The Hypocrisy of Pragmatists: Ben Shapiro, Jordan Peterson, and the "Religion as Social Control"

So, I’ve noticed alot of theists who argues that religion is essential—not because they truly believe in God, but because they think society needs it to function. Ben Shapiro and Jordan Peterson are prime examples.

Peterson doesn’t openly say whether he believes in God, but he constantly talks about religious stories as psychological tools for stability. He pushes the idea that society would crumble without religious structures, even if they aren’t literally true. That’s not faith—it’s using religion as a means of social control.

Shapiro, on the other hand, claims to be religious, but his arguments often sound more like a lawyer defending civilization rather than someone who deeply believes. He promotes religion not just as a personal truth, but as a necessary system to keep moral order in check.

But here’s the problem: if you don’t actually believe something but still push it onto others for societal stability, isn’t that just manipulation? It assumes that you are smart enough to see through it, but "the masses" need the structure, the rules, the fear of God—because without it, they’d devolve into chaos. That’s basically saying, "We know it’s a myth, but let’s not tell anyone because society needs myths to function."

If religion is true, fine—believe in it. If it’s false, then be honest about it. But promoting it as a lie people need just to keep them in check? That’s hypocrisy. Thoughts?