The crusade theory of warfare outlived the Cold War enemy it justified

Evidence

For decades, anticommunism had been a linchpin in the evangelical worldview, justifying militarism abroad and a militant pursuit of moral purity at home. The victory of the free world was something to celebrate, but it was also disorienting. Without a common enemy, it would be more difficult to sustain militant expressions of the faith. Yet even as the Cold War came to an anticlimactic end, the crusade theory of warfare endured. A flexible guide to combat, it could be employed to justify aggression against threats both foreign and domestic. Among Christian nationalists, it could effectively sanctify any engagement where the United States resorted to force. On the home front, it could validate questionable or even ruthless tactics wielded in defense of Christian America. In heroic pursuits of a higher good, the ends would justify the means. Conservative evangelicals knew they were called to fight the Lord’s battle. It just wasn’t entirely clear what that battle would be. — Kristin Kobes Du Mez, Jesus and John Wayne, 312

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to the ‘ends justify the means’ logic in Milgrom and to just-war/crusade theory debates; the flexible enemy formalism echoes Milgrom’s point that institutions/game structures survive their original purpose.