We have lost control of our political system and confidence in our institutions. I offer some root cause reasons for this situation in a series of posts. Fifth post in the series.
The modern world has largely solved the problems of science and economics. Our political and religious solutions compete to solve 4 big remaining human challenges.
Facing death.
Finding a purpose beyond self.
Being affirmed.
Living as a social being in community.
Secular Humanism / Personal Growth
Be stoic, heroic, transcend through your worldly life. C-
Link to humanity, universe, reach for excellence, find personal purpose. C
Focus on this first, find support, promote yourself, find supporters. C-
Link up with peers, communities of interest, demographic groups, limited liability. C
Populism / Common Man / Common Sense
Ignore, stay busy, be stoic, accept, find a church, avoid it. C
Focus on day to day, local experience, controllable, be good, craftsmanship. C+
All are equal, victim, local commonality, work support, politics, reinforcing groups. B+
Neighborhood, work, sports groups. Church and political groups. B
Authoritarianism / Nationalism / Traditionalism
Ignore, stay busy, link to greater cause(s), embrace religion. B
Link identity to nation, politics, church, culture, class, history. A-
Reinforcing groups, against “others”, merge identity with group. B+
Deepen ties to family, neighborhood, church, class, region, sports. B
Libertarianism / Free Market
Stoicism, heroism, results, engaged, avoid. C
Elevate self, hero, superman, freedom, liberty, choice principles. B
Glorify God, love neighbor, golden rule, laws, spirit. A
Created in God’s image, child of God, baptism, congregational support. B+
Local congregation ties, ministries, activities, catholic church, ecumenicism. B
Summary
No major “solution” fully solves all of these 4 main challenges. The “science versus religion” split is deep. Some individuals combine multiple views to create a better solution. In “A Secular Age” individuals have to make choices about what to believe. They have to sort through conflicting views and information. They have to define and prioritize their goals. Without a dominant or obvious social choice, they have to determine how they will make such philosophical, political and religious choices, even if it is to not make a choice. We have an opportunity to reform our public schools and other institutions to help us make these choices and to embrace our neighbors who make different choices.
The US imports and exports about 1/8th (12%) of its Gross Domestic Product. Argentina, Brazil and Pakistan have a similar level of trade to GDP. China and Russia are closer to 1/5th (20%). The world imports and exports 30% of it’s GDP. European countries import and export 45% of GDP. The US is the most self-sufficient country in the world. It imports select commodities, labor intensive goods and luxury products. It exports high value-added goods and services supported by its high value-added and compensated workforce. As the US president threatens the large benefits of global trade to the US and the world, it’s very important to place the US within this context. U.S. trade may be less advantageous than someone’s vision of ideal, but based on size alone, international trade is clearly not a first-class priority for the country, its firms or citizens.
We have lost control of our political system and confidence in our institutions. I offer some root cause reasons for this situation in a series of posts. Fourth post in the series.
Classic liberal state, individual rights, liberty, freedom, fairness, justice
No era of human history has been perfect but “Western civilization” experienced net cumulative progress in its self-understanding, capabilities, confidence, positivity, justice and use of effective institutions for several centuries.
History Undermining Total Confidence in Any Single, Simple Cultural, Religious or Political Worldview
Natural disasters, plagues, wars, evil and oppression.
Religious conflicts, denominations, global religions, secular humanism, Deism, institutional failures.
Promise and obvious experienced shortcomings of utopian solutions such as socialism, communism, fascism, globalism, romanticism, environmentalism, and eugenics.
Rise of the modern nation state as an effective context for community, government, commerce, loyalty and security, followed by its totalitarian abuse, demonization of others and splintering into smaller geographic, religious and ethnic states.
The amazing, sustained progress of science and technology to “solve” all problems, followed by the realization that it cannot solve moral, political and social problems and that it creates many new ethical, commercial, and political challenges.
The sustained global economic progress driven by urbanization, industrialization, finance, administration, capitalism, government regulation and trade raising living standards, offering opportunity, improving health and reducing poverty, without reaching a clear consensus on how to capture the benefits of economic progress without being overwhelmed by the exploitative, unequal, monopolistic, political capture, environmental and cultural downsides.
The shock of the Great Depression and the 2 world wars to the popular, business and elite confidence that economic, social, global, military, political, educational, scientific and cultural progress was inevitable. The global successes of the post-war era and the collapse of the Soviet Union provided a very brief renewal in faith in progress and “the end of history”.
Philosophy worked very hard to keep up with the progress of science but has ultimately failed. Most of philosophy has been absorbed by science and social science. It provided some support for modern religion, science, arts and politics in the early modern period. It also offered deep skepticism about religion, objectivity, causality, and language. It didn’t solve “nature versus nurture”. It didn’t resolve idealism, essentialism, rationalism versus empiricism, pragmatism, existentialism. It provided us with several flavors of individualism, including Rousseau’s positive view of man outside of society. It served up Hegel’s historical/dynamic view, Marx’s insights and nonsense, Nietzsche’s replacement of God with Superman and the final retreat to logical positivism, materialism and postmodernism.
The expansion of individual rights has been a signature strength of the last 500 years. The true essential equality of individuals is broadly embraced. Race, gender, ethnicity, religion, class, social status, wealth, property, profession, sexuality, customs, appearance, and education are generally respected. Yet, we humans discriminate and prejudge upon such categories. Efforts by idealistic and minority groups to offset such shortcomings are hotly contested.
Major Options Today
Religious belief. The default secular worldview limits this approach to understanding the world and making important choices. Fundamentalist right to progressive left.
Personal growth. Design your life and your children’s lives to “be all that you can be”. You will have to look outside for validation of your progress. You may not find guidance by looking inward. You may find that you need community and links to eternity and the universe.
Libertarianism. Free market capitalism. Anti-government. Liberty. Freedom. Ayn Rand, Milton Friedman, Friedrich Hayek, and Ludwig von Mises developed a positive version of this worldview. It is embraced by a large share of the Republican party today. It is fundamentally anti-community and anti-religion. It elevates a single dimension of philosophy and morality above all others: economic liberty.
Populism. The “little guy” is exploited by “the elites”. A victim perspective. Farmers, peasants, factory workers, and small business owners take this perspective. In our individualistic, opportunistic, competitive, meritocratic, commercial, secular world all people need to justify their progress. We all “know” that we are “above average”, like the inhabitants of Garrison Keillor’s Lake Wobegon. If we don’t reach our goals, someone or something else must be to blame.
Authoritarianism. The world is too complex. We need a “great leader”.
Postmodernism. The powerful use every possible tool to oppress others. All minority groups are victims of the “ruling class”. Most modern philosophies, institutions and language are tools. Enlightened professors in the humanities and social sciences are waiting to lead the next revolution.
The Center Remains Missing
The Republican party has moved far right, embracing libertarianism, free markets, cultural conservatism and populism. The Democratic party and other cultural elites have been tempted by postmodernism, expected demographic trends and special interest groups. They have failed to provide a compelling mainstream alternative to the Republican party since Reagan and Gingrich. Socialists like Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez win headlines. Democrats have consistently lost the framing battle, competing on shifting terms favorable to Republicans. They have failed to find a positive core message like opportunity, progress, pluralism, balance, rule of law, will of the people, decency, justice, reasonable fairness, shared winnings, sustained growth, win/win, security, or mutual interests.
I would also argue that a simple proposal to maintain the benefits of our historical political systems could be compelling and adequate for a supermajority of citizens and voters.
I return to Jonathan Haidt’s work on the moral foundations of politics and religion. The BIG change in human history is from a broad portfolio of factors in most historical and global societies to the WEIRD perspectives supported in part of the Western world: care, fairness and equality alone. “Liberals” now mostly ignore loyalty, authority, purity, proportionality, liberty, honor and ownership while “conservatives” wisely appeal to all of these moral flavors.
Western civilization has embraced rationality, science, and individualism. It has gone too far, forgetting about community and eternity/universality. Skepticism has grown as we have learned that no single, simple perspective is adequate to explain our world. There is now a risk that we reject all structured knowledge. There is also a risk that we embrace intuitive world views and leave rationality and criticism behind. The Republican party has managed to keep the various flavors of conservatism aligned in a far-right view. Democrats are unable to offer a compelling alternative to the general public.
The United States maintained a strong religious worldview among its people and its elites for generations longer than Europe. The U.S. saw a surge in religious belief, membership and participation as the baby boomers left behind WWII and the Great Depression and formed new families. The supermajority consensus allowed the country to be nominally secular but effectively Christian. Most individuals did not have to make religious choices. They followed their parents’ choices and adjusted their degree of engagement.
The mid-century counterculture, birth control, liberal theology, higher education experience, arts, music, jazz, women’s rights, war protests, civil rights, abortion rights, sexual revolution, films, globalization, rejection of authority, individual expression, riots, child rearing beliefs, therapeutic psychology, personal growth, commercialism, advertising, drugs, divorce laws, urbanization, anonymity, health, medicine, drive-ins, car access, mass media, common experiences, etc. provided and validated many new options for most life decisions, including religious beliefs and activities.
As Charles Taylor documented in his “A Secular Age”, the possibility of non-belief became possible, then plausible and then the default option among some highly educated people. The “none of the above” option spread throughout society. Religious belief became one choice among many. Each succeeding generation, allowed to choose, became less religious.
Societies, cultures and civilizations work best when citizens hold common beliefs unconsciously. When the default worldview is shared, “life is good”. Religious and philosophical beliefs matter greatly, even if most people don’t consciously address them. The breakdown of a shared worldview triggers several actions. Many “double down” on the historical choices, validating, refining, formalizing, justifying and supporting them. Others search for alternatives. Some look to modify their beliefs to preserve the past and address the new challenges or situation. Others simply “check out”.
We’re living in one of those transition periods. These responses to changes in religion and philosophy play out in all other areas of life: careers, family, interests, leisure, education, arts, community, volunteering, trust, confidence, interactions, dialogue, civics, politics, dress, socialization, health, communications, sports, games, participation, risk-taking, creativity, exploration, myths, history, commitments, lifestyles, experimentation, conformity, skepticism, certainty, ethnicity, nationalism, patriotism, language, the list continues.
Everything becomes fluid and relative or fixed, static and fundamental. Some embrace change and possibilities. Others fight, fight, fight. “Things fall apart, the center cannot hold”. Ouch.
As much as we praise the individual and individual choice as the best expression of human experience, most people are not made for so many choices.
In the US this challenge is exacerbated by the availability of new options for religious belief. Many non-Christian options are available in my community. Is this an opportunity or a threat?
Humans have a strong preference for certainty. “Cognitive consistency” is essential. We look for evidence to confirm our beliefs and ignore conflicting evidence. Radical skepticism and serious relativism are quite unwelcome. We “know we are right”. Yet, we need to be validated by our neighbors and our peers. We need to live our lives based upon our habits. We simply can’t be pursuing the “5 why’s” technique every minute. We have lives to lead. As Jonathan Haidt says, the elephant leads, the rider occasionally influences the elephant.
Daniel Kahneman has the same insight. Our conscious mind simply cannot address everything “logically”. It must use shortcuts, habits and heuristics. It can only rationally address a very small portion of life.
We don’t know what to believe, if we’re honest with ourselves. Kierkegaard’s “leap of faith” still applies but does not satisfy. Skepticism and subjectivism have undermined us. The “rational” Enlightenment and the advances of science have reinforced the expectation of certainty. A perfectly materialistic worldview is deemed possible and promoted by some. The philosophers rejected any supernatural belief, pursued positive, analytical philosophy, saw it was a dead-end, pursued existentialism, saw it was a dead-end, considered postmodernism, saw it was a dead-end.
The scientists continue to move ahead with their highly effective techniques. The philosophers of science and the “science and religion” experts have undermined any proof of materialism or scientism. Science cannot replace religion. They overlap. They work in different dimensions. Oh boy!
Scientists, mathematicians and philosophers have “proved” that we cannot have a deterministic description of the world supported by facts and logic. Ouch! Probability, mystery, uncertainty, perspectives, paradigms, infinities, dimensions, indeterminacy, descriptions, measures, fractal dimensions, imaginary numbers, duality, quantum uncertainty, and artificial intelligence.
We are grasping for a new form of certainty. It has not arrived. [Waiting for Godot?] Red and blue politics are trying to fill the gap, quite poorly. We’re looking for a religious, cultural or artistic break-through. Science alone is clearly inadequate.
We’re looking for a “both/and” solution. Yin/Yang. A toroidal field that supports nuclear fusion. Bittersweet. Sweet and sour. Some new version of Hegel’s thesis, antithesis, synthesis, repeat process. Some version of Hofstadter’s eternal golden braid. Practical/analog and mystical/eternal at the same time.
A double helix that provides a new 3-dimensional structure. A bootstrapping theory that creates life from chemicals. A mechanical or other “explanation” of consciousness.
This ultimate exhaustion of alternatives may lead us back to Christianity!
We have lost control of our political system and confidence in our institutions. I offer some root cause reasons for this situation in a series of posts. Second post in the series.
Real, inflation adjusted, gross domestic product (GDP) is up 4 and 1/2 times since WWII when the American economy was the savior of Western Civilization and about to invest in the recovery of Europe and Japan. In this long-term perspective, growth is very constant. Critics can point to the capture of a greater share by the wealthy. Optimists can point to the radical improvement in quality not captured by GDP, increased consumer choices available and a larger share of retirees in the population.
Economic Satisfaction Stagnates
Consumer confidence rises with the economy and declines with recessions and polarized politics, but it has no upward trend to match real incomes!
Unlimited Wants, Limited Satisfactions
Economists assume that people have unlimited wants. Most research and common-sense experience show that this is true.
Post-war economists have persistently claimed that Americans “now” have everything they need materially to be happy, but they have been persistently wrong.
Once we have an idea in mind, we tend to consume information that confirms the idea and avoid or deny challenges. Positive, constructive people will be optimists. Others will be pessimists and follow the bad news media.
When we do try to rationally assess our current situation, we compare it with something obvious. It’s usually something prominent, recent, large, and shiny. We compare today with our best ever experience or situation. We reset our expectations to compare with something prominent in our experience. We don’t plot graphs of our real annual earnings, wealth and leisure. Our expectations are anchored in our best experiences. Current expectations tend to move back to a neutral evaluation.
Humans want more. We are rarely satisfied. That means we are easily distracted in the modern world by marketers, influencers, journalists, bloggers and politicians. Human nature has not changed. Our true economic condition has improved with little impact. Our access to information, education, knowledge and wisdom has increased with minor impact. The ability of communicators to influence our perceptions of the world has greatly increased and we have generally not improved our defenses. “We have much, much work to do today” – Mr. Thoburn Dunlap, 1970, Fairport Harbor, Ohio high school teacher.
We have lost control of our political system and confidence in our institutions. I offer some root cause reasons for this situation in this series of posts.
Republicans have driven economic individual extremism, and Democrats have driven social individual extremism. We are unable to balance the individual with the community, morality, culture or religion.
After WWII our leaders worried greatly about the extinguishment of the individual by our culture, religion, businesses, government and universities. These large organizations were so large, effective and results-oriented that they could not encourage or allow individual freedom. They would necessarily enforce social conformity, even in a capitalist democracy. The 20th century’s totalitarian societies, George Orwell’s 1984 and Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World greatly disturbed thought leaders. Liberals and conservatives worried about different aspects, but the core concern was universal. Consider The Organization Man, The Man in the Grey Flannel Suit, The Hidden Persuaders, The Road to Serfdom, Atlas Shrugged and The Lonely Crowd. Very surprisingly, the “individual” was unleashed in the next half century and became God.
Mick Jagger struggled with the conflict between competing powers. He embraced the tension and moved ahead. Freddie Mercury simply declared victory. Complete victory.
The individual alone as God is not a solid base for our society or any society.
We are polarized because we all “know” that we are right. We don’t have solid experience working with others in community or government to resolve differences. We don’t reach our goals, and then we look to blame someone else or claim victim status. We lock into media sources that reinforce our views. We only connect with individuals just like ourselves. We pursue only individual goals and are frustrated they are not affirmed. We emphasize consumer and producer goals and complain about “the rat race”. We don’t participate in civic life, complain that politics is ineffective and look for someone to solve our problems. We are not experienced managing complex situations, so we look for simple answers to complex questions about politics and the meaning of life.
I believe that “community” really matters in our modern world. Ten articles promoting my view. Just like the neighbors who have visited the Cleveland “West Side Market” for 175 years.
Humans have a deep-seated preference for simplicity, directness and logic. We are analog creatures built to manage the variability of the real world, yet whenever we think abstractly, we strongly desire straightforward tools and concepts. Greek atomism, materialism, Euclidean geometry, the whole is the sum of the parts, fixed Bible language and meaning, mechanical leverage, Aristotelian formal logic, Cartesian coordinates, Newtonian physics not crazy quantum mechanics, light as wave or particle but not both, the ether as background of space, simple Mendelian laws of genetics, fixed, detailed laws, train tracks, binary computer logic, simple voting rules, etc.
We struggle with grey, indeterminacy, probability, uncertainty, tension, and dynamics. I think the success of Newton and science; the whole Enlightenment and scientific method have reinforced this bias. We seek objective reality, science and morals and instinctively back away from relativity and subjectivity. We really like Jesus when he reduces the moral law to “love God, love neighbor” but struggle with the mystery of the trinity, the paradox of fully man/fully God and riddles like “Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.”
My academic, career and personal background align with the deterministic view of the world. Degrees in economics, math and finance. Two professional accounting certifications. Presbyterian. Adjunct professor. Meyers-Briggs INTJ. Really strong thinking and judging. Moderate center-left politics. Library board member. Career experience in IT, quality control, process engineering, manufacturing, distribution, supply chain management, and logistics. Numbers guy. Back office.
According to F. Scott Fitzgerald, “the test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function.” I read this circa 1977 and “knew” it was pompous BS. I read Marx and his descriptions of “organic wholes” and “knew” they were simply a poor substitute for reason.
I have this same deep desire for order, clarity, directness, transparency, logic, understanding and control. Unfortunately, or fortunately, I have learned that the universe really doesn’t work like that. I’ve learned that God does not give us direct access to infinity or eternity or specific promises. I have learned that scientists, mathematicians and philosophers don’t believe in a deterministic world. I’ve learned that businesses leverage probability, processes, portfolios, projects, culture and flows that can’t be controlled.
I share this topic because I believe that most Americans unknowingly subscribe to a linear, direct, numerical, objective, deterministic, realistic view of the world. I think that politicians, advertisers, managers, preachers, teachers, counselors, neighbors and leaders share this view and reinforce it without knowing that there is an alternate view. The very best thinkers and doers embrace a world that allows for multiple views, multiple dimensions, uncertainty, grey, win/win, possibilities, art, music, religion, spirituality, love, community and neighbors to be real.
We have mostly embraced the single dimension, simplistic, polarized, right versus wrong, Manichean version of politics sold to us since 1990, to our combined detriment, IMHO.
My National FFA Organization colleague, Bill Stagg, advised me to always use automobile analogies when communicating complex ideas like this. Here we go!
Modern automobiles evolved from horse drawn carts, steamships and trains. Cars don’t look much like the trains or interurbans that dominated the US from 1900-40. They aren’t confined to predefined tracks! They have wheels that allow them to follow many roads. They have rubber tires, not wooden or steel wheels. This absorbs shocks, grips the road, and steers with slippage in dry and wet conditions. They have shock absorbers between the wheels and carriages. They have steering. The [power] steering has room to allow for “play”. They have bumpers. They have multiple gears for different speeds. They have clutches to buffer the force of the engine. They have differentials to buffer the power to each wheel. They have coiled springs in their seats. The brakes gently squeeze a metal plate. Windshield wipers are made of rubber to grip, but not too tightly. Engines are lubricated with oil. Transmissions are lubricated similarly. Braking systems are based on liquid pressure rather than mechanical devices.
This is aside from anti-lock braking, collision avoidance/lane warnings, air bags, cruise control, fuel systems, braking energy capture, etc.
The modern automobile uses buffers everywhere because they are most effective in the real world.
We should all follow this example. The very best “systems” provide for some slippage, buffering, shock absorbing, uncertainty, gearing, flexibility, gripping, and lubrication. They are never fully “direct”.
This principle applies to all systems, even our political system. The US political system is indirect. Checks and balances. House and Senate. Federalist. Electoral college. The “flexibility” is a planned feature, it is not a bug.
Some of the commentary is merely “sour grapes” after losing the election. For some articles, you can “consider the source” and disregard them. However, it is very clear, IMHO that President Trump, this time, is going to fulfill his election promises, including implementing the whole Project 2025 agenda, retribution on his “enemies”, and a complete disregard for legal and political “checks and balances”. He views the election as a mandate and believes he has the right to implement all of his policies as if he won victory in a “winner takes all” parliamentary system. President Trump does not support our historical system of government that greatly limits the impact of any one actor, even one who earned just 49.8% of the votes and just 31.6% of eligible voters. Non-voters won the race with a 36.6% share. Vice president Harris came in third with 30.7%.
Military generals, career civil service, FBI, DOJ, inspector generals, independent agencies. These agencies have a distinguished track record of fighting for their independent roles. The first month indicates that Trump understands they are a formidable opponent to be undermined.
Federal Judiciary
Lawyers belong to a proud and left-leaning profession. Federal judges belong to a two-century legacy of judicial independence. Most “conservative” judges use the originalist theory to limit the application of laws that restrict the free market or traditional cultural actions. Many of President Trump’s initiatives fall outside of these two areas. Federal judges may use their powers to retain the commonsense version of existing laws and reinforce the principle of maintaining precedents.
Brett Cavanaugh is less conservative than he is perceived to be. Supreme Court justices treasure their independence. Chief Justice John Roberts is relatively neutral and strongly supports the independence of the court and his legacy.
There are two dozen congressional seats held by Republicans in districts where they have a real chance of facing a competitive Democratic opponent. These individuals face strong pressures from Trump, national, state and local Republicans to fully support the president on all matters. They can have their funding cut off, lose congressional assignments and lose party staff support, but they don’t have to worry much about being “primaried” from the right.
Senate
Louisiana senator Bill Cassidy, Alaska senator Lisa Murkowski and Maine senator Susan Collins voted to impeach Trump. The other 4 Republican senators who did so are no longer in the Senate (Romney, Sasse, Burr and Toomey). Pennsylvania senator Dave McCormack and Wisconsin senator Ron Johnson join Collins as representing states with mixed party senators. In addition to Murkowski, 5 senators have a history of bipartisan activities: John Cornyn (TX), Jerry Moran (KS), Todd Young (IN), (the ageless) Chuck Grassley (IA), and Shelley Capito (WV). That makes 10 Republican senators who are more likely to consider the good of the country than their own or their party’s if “push comes to shove” on preserving our democracy. Mitch McConnell would never undermine the power of the Republican Party that he built over 4 decades, but he will not tolerate foolishness from President Trump. The U.S. Senate also has a long tradition of independence from the other branches of government. Each senator sees themselves as a base of power, representing their state, their party and the nation. Senators face political pressure to conform to their party and their party’s President, but they face elections only every 6 years and have a long history of personal support in their states.
Sometimes a speech, a question, an op-ed, a campaign slogan, a court brief, a story, an analogy can change the frame of reference for public opinion. When Joe McCarthy was asked “Have you no sense of decency?” he was finished.
Canada, Mexico and the EU are not going to accept Trump’s unilateral threats. They will respond strategically, irrationally, emotionally, patriotically, politically, even at a net economic cost to their people in order to protect their sovereignty. This will provide political pressure on Trump from his domestic supporters.
Big Business
American business has done very well for the last 75 years with free trade, globalization, international institutions and American dominance through alliances. Trump’s promise of lower taxes and regulation and threats of intervention for non-supporters will lead many to accept his approach, but some corporations and industries will be devastated by his trade wars. These corporations and others may see that the threat to the whole system is too large to ignore.
Governors
5 of 27 Republican governors have strong reasons to oppose any overreach by President Trump. Brian Kemp (GA), Kelly Ayotte (NH), Mike DeWine (OH), Phil Scott (VT) and Glenn Youngkin (VA). 7 of the 23 Democratic governors have national aspirations and will use their powers to aggressively thwart anti-democratic measures. Gavin Newsom (CA), Jared Polis (CO), Andy Beshear (KY), Wes Moore (MD), Gretchen Whitmer (MI), Kathy Hochul (NY), and Josh Shapiro (PA).
Trump was good for business in his first term. He will be great for business in his second term. Journalists and media firms have lost their interest in providing “balanced” coverage and stretching to find a way to interpret Trump policies, actions and statements within traditional frameworks. They are more willing to directly and repeatedly say that he is lying, that his actions break the law and norms, that his actions are inconsistent with American history. They more quickly fact check and place his actions within the context of US and global history. They challenge his wording and stories. They attempt to prioritize the news of the day and not become distracted by all of his noise.
Churches
Evangelical Christians have supported President Trump because he has delivered on his promise to appoint judges who oppose abortion and support socially conservative positions. They have rationalized that his imperfect personal character is a case of God using him for good purposes. Younger and idealistic people are leaving these churches because of this strange alliance. Some leaders now speak out against Trump. Trump has “punted” on national abortion policies, arguing that they should be resolved in each state. Actions which threaten historical American norms on politics may be “the straw which breaks the camel’s back”. Liberal churches have chosen to stay out of national politics for many decades. Trump’s cold-hearted approach to issues may lead them to oppose him from the pulpit. Protestant churches generally agree to “Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s”, but the generally unchallenged German Nazi situation remains as a stain on their conscience. Churches are much less influential than they once were, but certain transgressions may spring them into action.
Although we are polarized politically, there is a large middle one-third of Americans that consider themselves “independent”. They may lean left or right, but they pride themselves on being pragmatic and not buying into the unfounded claims of politicians on either side. The American people, even most diehard Republicans, will not accept actions that undermine our government or society. Trump is expendable. There is a Republican vice president who can take his place, as necessary.
Summary
President Trump’s first 2 weeks indicate that he will test the limits of our democracy. He strongly believes that his personal views are right, and that the country has provided him with a mandate to implement them quickly and permanently. Our political system provides the president with well-defined limited powers. He will “cross the line”. There are a dozen institutions that can and will push back.
Good News 