I’ve more or less completely rejected ideology as a cause of modern degradation. Yes, ideology is probably a secondary cause of some things but almost all modern ideologies are different opinions on how to make society fully technical. If you wish to fully understand Technique, I recommend reading my article which covers it in depth. But I will give you a short explanation.
Technique can on some level be compared to technology but they are not the same thing. Technology is a part of technique, technique is the reason that we seek to achieve new technological capabilities. Technique can be summarized as an autonomous decentralized force that seeks ultimate efficiency and consumes everything in its way. What I mean here is that there is no central authority to technique. Technique isn’t managed by the government or a corporation, these entities might fulfill technique but they don't decide what technique is. When Frito-Lay installs new machinery or implements a new seed oil it isn't because they want to, they need to. This is what is meant by all-consuming, no entity is to be above technique, technique seeks to rule over all entities.
Of the things that technique seeks to control, God is at the top of the list. Most believers find their faith through irrational means, you didn’t fill out a logic table to find the Holy Ghost, it came to you in a flash of spiritual drunkenness. Consequentially your belief isn’t reliant upon any worldly expectations like money or convenience. In fact, your faith is wholly irrational and inconvenient. Do away with any negative connotations you might have of these adjectives, irrationality and inconvenience are characteristics of the best things in life.
When you were taken into the waters of baptism you made a covenant to put aside convenience and rationality in favor of the will of God. I wrote an article about the irrational and great faith of Abraham a while back ago, only through irrationality could Abraham have faith that despite sacrificing his son at the age of 100 he could maintain faith that God would keep his promise to spread his seed like the sands. You’re ontologically not that different from Abraham, you try to maintain your faith despite the illusions of conflict.
Furthermore, your faith isn't particularly convenient in a worldly sense. I think of the tribulations of the Latter-day Saints of the past and the violence that they had to endure. While many fled in the face of persecution, many more maintained and emboldened their faith. A few times in the history of the church, the government legalized violence towards the saints and stripped them of their constitutional rights. This didn't stop members from submitting to the Lord of hosts. This dynamic isn't particular to the saints. Many religions have faced persecution for their beliefs yet they continue. Nothing about this has changed, to this day religious people throughout the world face persecution due to their beliefs not aligning with the philosophy of the current year. Even in the supposedly free west, Christians have their livelihoods threatened by not conforming to modern sociological theories. Were they to relinquish their faith their lives would undoubtedly become more convenient but convenience wasn’t the reason they believed in the first place. You sacrifice all sorts of conveniences when you decide to believe. You watch the food you eat, the thoughts you have, you surrender your personal ethics, and much more.
This sort of thinking is often called Fideism. There are some Aristotelian theologians in the Catholic tradition like Thomas Aquinas who thought that there was plenty of rationality in faith but I cannot conceive of a Latter-day Saint perspective that could create faith out of rationality. Instead, we rely chiefly on revelation for our testimonies. The only way to know the truth of The Book of Mormon is to simply pray and ask God. Nothing else will bring you to that conclusion.
All this is to say that there is nothing technical about genuine faith. It is difficult to maintain, it makes you vulnerable, and is extremely inconvenient. People are often infatuated by the life of the monk or the nun, and they should be, it is a rather interesting endeavor. Some of the greatest philosophers like Schopenhauer and Nietzsche wrote great books inspired by the lifestyle. At its core, I think the fascination comes from the monk’s decision to almost completely reject technique. It is the lack of technical application that makes the life of a Monk beautiful. Take for example how monasteries are created with beauty in mind and not just function.
It is this rejection of technique by religion that causes great strife within the religious progressive. The religious progressive is rarely a true believer in the faith to which they seek to bring progress to but this doesn’t mean that they don't have a religion of their own. Their religion is technique. Those who are consumed by the technical milieu seek to bring maximum efficiency to everything. To them, the inconveniences of believing in traditional family structures, paying tithes, regular worship, etc. are obstacles in the way of religion becoming part of the technical milieu.
You will notice how the religious progressive worships technique, in the same manner, the faithful worship God; unquestionably. In their view, anything that may come from science, technology, or the academic apparatus is elevated to a status above religious doctrine. Technique is rife with mysteries of its own; although they are typically shallow, it fills the God-shaped hole of the technical man. In fact, the worship of technique derives from man’s disposition to the worship of the mysterious; technique is then a magic of sorts.
What allows technique to supersede God in the minds of so many is how it makes its fruits immediately available. It’s much easier to appreciate air conditioning and the internet than it is to wait a lifetime for exaltation. Progressives, then, make practical activity a replacement for worship and God. As a matter of doctrine, Christianity disdains excessive practical activity. To live in abundance is considered a sin we call it gluttony, luxuries, and money represent the City of Man which is fallen. Yet, like most sins, indulgence in technique is attractive.
Towards the end of the medieval period, the self-control found within Christianity began to be cast aside in favor of "science". While once it was seen as unethical to desecrate a post mortem body for any reason, it became increasingly acceptable in the pursuit of knowledge. Perhaps the origins of modern Christian progressivism can be traced back to that era within the catholic church and not the protestant reformation as many say. Technique was well on its way to becoming the all-consuming force that it has become well before Martin Luther came along.
At the core of the technique of the progressive is the pursuit of the long-established human endeavor to subordinate God, and technique is the sword they wield. Christianity denies man the convenience of being his own deity, thus the visceral energy with which progressives fight. Within the realm of religion, or anything else, technique can have no boundaries. Where obstacles are found, they must be immediately destroyed. For a religion like Christianity which is rife with boundaries and rules (hallelujah), it creates a problem for those who live completely in the technical milieu. In this way, the religious progressive can be thought of as a technician. They are the true believers of technique and seek to bring forth technical paradise.
The Religious technician is typically consumed with his endeavor to overcome God. While most believers live with our faith at the center of our lives, we aren’t professional believers. Believing is simply something that we do. But you will notice that the religious progressive within the Church of Jesus Christ or any other religion makes the forthcoming of technique one of their core prerogatives. This holds true from the most active professional columnist to the least influential BYU undergrad. It isn’t simply enough for them to disagree with or dislike a certain policy or doctrine, they NEED to change it. This is the compulsion of technique. If technical change CAN be done, it MUST be done.
Consider the highest professional class of the religious technical cult. In this class, you have academics, theologians, and journalists. I use all of these words very loosely. The occupants of this class are constantly striving for respeck. More than the Kingdom of God, they desire worldly honors. If they were to be faithful believers, this endeavor becomes considerably more difficult. For example, a BYU social scientist who desires to be widely published and recognized will find it difficult to do so in the technical milieu if he simultaneously enthusiastically supports and defends the Church which employs him. He may be denied grants, awards, and titles if he believes marriage is between a man and a woman. The only two options then are to reject the fake fruits of technique or become a technician and be jerked-off all day, every day; the technician will never deny a hand-job, it’s just so efficient.
In this way, the religious progressive has fully adopted the bourgeoisie morality. The morality of the bourgeoisie is primarily a morality of work. For the progressive the work towards technical efficiency within the church is noble and virtuous, it is the Good. The work replaces the need for God. Where man once searched for the Good within the God-head he now defers to the work of technique. Where man was once purified by the waters of baptism he is now purified by the righteous work of technique. More precisely, for the progressive work is god. For the technician the only thing that becomes important is the exercise of a métier, be that of a BYU professor, grad student, or therapist. Nothing may get in the way of the métier being fulfilled to the fullest capacity, including the Holy.
In the pursuit of technical fruits, the religious progressive applies technique from other industries to his religion. You certainly have noticed how to the religious progressive quantitative metrics are fundamental to their faith. For example, the technician makes membership numbers and statistics a constant point of reference. For the faithful, membership numbers have little bearing on the truth of the Church. We do desire for everyone to accept the gospel so that they may too enter the Kingdom one day. However, membership numbers have little bearing on our own testimonies, we like to believe that we could be the last members in the world and our faith would remain intact.
The technician views religious statistics in the same way a businessman might. The technician points to declining membership rates (which isn't actually happening) and sees an opportunity to apply the technique of business to rectify the problem. Like a business, the technician believes that the way to correct a perceived decline of growth is to change business model. Meaning that they desire to change the foundational theology and under the laws of technique, the have the authority to do so.
In this way, the technician sees the church more as a business than the one true Church of Jesus Christ. They employ techniques like customer service and human relations which have as their end the goal to adapt and integrate humans into the technical milieu in a way that they will not suffer from it. Yet one cannot be truly faithful without coming to terms with the fact that within life there are many periods of great suffering, this isn't bad or good, it simply is. Human resources seek to mitigate this suffering by destroying any points of conflict between the religious and the secular, however, "conflict is inevitable".
Where there is conflict between the technical man and the church, he expects the church to come up with some sort of solution to satisfy him in the same way a man does standing at the Walmart customer service desk. He sees covenants as products that he can buy and exchange at will. Just as if he petitions a business often enough there is an expectation that the church will provide him with a reformed product.
In the technical milieu, everything can be called into question, first of all; God. Perceived inefficiency must be done away with as soon as possible without exceptions, none at all. Technical innovations like machines and worldly prestige become the visible blessings the technical god gives to his followers. The layman without fancy academic positions, abundant wealth, and friends in high places are the obvious sinners. If work is the mother of all virtues then faith in the God of Abraham is the father of all vices.
The religious progressive sees himself chiefly as the recipient of the blessings of the technical milieu. There is nothing particularly ideological about him. Progressives aren’t really smart enough to come up with or see ideology. They are unknowingly pawns of the technique. Technique denies the existence of any sort of metaphysical truth like ethics and only accepts efficiency as the sole force that guides.
The way to combat the religious progressive isn’t with some sort of counter ideology like Orthodoxy or Conservatism. The only way is to completely reject technique.