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

[avraamjack]

You forgot to ask ,

"Why do we allow gang stalkers to openly and notoriously poison and irradiate and stalk and harass. Did we not learn our lesson from the Nazis and the KKK ?"

Probably safer not to mention that one. The police will not help.

[onlyThis]

In a nutshell - it's all about ME!

[Skepticat]

Societies survive when people are willing to sacrifice even when they obtain no obvious or immediate personal tangible benefit. Unfortunately after 3 decades of promoted selfishness and ME-ism we have impending economic collapse. Even now millions don't get it - our individual prosperity, safety and security depends on the well being of others we don't even know. Unemployed empoverished people don't buy things. If they have disposable cash - they just might - maybe even from you.
Ayn Rand and Gordon Gekko were wrong - greed is not good. Catholics were correct about greed - it was one of the 7 deadly sins for a reason.

[noralou]

Great article, thank you. I was raised an atheist, but my mother (drunk, not there, dad) believed in the Golden Rule. Treat other people as you would like to be treated. My moral compass does not depend on fear of eternal damnation, it is based on the idea of common decency. I was not raised to "need" the latest gadget, or newest fashions. I feel happy and blessed that I have a roof over my head and food on my table. I am one of the lucky ones in this economy, my needs are being met and for the most part I can ignore my "wants". The occasional purchase of a cd is my downfall! I have a lot of faults but greed and loose morals are not among them. For that I can thank my mother, a truly decent human being.

[mommadona]

"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."

Oh, PULeeeze.

With his choice of Rick Warren, he's given up his status as "change agent".
With his choice of a Clintonian Retro Administration filled with Bubba shills....he's thrown away that opportunity.

I don't want a preacher of state.
I want a good ADMINISTRATOR.
I want a good COMMUNICATOR.
I want a good SECULARIST.

He can get down on his knees in that Oval Office all he wants, if it helps him in his personal decisions.

The MINUTE he steps out in public, he is REPRESENTING ME.

[JimReed]

American society may be polarized, but we have always been a two party system. The parties have as much or more to gain from destroying the other side as from building the country, especially when a party is built on dogma over reason. We don't have the options available to us that other countries have like multiple parties negotiating to form a government after an election, and the option of no confidence and early elections when things go wrong. I guess that means you are right, the long range trend is we are on the way down and the rest of the world will be up. This could be good news for everyone unless we start selling our nukes on the black market.

[Emlyn]

thank you, Mr. Schaeffer, for such a good article. You hit the nail on the head. We are a good country of good people that somehow lost its way. God help us. Thanks.

[UrbanRevolution]

Touch a nerve, did he? Step on some toes, perhaps? Boy oh boy, usually i hear praise for Schaffer's work, but not today? Well I agree with a lot of what he's saying - extremes tend not to be healthy in the long run and either extreme has it's problems. The left have morals when it comes to helping the poor, less (not No but less) bigotry, protecting our earth. But erosion of the specialness of sex has put our culture at risk. The core of the culture is the family and the American family is in trouble. I can count the number of traditional families. People are having to deal with ex wives/husbands and step siblings and 1/2 siblings and it's a mess. The right has become a bunch of legalistic, religious (in a bad way) hypocritical, racist, greedy bunch. Sure they may stick out their marriages more, but as one person noted, to the detriment of the family. They are not trying to make it work they're just preserving wealth.

The reason why this country is heading down hill, though, is not necessarily for the reasons stated. That may be part of it, but the argument assumes that this country was headed in the right direction at some point in the past. African Americans realize this country was built on a foundation of evil and so until the foundation is rebuilt - we only have a house of cards.

[vjoseph]

Truth hurts

[bigorangefish]

I don't think anyone should assume 'sticking out a tough marriage' is a good thing 'for the kids.' In fact, quite the opposite. Subjecting children to abusive or disfunctional marriages is not good for the children or the parents. It's better to have one mentally and emotionally healthy parent taking care of the children, versus subjecting the family to a spouse who is so-so or less than desireable as a parent. Moreover, people die and it really is ridiculous to conclude that somehow a single parent household is somehow less desireable, or less good. Statistics show that there is no significant difference between a happy two parent family or happy single parent family. The only 'statistics' that show a difference in favor of two parent families are those put out by the phony 'family research' groups aka 'focus on the family' who have an evangelical agenda to push the notion that somehow two parent families are superior. Of course, if this were true, then these same groups would have to support any two parent family - including same sex parent families, but, of course, they don't, because they are trying to push an 'ideal' that they feel comes from the bible.....don't ask me where, given all of the polygomy and incest going on in the bible.

[mivogo]

If only it were so. Statistics show that children of divorce and broken homes have a much tougher go of it, both present and future. Just like the children of abuse have a greater chance to be abusers, so do children of divorced tend to have unhappy relationships or be unable to establish one. (if you doubt it, just take a poll of your acquaintances, and compare children of divorce with those from intact families). Of COURSE, if you are married to an abusive partner, alcoholic, drug addict, it is better to get the children away from them. But too many people divorce because they are bored, or sexually curious, or going through a tough patch. That is fine if you have no children, and it is nice to think that what is best for you is always best for your children, but that is unfortunately often not the case.

[OldLeatherNeck]

Frank,

Thanks for your insightful, yet troublesome post.

Civilizations, governments. societies and religions have long suffered due to differentiations about:
1. Sin
2. Morality
3. Ethics
4. Legality

While 80-90% of what most religions consider as a Sin is also considered illiegal, immoral or unethical by most societies, it is that remaining 10-20% that causes much of the world's problems.

Sins are codified by religious entities.....subject to interpretation by local officials. Laws are codified by governments....subject to interpretation by local officials.

Morality is a behavior that should transcend religious or legal dogmas.

Ethics is a loosely defined standard that defines behavior that complies with every law and most definitions of moral and religious behavior.

[twofish]

Not true. Most of the 10 Commandments, for instance, are not against the law in the US. Murder, stealing, and lying (under oath, not in everyday life) can be punished by the legal system. The others are quite legal; some are encouraged (coveting others' property, for instance, and non-religious activities on Sunday).

We have to debate our laws and our generally accepted ethics on a rational basis, not fall back on religious dictums.

[MaryRW]

I take serious exception to this: "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)?" Here, Mr. Schaeffer, your ignorance is showing, along with your bigotry.

In spite of the so-called obesity epidemic, life spans continue to increase. You assume that the thin are in some way morally virtuous and that the fat are not. You also assume that fat people eat more than thin people do, but there is no evidence for that. There is, however, a clear correlation between ill health and a sedentary lifestyle, especially when combined with poor nutrition. But that correlation applies to people of all sizes.

Please, before you indulge in any more fat hatred, educate yourself. Start with The Diet Myth by Paul Campos http://www.amazon.com/Diet-Myth-Americas-Obsessions-Hazardous/dp/159240135XX).

Fat people are not part of what's wrong with our culture, but the stigmatization of fat people is. If shame made people thin, no one would be fat. The problem is not “overweight porkers.” The problem is our obsession with body size, our knee-jerk judgment of people who are larger than average, and our refusal to accept that good people come in all shapes and sizes.

Insulting fat people does not do anything to alleviate what’s wrong with our culture. And don't you ever call me a porker again, Mr. Schaeffer. You owe me an apology.

[JosieInMS]

Thank you and bless you, Mary.

[Carolab]

The people with "loose morals" in my experience are Republicans and "holier than thou" Evangelicals who s.i.n. all week long and then show up to church on Sunday for "forgiveness". If you want to point fingers, Frank, take some responsibility for the culture that you helped establish, not the one you are trying to condemn. People on the "left" have been out of power for about 40 years. All of the decadence and destruction we all currently behold belongs to the extremists on your side, and not ours. The extremists on our side were trying to stop war, provide equality, clean up our environment, promote strong public education and generally make the world a better place to live for everyone.

[NotFromRoundHere]

In Frank's defence, he's taken a lot of responsibility for and never steps back from calling out the "culture that [he] helped to establish" (just read his book!).

Also, claiming that people on the "left" have been out of power for 40 years might surprise LBJ, Carter and Clinton, along with many years of Democratic Senate and/or Congress majority. It also negates the real power wielded by popular media, ie. music, movies, tv and advertising. Watch the Top 40 music video clips and then picture the world they represent, or watch 10 mainstream movies and count how many times you see people having casual sex, using a gun, taking drugs, speeding in cars, you name it. Then there's the advertising constantly screaming at us that the more stuff we have, the better we look, the more we indulge any and every appetite, the better we will feel.

Frank has the right idea - divorce personal morality from the public sphere, left to right or right to left, and you reap reduced morality on both sides of the equation.

[Carolab]

LBJ, Carter and Clinton are marginally "left".

[Carolab]

I was speaking of political power in the White House and I don't, personally, think of LBJ, Clinton or even Carter as "left". The last president I thought was truly "left", meaning "liberal", was Kennedy.

[hopefullee]

One last thing to add to my comment on sex and divorce. I don't believe that premarital sex is responsible for the high divorce rate. I think that what we need to do is educate people about what marriage really is, and give them more realistic expectations about the commitment , work, and sacrifice involved, instead of the unrealistic images of perfect romance love that saturate the media.

[hopefullee]

Frank-

I very much appreciate your open-mindedness about gay marriage, but I have to take issue with your take on "left-wing" views on sex and divorce.

First, I've never heard liberals (except for a few on the fringe who have "open-marriages") support adultery, and I don't think that the fringe is responsible for the overall divorce rate.

Second, when I think there are many factors leading to divorce, one of them being that today, women are not dependent on their husband's income and the freedom to leave a bad marriage.

Third, when you talk about premarital sex, what you are really talking about is women. Men have been having premarital (and extramarital) sex since forever. If may have been a taboo for both genders, but in practice, men got slap on the back while women were ostracized. It's only since the advent of the pill that women were able to explore their sexuality the way men have without fear of pregnancy. By suggesting that everyone stop having sex outside of marriage, you are trying to put women back into a box we fought hard to get out of and asking men to adhere to a standard they never have before and probably never will.

[BlackYowe]

Very good piece! A little gloomy but right on.