Why is the USA Screwed -- Maybe Forever?

Merry Christmas, and for you all who prefer "Happy Holidays," okay. Holidays or not, we're screwed. Here's the anatomy of the perfect storm that has taken us down...

There is a basic human moral code. Cross-cultural taboos are witness to the fact that the human race has a sense of right and wrong. Religious people codified this in commandments, teachings, laws and regulations; even threats of eternal damnation. Secular people are no less rigid. They just come up with utilitarian reasons for why bad behavior is punished. But here's the fact: like it or not anarchy never catches on. It's a matter of the survival of the tribe. Call it God's way or the truth of what we became in our evolutionary ancestral home; it all comes out the same: we need rules.

- What has led to the massive levels of fraud on Wall Street, as well as the technically illegal kind of actual fraud, wherein one prankster walked off with $130 million and another with $50 billion?

- What has led to America blithely undertaking a wrong war in Iraq, for bogus reasons having elected a bogus president?

- Why are educational values sliding?

- Why are divorce rates amongst even so-called born-again Christians, as high as amongst so-called atheists?

- Why are the majority of African-American children being raised by single parents?

- Why are the mostly white, over-educated white collar jerks who ran our economy into the mud taking bonuses?

- Why are white rural kids killing themselves with methamphetamine addiction?

- Why have governmental environmental officials become so corrupt that they are little more than shills for oil companies, car companies and mining companies? (Easy answer -- they're Republicans!)

- Why in the midst of global warming are there still jerks out there driving Hummers and SUVs because they think they can "afford it"?

- Why did it become "okay" to torture prisoners?

- Why have the banks betrayed us?

- Why are there idiots collecting assault weapons?

- Why are we a nation of overweight porkers, incapable of losing weight who may well have shorter life spans than our parents (declines in smoking aside)?

- Why can't we save money but have run up personal and national debt to the point that our currency is plunging in real value worldwide?

- Why are we putting children on prescription drugs for disciplinary and/or behavioral problems?

- Why can't we keep our credit cards in our wallets and our cocks in our pants?

The answer is: the worst of the progressive movement and the worst of the conservative, and especially evangelical/born-again movement, converged into a weird symbiosis wherein even though they represent polar opposite extremes in our culture they have in fact created a perfect environment for our perfect storm of self-destruction.

Both the left and right have believed their own bullshit and taken their private "religious" theologies as gospel.

The left tried to de-link personal moral sexual and family-related behavior, for instance staying married for the sake of raising stable families, not screwing around, just because you wanted to... from what they considered to be public policy issues. They forgot that when the general atmosphere of a culture slides to license in the personal realm something snaps in the public realm.

On the right, and especially in the evangelical/fundamentalist community, people de-linked the biblical call to love your neighbor as yourself from public responsibility. In other words, government programs that require higher taxation, regulation and benefits packages (we loosely call welfare) were de-linked from private theology wherein the gospel calls for the care of the poor, the earth and the other. Greed was sanctified.

On the left, the mantra -- post-sixties -- became go to bed with anyone, follow your pleasure and don't put up with any hassles when it comes to, for instance, being faithful to your wife or husband and/or sticking a tough marriage out for the sake of your children.

On the right, the mantra -- post-Reagan -- became, the market is supreme, freedom equals consumerism.

On the left, the cry went up, it's my body I'll do what I want!

On the right, the the cry went up, this is my stuff I'll do what I want!

When personal responsibility and private taboos crumble on the one hand, and when public responsibility and taboos crumble on the other hand, the mix becomes toxic. Everyone is into what works for "me" but not what works for "us."

President-elect Obama is going to have to try and reverse this trend by calling out both the progressive and conservative elements of our society to get back to first principles and a willingness to sacrifice. That means that we may be entering an era where taboos both personal and public become fashionable again. I hope so.

We've gone to the last stop on a road paved with the mantra that no one is allowed to judge anyone else's behavior. The result is a culture that drives whatever vehicles suits it and global warming be damned. The result is a culture in which divorce is easy and common and all the definitive studies which prove unequivocally that the children of divorce, abandonment and instability bear lifelong scars, that in turn directly affect their ability to function in society, be damned (not to mention the economic problems of divorced families, particularly women, those who raise the children.)

(Note: How ironic that the right wing of the "Christian" community is taking a "stand" against gay marriage when gay marriage hurts no one and shows a salutary commitment to stability and the future, and when all studies show that the real marriage meltdown, in terms of actual harm to society that is measurable, is our tolerance of "no-fault" heterosexual divorce and its effect on kids and the economy.)

If the Obama presidency is to succeed, it's going to have to go far beyond policy and laws. President-elect Obama is going to have to become an evangelist.

The new president is going to have to call religious people back to a consistent lifestyle based on what they say they believe. No more raping the earth by "evangelicals" and stomping on social justice programs in the name of market oriented "freedom." No more bashing gay people in the name of Jesus. No more hate for immigrants.

And to secular "progressive" America: no more lying to ourselves. Irresponsible men who father children, irresponsible women who walk away from families, cynical moral anarchists hurt the whole of our society. Just ask a teacher (my son teaches high school) if the children of solid two parent-caring families do better than the children of single or divorced parents or single moms.

The real problem is that we've all been lying to ourselves and pretending that the 10,000 years of human history teaches us nothing. We've been pretending that somehow our society is exempt from everything human beings have learned about the need for order, structure and moral taboos.

The criminology idea of the "broken window" (small crimes create a climate for big ones) applies to our lax moral decisions; from winking at vast amounts paid the executive thieves running the hedge fund companies and banks, to winking at the idiots in the entertainment industry and cultural establishment who have sold a generation on the idea that following your cock is always a fine idea, to winking at the fact that people who can't stop eating, won't save money, run up debts and run out on their spouses are earth and culture-destroying menaces. These are not "private" choices. They are what ruin schools, make health care unaffordable , destroy the economy and create kids who barely can function. We all pay. And we're all guilty as hell, if of nothing else, of gross complicity by our silence.

From Wall Street to the listless youths failing in our schools, to the churning insane casino industry, to the tens of thousands of marinas filled with all those useless stupid pleasure craft, to our highways clogged with vehicles with one passenger, to our broken railroads, to every faithless man and woman who hasn't put their children first, we have, taken together, achieved the unthinkable: we've put at risk the most powerful country on earth and perhaps destroyed our future.

I hope that President-elect Obama can call us back to our senses, coerce us into better behavior, preach, cajole, convince and -- if need be -- force us to look at what we've done to ourselves. It's time to admit our wrongs, repent and convert to new ways.

Here is Obama's message shorthand: stop screwing around!

Or he could put it this way...

There is no free lunch be it in the classroom, the bedroom or the boardroom. Grown ups know this. So do grown up civilizations. Grow up!

Frank Schaeffer is the author of Crazy For God: How I Grew Up as One of the Elect, Helped Found the Religious Right, and Lived to Take All (or Almost All) of It Back (Now in Paperback).

Follow Frank Schaeffer on Twitter: www.twitter.com/frank_schaeffer

Comments

[clevelandchick]

"On the left, the mantra -- post-sixties -- became go to bed with anyone, follow your pleasure and don't put up with any hassles when it comes to, for instance, being faithful to your wife or husband and/or sticking a tough marriage out for the sake of your children."

Are you kidding me? Adultery was only an issue post-60's? Nobody committed adultery before that? Give me a break. It was always socially acceptable for men to cheat on their wives, the 60's just gave women the social permission as well. Good for the goose and gander.

You know what else was socially acceptable pre-60's? Men beating their wives and discrimination against women in every aspect of our social structure including the workplace.

Yeah those lefties that brought attention to women being beaten or cheated on by their husbands and encouraged divorce instead of a life of hell for those women are responsible for the decline of our society. Those selfish children-hating women went into the workplace after their husbands dumped them for the secretary and then demanded equal treatment too.

Women should have just stayed in the kitchen quiet as church mice living brutal lives of second class citizenship for the children because the children of course would never continue that cycle of abuse in their own lives. Society would be so much better off.

Whatever.

[viewfromuphere]

yeh...I kind have to go along with clevelandchick here....I had an aunt who left a husband who shoved the barrel of his rifle in her face more than once....sh­e didn't leave because she was irresponsible. She left because sooner or later he would kill her.

And books have been filled about the infidelities of major historicala figures ( the male Kennedys spring to mind) who ...you know...sta­yed married for whatever that was worth. And the kids grow up Frank.....­then what???

The sixties...­the sixties...­waw waw the sixties ruined everything­...bollock­s...

All that irresponsble behavior was around long before the sixties...­.just behind closed doors causing as much if a different sort of grief that it does now.

Usually I like Mr Shaeffer's slant on things but this "the sky is falling" ...come on man...Amer­ica just elected their first black president.­....someth­ing that wouldn't have happened in the day of...."sta­ying together for the sake of....(fil­l in the blank...it wasn't always the kids)

[CalexenderJ]

I don't think Frank's point was that married couples need to stay together no matter what. I think he would acknowledge that there are legitimate reasons for separation and/or divorce. His point was that marriage (especially a marriage with kids) shouldn't be treated flippantly as if what goes on in your marriage effects nobody but yourself.

The advance in women rights made in the sixties is to be applauded but the idea that a marriage doesn't require responsibility is wrong.

[DeniseD]

Thank you, Clevelandchick! You forgot to mention verbally abusive husbands who treat their wives like second class citizens. I have two daughters, and would not allow them to grow up in that environment. Unfortunately, I did (in the 60s and 70s), and I still bear the scars. My daughters are much more self reliant and confident than I was at their age. They are also staying away from drugs and getting good grades in school. I know I made the right decision to leave their dad.

[BabsfromKansas]

More power to you!

[Vickster]

Re: "It was always socially acceptable for men to cheat on their wives. The 60's just gave women the social permission as well."

You're absolutely right. There were (and still are) double standards for men and women, however that doesn't mean the best way to correct this inequality was lowering standards for women instead of holding men to higher ones.

Also, I've known quite a few people (men and women) who left a marriage because they were bored with the sex.

[ConcernedJoe]

Good golly Miss. Molly !! Frank you get some award for this one!! Horse Feathers comes to mind.

I just do not have the energy to show all the logical fallacies, scapegoating, and straw men in your article. Hell I'd need to write a book.

But let me give you the cause of why we are where we are ,,, we progressives 60's gave up and/or did not understand the that danger and turned the Country over to the Right Wing Authoritarian followers and their leaders. Yes - for the last 30 years we did at least.

RWA's screw things up .. they just do ,, in bona fide scientific simulation studies and in the real World. It was as predicable as the fact that I am getting old. It has to do with their fixations, aggressiveness, prejudices, and unwavering self righteousness.

RWA's (my calculations) represent about 30% of us.. 21% right wing leaning, 9% left wing leaning.
We have to ensure the RWA's don't have THE power by out voting them. That is the real calculus of it.

[propitiousmoment]

Thank you, I think there is more to it but you have definitely hit a major part of the problem.

[lucie13]

The argument for personal responsibility is strong, and I don't disagree with much of what the writer says.

However, he is totally neglecting the effects of societal, cultural, economic and CORPORATE forces on the individual.

Our psychology has unfortunately been shaped by media and commercial interests pushing "satisfy all your pleasures through materialism" and the entitlement to do that.

And government policies collaborating with that. Take food. Agricultural policies make bad food cheap, healthy food extremely expensive (yielding to lobbyists). Commercialism pushes junk food. Culture has accommodated by making junk food ubiquitous and stuffing yourself the norm.

The individual often swims upstream to be responsible.

[commonsensor]

Mr. Schaeffer I agree with most of your article but I have ONE burning question and not necessarily for just you but in general. In the world you describe (this or that, right or left, liberal or conservative) where does that leave people like me who are neither?

Besides completely unheard and unrepresented in our government that is. Because the one fact that you fail to point out is that we are forever hopelessly deadlocked into a two party system that has driven the national agenda of this country for DECADES. The political parties have never shown any real or sincere interest in altering the polar opposite approach regardless of what our PE says.

How do you change societies perception and get people to take responsibility when everything around them tells them otherwise? How do you get people to come to the middle when our leaders INSIST on polarization?

Fish starts stinking from the head.

[citadelgrrl05]

Finally someone saying what I have been thinking for years and I am a christian and a independent democrat, and I agree with everything you said. AMEN!!!!

[FogBelter]

Mr. Schaeffer, your observations are keen and I share your frustrations. I believe, however, the American people aren't a tribe ... they are an aggregate of tribes that share the peace pipe with the understanding that the United States offers the unique opportunity for all to pursue wealth. The access to wealth is what drew people to the New World in the first place ... relative moral and religious freedom being a pleasant byproduct of arriving in America.

We celebrate Thanksgiving as the romanticized celebration of the first harvest of American Settlers ... shared, no less, by the peaceful native inhabitants that received and broke bread with our forefathers. We don't focus on the tale of the first Jamestown Settlement which preceded the Pilgrims. The settlers of the first Jamestown Settlement left their ships, shovels in hand, intent on finding gold ... they planted nothing. When winter came they had no food, no gold, had developed hostile relations with the natives, and had to resort to cannibalism when "Starving time" arrived in order to get through the harsh winter.

Which story paints a more accurate picture of America? I think moral failings have always been part of the human experience, but, as long as their was access to wealth, immorality and its self-defeating manifestations have always been a secondary obsession in the United States.

[HeevenSteven]

Speaking of the native Americans--the "relative moral and religious freedom" that came with the wealth permitted our forefathers to exterminate, and concentrate to the reservations those "heathens" without that guilt baggage.

If we could only bring back the morality of yesteryear­....

[rbenjamin]

You missed a biggie Frank. A winner take-all political system which encourages polarization at best and results in minority rule at worst.

[Digeeedad]

Mr. Schaeffer.­.. Absolutely GREAT column!!!!

I've thought many times over the past year that our nation is indeed "screwed", because it seems readily apparent that the extreme factions of both right and left would rather impose their view of "right" on everybody than have our country succeed!

Rev. Wright was in fact VERY correct in his assertion that "America, the chickens have come home to roost"!

[YesWeCanada]

What a complete load.

[vjoseph]

Wow, Mr. Schaeffer you tell it like it is. I agree wholeheartedly with everything. I know a lot of people are going to vociferously disagree with you, but hey, truth hurts

[citadelgrrl05]

I totally agree, great piece

[castlerider]

If the nation is to be percieved as one, then we should understand that we will pay for its crimes as one.
A good reason that as "one" we'll truly reap what we sow.
We were born as a cruel nation with slaves while we saw to murdering millions of Native Americans as manifest destiny and superior Christian reasoning, ... America was thrown into a war.. In ONE DAY, at the battle of Gettysburg, we lost as many young men as we did in the entire Vietnam war. Gief and heartache covered our land like the smell of death, everywhere.
Continuing with cruel influence not only here, but all over the world. leading to millions of lives lost in WW1
I also believe the great depression was direct Karma for the continued suppresion of the decendants of slaves and our own people.
WWII was a direct further paypack, but at this point now America was called on to lead the way to establish and promote freedom, which it did so unselfishly. A lot to be proud of. Sadly not so in Nam.
Now Iraq, Bush's bold pre-emptive attack against a nation that never threatened us.
From where I see, this failed economy is immediate in your-face payback for foolishness, cruelty and idiocy that can hardly be believed.
This nation has a long history of reaping what we sow. You'd think we'd learn someday.

[YellowDogInRedCounty]

Not a bad post but to accuse the left of sexual immodesty is to forget about Larry Craig, Mark Foley, Newt Gingrich, and on and on and on and on and on and on and on.

[DeniseD]

Good point. I consider myself very left, but have never cheated on my spouse. I think cheating is wrong, and is the main reason I never voted for Bill Clinton. I never did drugs either.

Not all lefties are amoral.

[SeekerOne]

Everything about our society, namely the media messages we consume at every turn, induces our physical, moral and intellectual decline. Yes, we must take personal responsibility, but when avarice is the driving force of a society, it's a bit of losing battle.

The glory and rationalization of unfettered capitalism. Consider it and weep.

[TAFL]

What utter rot. It's this sort of poor reasoning that contributes to ongoing problems.

[CharlieMarlowe]

TAFL, maybe "rot" is a bit too harsh an assessment. The article is clumsily structured, too subjective and anecdotal (which is the curse of the blogsphere), but the gist of the idea can be gleaned from it. It is just that the probems facing society are far too complex for there to be any kind of satisfactory analysis, let alone solutions. What we are dealing with is the tension between modernist and post-modernist philosophies: between the idea that humanity can progress and improve and that of Man as animal, incapable of the teleological advances envisioned by the Ancients. It was believed that science and rational thought would improve Life, then science went and undermined this with the discoveries and experiments of Darwin, Freud, Taylor, Pavlov, Skinner, Milgrom. et al., etc. which left us with the grim possibility that we are little more than organisms that react to our environment rather than dominate and shape it. Nietzsche said it best when he concluded that Life, History, etc. does ot have a purpose: It is just a bunch of stuff that happens.

[CharlieMarlowe]

Some thoughts:

America is the land of Playboy and Puritans: engaged in an eternal cultural civil war.

French "deconstructionist" philosophy which has infected the institutions of higher learning is far more destructive than we thought

The right and left wings are slavishly adhering to ideologica­lly-bankru­pt philosophies of human nature and history that promoted rational thinking to diety-like status, forgetting Burke's truism that societies are based upon "passion, prescription and prejudice" and need to be governed accordingly.

The rot set in when "Scientific Management" began to pervade all aspects of society.

[DasBoot]

Ah, it's all Jaques Derrida's fault! I for one did not know that he had invented the bundling of mortgages into securities­....

A little more "scientific management" of our economy would come in handy just now I would say.

And by the way, just in case you are actually interested: Derrida and the Deconstructionist movement were some of the biggest critics of self-proclaimed rational discourse. And in turn nobody understood the passionate side of our souls better than Michel Foucault. So let's leave the French alone.

[CharlieMarlowe]

I had a professor who said that the deconstructionists claim that a text has no author, then insist on being paid for authoring such texts that say so.

As for scientific management, it is never accepatble for humans to be considered mere parts of the machine. Viewing reality through the perspective of business principles is de-humanizing.

"Passion, prescription and prejudice" shows the need for a strong social contract and good government, not less government and lax regulations.

I have a strange feeling that we are probably more in agreement than disagreement, but the nature of interpretation and argument is such that similar philosophies are often misconstrued as being in contention.