Why Is This Climate Change Different From All The Others?

A news article in the Gannett Wisconsin newspapers recently told of the WI DNR removing all references to "climate change" from their web sites. A comment that someone placed on-line under the article asked "The climate has changed many times - why is this change different from all the others?"

I responded:

On the chance that your question is sincere, I understand that there is one primary difference between the current change and previous climate changes. SPEED. For example, when the "Wisconsin" glaciation of 20,000+ years ago was melted back by warming, the climate change took place over 4,000 years or more. The current warming of the planet, which is roughly on the same scale, is taking 200 years or less.

Another difference is that humanity used to have more mobility. When the climate in Africa became too stressful 75,000 years ago, we left and moved out to Europe, Asia, and Americas. Now, we have all these lines drawn on the map that make it impossible for people whose agriculture has been destroyed by the climate changes to move to someplace better.

And, of course, a big difference now is that we humans exist and are capable with our technology to throw the planetary climate out of balance. Unfortunately, we humans are not capable of working together to solve any problems like that. It's like we are children playing with matches.

Did that help?

Futility of Anti-Trump Demonstrations.

I don't think the people who are demonstrating "against Trump" realize how silly and futile their marches are. It seems that they are dealing from 2 fantasies.

1) The Electoral College. Do they think it possible to change the result of the 11/9 election? While they may think that the American people were voting for President last Tuesday, they were actually voting in each state for a group of (mostly) anonymous "electors", who are dedicated members of each party. In 31 states (including Wisconsin), it is illegal for an elector to vote against his party's candidate. In the last century or so, there have been only 8 individual votes by "faithless electors".

Trump's election is a done deal, with the December 19 Electoral College vote a mere formality. No matter how much anyone demonstrates, there will be no do-over.

2) Demonstrations might affect policy. Really? The times in our history as a nation where mass demonstrations affected policy are as rare as hen's teeth. Protests against the Vietnam War began in 1965, but the war dragged on for 8 (or 10) years. Closer to home, protest marches against Wisconsin Governor Walker and the Act 10 elimination of public unions had LESS than no effect. The failed recall elections left the Governor empowered to push through more of his agenda (Right to Work, Voter Photo ID).

I think the time and energy of the protesters will be put to better use in crafting a new vision of a better America.

A Family Living and Growing in Christ

A Mission

St. Anne's Episcopal Church in De Pere, Wisconsin is my home parish. It is the ninth parish that I have been a member of. It is probably the first that had a simple and clear enough "mission statement" that I could remember for more than five minutes, while still saying something worthwhile. That mission statement is the title of this post.

(A digression: the most effective "mission statement" I know of is "Less filling, tastes great!" Employees at Miller Brewing can measure everything they do against that standard).

For a mission statement to be useful, it needs to translate into action. That means, it must cause us to do things. Measurable, noticeable things. As our Presiding Bishop Michael Curry has said, we are the Episcopal Branch of the Jesus Movement. So, what is it that this mission statement is telling us to do in "Moving With Jesus"?

Growing in Christ

In the Episcopal Church, our Sunday service always includes a reading from one of the four Gospels. The Homily (Sermon) follows, usually involving explanation or expansion of the words and actions of Jesus that we just heard of. Why do we do this, and is 20 minutes a week enough? If we are to be actual movers in the Jesus Movement, we must first know what Jesus thinks, says, and does. Last Sunday's gospel was Luke 16: 19-31, the rich man and the beggar, Lazarus. It's a very sad story of broken relationships and consequences of brokenness. (Some interpretation is needed. Casual reading may leave us thinking that wealth is a bad thing. Since Jesus had rich friends, we have to think deeper. This rich man's sin was the chasm he built between his riches and the community around himself). We learn from this the critical importance that Jesus lays on community, neighbor, compassion.

The future of this, and any parish, depends on the expansion and deepening of our intimate knowledge of Jesus, of his thinking, his sayings, and his actions. And the answer to my second question is, NO! 20 minutes a week is not enough. 5 minutes of reading and 15 minutes of sermonizing are not enough to fill our minds and hearts with the actual person of Jesus. Compare that to the amount of time we are spending lately in getting to know our candidates for office. (I wish I could hold that down to 20 minutes a week!)

The next step in our mission statement is not possible until we really know Jesus.

Living in Christ

Most of us are familiar with the WWJD bracelets. "What Would Jesus Do?" It recently occurred to me that a stronger and more useful question might be "If I were Jesus, what would I do?" There is where we find the bridge between "Growing" and "Living" in Christ. The temptation in WWJD is to remain a spectator on the outside of the Jesus Movement, evaluating the thoughts, words, and actions of those trying to walk the path of Jesus. When the question is "...what would I do?" there is not easy out for us. When we have done the work of "Growing" into the figure of Jesus, in thought, word, and deed, we will know what our next step needs to be. This "Jesus Movement" is not a Sunday morning retreat from the world. Jesus is the pattern of our Tuesday afternoon staff meeting at work, our Thursday evening bowling league, and our Saturday morning at our children's soccer match (What was that you said to the referee after last week's game?).

So?

Wrapping up, I'll say that any parish intent of spiritual growth will do well to focus their programming on these two thoughts:

• How can I come to better understand Jesus' thoughts, words, and deeds?
• How are my thoughts, words, and deeds today resembling Jesus.

Amen.

Minimum Wage Changes is the Tip of the Iceberg.

I started thinking about this a long time ago, but today's monologue started playing out when I saw this article posted on Facebook by The Christian Left:

http://news.groopspeak.com/fast-food-ceo-threatens-to-fire-everyone-if-a-democrat-wins-the-presidency/

In the next 5 years, economists estimate that another 6% of current American jobs will disappear, victims of automation. The advances in technology that are driving this will continue (or accelerate). Boycotts cannot stop this. Laws that require employers to use human workers will not work. Out future (50 or fewer years hence) will include a large and growing population of jobless people. It will include an even larger population of "almost" or "soon-to-be" jobless people. Our society (politically and economically) operates almost strictly in a capitalist fashion with small, decorative touches of socialism around the edges (Social Security, Medicaid, public schools).

It seems to me that there are only two directions that we can go: deeper into oligarchy or deeper into socialism. However, when the jobless population reaches a critical mass, the question will be "How much of society's resources will be directed toward the support of those jobless?" Since people in large masses haven't changed in a few millennia, the threat of violence by the 80% (say, the 40% jobless and the 40% soon-to-be jobless) will require an answer.

A rough estimate (purely back--of-envelope, SWAG) would put the current number in the neighborhood of 60% of the GDP. I get that from the 45% that goes toward wages and salaries, and a little over half of the 27% that goes into taxes. As the resources (GDP) that are directed into wages and salaries shrinks toward single digits, two things will have to happen. First, more tax revenue will need to be extracted from the economy. Second, the nature of joblessness will need to be reshaped into normalcy.

Many of the highly developed economies around the world are on this path. Recently, many employers in Sweden have gone to 6 hour work days. (Oddly enough, they find that total employee output remains as high as it was at 40 hours.) As the need for "employee output" shrinks, the rest of the social safety net will be more important. When it becomes a requirement for the majority of the population, it will morph from "safety net" to "lifestyle".

In the United States, conservatives have exalted the capitalist system to near religious levels. It seems almost as if the worship of "Mammon" has become the state religion. Coupled with that, the disdain toward the "losers", the "takers", those who are "dependent" on government grows. Interestingly, this election cycle features a larger than usual amount of rage by those who are being driven into being "takers". It seems that, as long as the "losers" could be characterized as lazy and irresponsible, the masses were OK with the economic losses. When too many of the masses found themselves to be driven out of the circle of winners (through automation, outsourcing, immigration, corporate failures, etc), they have reacted badly.

A significant portion of the resources of this country must be directed to support ALL the people of this country. When there are not enough jobs of sufficient quality to go around, we (that is, our government) will be forced to accomodate this new world of joblessness.

Some Thoughts on Racial Conflict in the US

People can live together in peace only in communities that value and practice justice. Communities of justice can only form, however, when the power of that community is constrained and directed toward the benefit of all members of the community.

One of the sources for my view of community or society comes from a college American History course where we studied from "The Power Elite", by C. Wright Mills. A key concept is that "power" is more important than wealth, and is more addictive than any known drug. Mills took off from the statement by Lord Acton, ("Power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely"), and filled chapters with illustrations. Some recent publications display some of the same thoughts. The Robert P. Jones book "The End of White Christian America" and the  analysis of the support for Donald Trump in the current presidential campaign show that the issue of power or, more precisely, the loss of power by white men is leading to a mental "gated community" among them.

The other source of my thoughts on this comes from the work of philosopher John Rawls in "A Theory of Justice". His "veil of ignorance" thought experiment is a method for examining the structures and systems of our world, for the purpose of minimizing misery without eliminating moderate wealth. Imagine that you are designing a collection of life situations out in the world. After you have built your various life-styles, you will then be placed in one of them. However, you have no clue as to which particular life you will inhabit. It should be pretty clear that "slavery" will not be an attribute that you would build into your world, since there is a chance you would land in that situation. A more recent description of this approach to understanding justice is called the "ovarian lottery" (Warren Buffett). The main point is that "justice" does not require that we all live completely equal life-styles. It DOES require that the riches of society not be so skewed toward the high end that the low end cannot live a decent life.

Here's where I'm going with this: The aims of POWER and of JUSTICE in America today are diametrically opposed. Since we have the clear teaching from every major strain of spirituality that justice is the first step on the path of peace, we must identify the points of failure in our society that allow power to overwhelm justice.

Wisconsin: A Proving Ground for Divisiveness

A letter to the editor of the Green Bay press Gazette complains that Scott Walker is "the most divisive" governor. Meanwhile, on the national level it is quite common to see the same complaint leveled against President Obama.

Here's a thought: Maybe it's not Walker OR Obama who are divisive. Maybe it's US.

This election year has shown that we, the American people, have hardened our political positions further than any time in living memory. The animosity between people on the left and on the right is higher than the animosity between people of multiple races or religions. Polls are clearly showing a shrinkage in the number of "Independents", the people who are not committed to either party or ideology. 

When half of America hates the other half (and I don't think I'm overstating that), it will always look like our leaders are "divisive". If we, the people, continue down this path, we will lose our ability to govern ourselves. There are really only two forms of government: authoritarian and democratic. When the majority of the people does not trust "the people", democracy fails.

Is America Stupid?

I recently read an essay in "The Atlantic" by Jonathon Rausch:

How American Politics Went Insane

Yes, it uses loaded language for its shock appeal, but the analysis is serious. Some of the diagnosis and prescriptions for remedies are not obvious, and some are even counter-intuitive. Where many voters are longing for viable third, fourth, and fifth parties (for obvious reasons), Rausch is suggesting that our two parties' weaknesses are a large part of our problem. He even recommends allowing MORE funding to go directly to the parties as a counter to the destructive effects of the dark-money Super-PACs.

Viewing our nation's behavior as if it were an individual person (like a corporation), I asked myself if the US of A might be viewed as "stupid". To answer that question, I think it is necessary to figure out what it means to be "stupid".

Now, we all know stupid people. they are out there among our family, friends, or co-workers. In fact, an unscientific poll by Scott Adams (of "Dilbert" fame) showed that the two most irritating things about jobs (both ranking nearly 25%) were "working for idiots" and "working with idiots". We certainly don't give the people around us IQ test, so how do we determine which people are stupid?

As Forrest Gump said, "Stupid is as stupid does".

What in particular is it that stupid people do that makes them stand out for us? It's the way that they fail to deal with problems. Problems large and problems trivial. They fail at managing credit card debt, and they fail at driving through roundabouts. They even fail at recognizing how incompetent they are. They cannot find solutions to a problem, or even reasonably identify a problem in the first place. It's also quite apparent that the person's IQ does not always relate to their dysfunction.

From that definition, does the nation know as "The United States of America" qualify as "stupid"?  In one situation after another, it seems obvious that the answer is a resounding "Yes!" If you take any of our many issues of conflict, you will see what I mean.

Firearms Violence; Climate Change; Poverty; Collapsing Bridges; Drugs:

We have brilliant researchers who are able to bring together theoretical research and practical experience to give guidance to our policy makers. This doesn't happen since those brilliant enough to recognize and solve problems are not funded or are ignored. This is not limited to one side of the partisan divide either. In the area of policy surrounding support for the indigent, conservatives have some of the better ideas. As Ronald Reagan once said, "I think the best possible social program is a job". 

Our stupidity is not a result of shortcomings in our people. It is from our loss of community. In particular, we (all of us) have placed the desires and goals of our ever-shrinking circles of interest ahead of the needs of "We, the people of the United States". When each of us has defined his or her tribe in terms of 5 or 6 non-negotiable ideologies (pro-environment, pro-choice, pro-immigration, pro-prison reform, pro-universal healthcare, pro-legalization of marijuana, pro-spotted owl) we have defined ourselves into corner that makes 90% of the country look like enemies. (P.S. Again, this ideological slice and dice applies to any combination of left, right, libertarian, authoritarian stances).

So, as my Mother always told me, never complain about anything unless you have at least a suggestion for a remedy.

How do we get ourselves out of this mess? 

I think that Mr. Rausch (link to The Atlantic at the top of this) has important things to say about the treatments for what ails us. One major step would be for the people in positions of leadership to begin treating each other as honest servants of the interests of all Americans. As long as they treat each other as liars and thieves, we citizens are going to follow that lead.

And, speaking of following, our nation is suffering from a fever of "radical individualism" that must be calmed. This is nothing new. 100 years ago, Theodore Roosevelt warned of it in a famous speech "Citizenship in a Republic". His message may be more important today than it was in 1910. We need to recognize that our rights and freedoms are an inheritance from 240 years of other peoples hard work and sacrifice. We also need to know that those privileges come with responsibilities toward all our fellow citizens.

Our political system is broken, and this has made us stupid. Until we regain our respect for our political system (and the people who make it up), we will remain stupid.

Harvard Divinity School on the Web

Today I'm beginning the 4th lap of the HDS series on "World Religions Through Their Scriptures", and it's the one I've been most interested in: Islam. We began with a general overview of the methods for studying culture and scripture, followed by studies of the Christian Bible and the scriptures of Buddhism.

Obviously, most of the material on the Bible was a familiar review. Even much of the Buddhist material is comfortable, with concepts like "karma", "yoga", and "mindfulness" breaking out into western culture. I expect the material on Muslim cultures, Islam, and the Quran (Koran) to be fascinating for two reasons. First, it is a journey into a great unknown. Second, there have been many barriers built up through misunderstanding and misinformation over years of sometimes violent conflict. Clearing away misunderstandings in order to get at the useful and fascinating realities underneath will be a challenge.

This is a FREE course offered by Harvard Divinity School through it "edX" system for "Massive Open Online Courses". You can find the introduction and information for this series of courses here:

Religious Literacy - Traditions Through Their Scriptures

  It's self-paced, which is a good thing since I was three weeks late getting into the Christianity program. (It was running at the same time as the last Cursillo weekend). There are two lessons presented each week, for a total of 8 or 9 for each of the 7 courses overall. I'll probably have a few posts on this particular course over the next month.