow yourself to be overwhelmed into inaction, don’t let complacency set in, and don’t capitulate before the fight even starts. There are four strategies for social action: service, advocacy, non-cooperation, and direct action. We have four core values, the four pillars of dharma. Below this article, there’s a worksheet that you can use to create your personal blueprint for spiritually-informed activism by connecting each of our core values to each action strategy. 

Number Four: Connect with Others. Build community among devotees and with people outside of our movement. In addition to the Baptist Joint Committee that I mentioned earlier, many organizations, both secular and religious, such as Interfaith Alliance और Americans United for the Separation of Church and State, are actively taking a stand against the incursions of Christian Nationalism into public policies and government institutions.

Finally, Number Five: Broadcast our Vision. What attracts people to a movement is a clear, inspiring, and unifying vision of the future that returns us to a previously glorious condition. Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati knew this. Srila Prabhupada knew it, too; going “Back to Godhead” is our version of “Make America Great Again.”

Aside from the obvious transcendental versus terrestrial emphases, one notable difference between our slogan and theirs is that we are personalists. Accordingly, our slogan represents a personalist worldview: we want everyone to return to their eternal personal relationship with the personality of Godhead.

By contrast, nationalism of any kind is impersonal: it’s all about the state, not about people. When Nationalism is followed to its logical conclusion, the state is all that matters, and people become expendable.

The vision that drives our mission, found in Srila Prabhupada’s Preface to Srimad Bhagavatam, consists of the re-spiritualization of the entire human society as a means for all of humanity to become one in peace, friendship, and prosperity with a common cause. Lifting this vision to a prominent place in the marketplace of ideas is the best way to safeguard Srila Prabhupada’s mission and protect our right to practice the yuga dharma, harinama sankirtana, in Silver Spring and San Francisco, in Tuscon and Tulsa, in New York and New Orleans, and every town and village in the United States of America.

व्यक्त किए गए विचार आवश्यक रूप से इस्कॉन या इस्कॉन समाचार के विचारों और विश्वासों को प्रतिबिंबित नहीं करते हैं।

About the Author:

Hari-kirtana Das is a yoga and meditation teacher, spiritual mentor, and the author of two books on yoga philosophy: Journey Into the Bhagavad Gita: A Guide to Exploring Timeless Principles of Transcendental Knowledge and Integrating Them Into Your Life और In Search of the Highest Truth: Adventures in Yoga Philosophy. He joined ISKCON in 1977 and was initiated by Satsvarupa Dasa Goswami in 1978. He has served in ISKCON in a wide variety of roles since that time. Hari-kirtana is on the faculty of numerous Yoga Teacher Training programs, offers live online workshops and courses throughout the year, and is a frequent contributor to forums and magazines about the enduring relevance of yoga’s ancient wisdom to life in the modern world.

You can learn more about his service by visiting his वेबसाइट and following him on Instagram और यूट्यूब.