Category: Politics

How will Biden Respond to Russian Aggression in Ukraine?

To have any sense of historical memory in America nowadays is to feel like one is slowly going insane. Objective facts, once universally accepted across society, are either completely memory-holed, or twisted to mean the exact opposite. Sometimes I wonder: Am I the crazy one? Or are we all just being gaslit by nefarious actors seeking their own personal gain?

Think back just a few years, to the first Trump impeachment (yes, there were two Trump impeachments). The reason for this impeachment was that Trump tried to violate treaty obligations and withhold military defense aid from Ukraine, a fledgling democracy trying to bolster its defenses against potential Russian military aggression. Now here we are, and Ukraine is on the verge of invasion by Russia, with 120,000 soldiers on its border. Even without Trump in the Oval Office, Putin perceives weakness on the part of Ukraine and America alike, and only he knows what may happen next.

Despite the seeming inevitability of invasion, I would caution Putin to also remember the historical record. A seemingly weak American president choosing to react strongly against a Russian invasion of a border nation? It’s happened before, in 1980 after the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. As I wrote for one of my senior seminars in college:

“President Carter is widely derided by many as a “dove” who let foreign powers walk all over the United States. At first glance, this view may seem accurate. Under Carter, the US economy faltered, Iranian radicals took over the American embassy in Tehran, Sandinista rebels took over Nicaragua, and the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan. However, Carter’s reaction to the latter event would surprise many: he immediately funneled immense amounts of military aid to rebel mujahedeen, threatened to boycott the 1980 Olympics in Moscow, and shut down SALT II nuclear arms reduction talks. This paper shall explore and analyze the Carter administration’s decision-making process in the wake of the Soviet invasion. Carter’s harsh line, seemingly out of character for him, can be explained when one examines the military, political, and societal forces surrounding the situation. Fearing Soviet influence over the Persian Gulf and eager to win back American opinion of his foreign policy, Carter chose to react forcefully against the Russians. Carter’s “hawkish” response to the invasion thus makes sense: the Carter administration was merely shifting in reaction to changes in the global and domestic environment.“

Nothing can unite a country like a military response to a foreign policy crisis (in political science this is known as the “rally-around-the-flag” effect). While Putin may sense an opportunity to expand Russia’s borders, the Biden administration may find that a strong response is not only militarily feasible, but politically popular. In am election year where he is (like Carter) facing inflation, deep unpopularity, and perceived weakness both at home and abroad, Biden may decide to pivot to a more muscular foreign policy in 2022.

Seem far-fetched? I invite you to read the rest of my research paper analyzing President Carter’s response to the USSR invasion of Afghanistan in 1980, and consider: in what ways is this similar or different to a potential Russian invasion of Ukraine? How might Joe Biden respond, both publicly and secretly? What sympathy might images of Ukrainian refugees fleeing Russian aggression generate in the mass media? Post your comments and questions below.

Carters-Response-to-the-Soviet-Invasion-of-AfghanistanDownload

Please reach out to your Qanon friends this week

This is not the blog I thought I would be writing this week. I had plans to write something hard-hitting about the death of truth, or about Bonhoeffer’s antifascist theology. But I feel led to offer a different piece, one that is both more gentle and yet more potent. (And isn’t there a mysterious potency in gentleness, when you really think about it?)

Here’s what I want to say: After Joe Biden’s is inaugurated, I invite you to lovingly and graciously extend an olive branch to your friends, family, and acquaintances who’ve fallen into conspiracy theories – particularly Qanon and/or the Christian “prophecies” that Trump will be a president for two terms. Only 1 out of a 100 of these conspiracy believers might be willing to emerge from the rabbit hole they’ve disappeared into. But you might be the one to help pull them out.

See, Inauguration Day marks a very significant deadline for both Qanon believers and the Christian prophets who are certain that Donald Trump will serve two consecutive terms. Right now, there are tens of millions of Americans – from a variety of ages, ethnicities, geographies, and socioeconomic backgrounds – who are convinced, against all logic and odds, that Donald Trump will somehow remain the president after January 20th. (I could post screenshots of people I personally know who believe this, but perhaps even more illustrative is to scroll for a few minutes through this Facebook group). Whether it’s through an act of God, a military coup, or some fancy legal maneuvering, these believers just know that Trump/Q/God couldn’t allow someone so wicked as Joe Biden to become president. (In fact, that’s what the insurrection on January 6th was all about; attempting to force Congress into throwing out the election results and keeping Donald Trump in power.)

Admittedly, the leaders of these cults have given other failed deadlines before January 20th, none of which have come to pass, and so they will probably just kick the can to some other deadline. But after Biden’s inaugration, some of the followers might be fed up and willing to start to back out of these conspiracy movements. And this is where you come in. By reaching out after the inauguration in a kind, confident, and non-aggressive manner, you may be able to win these people back to reality. This isn’t something I recommend for everyone, as it can be very emotionally draining and potentially risky if the person lashes out. And it will look different for different people. But by reaching out to your conspiracy-minded friend after Inauguration you may prevent the next terrorist attack, or the next lone wolf gunman–and never realize just how much of a difference you made.

Here’s a few tips and thoughts shared by a @QOrigins on Twitter that I think perfectly encapsulate the importance of this moment:

“For those with friends or family in QAnon, [Inauguration Day] will be quite a day. The Inauguration is going to plunge many Q believers into doubt and dismay. The most committed will simply double down, but others will want a way out. If you’re able, give them an off-ramp. No mocking. It’s HARD not to mock or taunt or say “I told you so” when, for months or years, the person you’re talking to has chosen conspiratorial, antidemocratic Trump worship over… y’know… a relationship with you. But the thing is, QAnon provides its followers with certain benefits: replacement friends. A substitute family. A wholesale new reality. And a sense of community that’s a powerful draw, especially when they’re feeling confused and upset. So… to compete with it, you have to draw on your old ties — and remind them what life was like before Q. Because the truth is that QAnon immiserates its followers. Their relationships falter. They find it difficult to sleep. They fear for themselves and their children — unreasonably, but the fear is often quite real. And while conspiracism GENERATES the fear, it also soothes it.

“So this is, however unfairly, on the shoulders of people who DO have a connection with reality. And that’s NOT to say that you absolutely must reach out to your Q person in a spirit of unity and rainbows. You’ve learned, & shouldn’t rush to un-learn, some ugly truths about them. And it might not be safe, either. Some of these folks were abusive and toxic before Q and will be abusive and toxic after. Some WEREN’T abusive and toxic before Q but will be afterwards. They’ve marinated in bitterness and revenge fantasies. It’s a long and bumpy road back.

“But if there are people in your life who you DO want back, odds are good that [Inauguration Day] is a pivotal moment. So if you want to reach out, what does that look like? Well, I can’t tell you the details. I don’t know your relationship. But I can tell you that it’s not triumphalist, it’s not mocking, it’s not taunting. It doesn’t demand they disavow all their beliefs immediately (if they do it on their own, GREAT). It offers them empathy. It establishes that you care about them as people & want a relationship. And understand they won’t shed all their beliefs in a day. You don’t have to SHARE their beliefs. You shouldn’t pretend to agree with them. Neither is healthy. But talk to them & then follow up. Stay in *very* frequent contact. Give them genuine love. And folks… good luck. (P.S. If you can’t do this, no judgment. QAnon folks are isolated from friends and family because they’ve *hurt* friends and family, and generally refuse to recognize that or make amends. It’s not always healthy to engage with someone like that. It’s VERY much OK not to try.)”

There’s not much I can add to QOrigin’s post, except to close with a story that feels very relevant here. If because of this blog even a one single person who is swallowed in conspiracies can be nudged even slightly towards the path of truth, love, and real community, it will have been well worth it. Helping one person out of a conspiracist mindset doesn’t erase the larger systemic, political, cultural, economic, and spiritual work that’s still to be done in our world. But it’s not nothing, either.

The Starfish Story

One day a man was walking along the beach when he noticed a boy picking something up and gently throwing it into the ocean. Approaching the boy, he asked, “What are you doing?”

The youth replied, “Throwing starfish back into the ocean. The surf is up and the tide is going out. If I don’t throw them back, they’ll die.”

“Son,” the man said, “don’t you realize there are miles and miles of beach and hundreds of starfish? You can’t make a difference!”

After listening politely, the boy bent down, picked up another starfish, and threw it back into the surf. Then, smiling at the man, he said…..

“I made a difference for that one.”

[Original Story by: Loren Eisley]

The Starfish on the Beach Parable

I Was Wrong…

Our political culture has many problems, but a big one is an unwillingness to admit when one has been wrong…and we’re seeing that happen big time among many right now as they double down on defending things they know are wrong (e.g. the myth of widespread election fraud, Qanon, or arguing it was Antifa who invaded the Capitol, etc).

Thus, in an attempt to try to normalize the practice of publicly admitting past mistakes, here is a (partial) list of political views that I once held that I now believe I was wrong about. If you’re willing, I encourage you to publicly share your own list (only if it’s humble and sincere; snarky confessions don’t count!).

PS-this isn’t a space to disagree and to try to argue that my former views actually were correct; my point is to promote the idea that people can, and should, be willing to publicly change their minds when faced with the evidence, and that to do so is not shameful or “weak”.


1. I was wrong to have supported the 2003 invasion of Iraq, which I mistakenly thought would swiftly bring peace and democracy to that nation. I am grateful for Mr. Losee who patiently engaged in letters back and forth explaining why he, a Vietnam veteran, thought an invasion of Iraq would be a mistake. He was right, and I was wrong.

Iraq Invasion

2. I was wrong in 8th grade to argue that affirmative action policies were fundamentally unfair; I now believe that they are one of many tools to try to correct an unfair past and build a better, more just future.

3. I was wrong to think in 2008 that Obama’s election would lead to an increase of abortion overall and a legalization of “partial-birth” abortion. Neither of those things happened, and in fact, the abortion rate dropped to record lows during Obama’s time in office.

4. I was wrong to think that the Occupy Wall Street movement would lead to any major or systemic change. As massive as that movement seemed in 2011, looking back 10 years later I don’t think it produced any tangible results.

5. On a similar note, I admit I was overly enthusiastic regarding the 2011 Arab Spring. I thought that popular movements would swiftly topple dictatorships across the Middle East, but what we’ve seen in Syria, Libya, and other nations is overall pretty messy.

6. I was wrong to believe that Donald Trump would get the United States into a new foreign war. While I do think we had some close calls, and I would be worried if he had been re-elected, the fact is that he has (almost) completed his four years in office without starting an additional war.

7. I was wrong to expect that demographic changes would make Democratic electoral dominance inevitable. Instead, as was proven this November by conservative vote shifts in Florida, Texas, and many other places, one cannot assume that urban residents and ethnic minority voters are an automatic lock for Democrats.

8. I was wrong to think that Facebook, Twitter, and other large social media corporations could adequately govern their own spaces without government regulation. The profit motive is far too enticing to promote a healthy ecosystem, and I now think the government should take steps to break them up, regulate them better, and/or somehow ensure that these platforms are not fundamentally harming our society via fake news, extremist groups, and polarization.

Again, this isn’t an exhaustive list of political topics I have been wrong about, but these are some of the big ones that come to mind. May all of us, and especially our political leaders, be willing to admit when we were wrong–and commit to doing better.

Bad Shepherds

One of the most common metaphors throughout the Bible is that of shepherds (political and religious leaders) who are in charge of the sheep (AKA the common people). Throughout the Hebrew scriptures, God continually calls out the bad shepherds that are misleading and mistreating the people under them, while trying to put into place good shepherds instead – Ezekiel 34 is a great example of this type of metaphor.

Truthfully, as an individualistic American, I don’t really like the shepherd metaphor as it implies that most human beings are simple sheep, without the capacity to make complex decisions on their own. (The pejorative use of the term “sheeple” as a secular insult to castigate people who believe in vaccines and a round earth hasn’t helped my aversion to the concept.)

However, after witnessing the insurrection at the Capitol on January 6th, I actually realize the metaphor of sheep and shepherds is quite apt. Without shifting away any blame from the average Joes and Karens who perpetrated the Capitol invasion (I hope they all face appropriate civil and criminal penalties), the simple truth is that this act would not have happened without the long list of political, cultural, and religious leaders/shepherds who instigated it. After all, six months ago virtually none of these Capitol invaders knew about the role Congress plays in certifying the Electoral College vote. Thus the mass gathering and violence we saw on January 6th is almost entirely due to the bad shepherds that organized it, promoted it, and then allowed it to happen.

Many of those who stormed the Capitol were planning to take hostages–note the zip ties– and execute them on camera. There was even a noose and gallows set up outside the Capitol.

It’s easy to imagine how differently January 6th would have gone if we didn’t have so many bad shepherds misleading the sheep  

If Trump, the political shepherd of our nation, had peacefully conceded the election back in November or December, most of these sheep would have grumbled but peacefully gone along with it. If Trump had not demanded a mass rally in Washington DC on January 6, calling for his followers to march on the Capitol, a few diehard protesters still would have been there, but not the thousands we saw overpower the police.

If far-right newscasters, politicians, and media personalities hadn’t invented and spread hundreds of false and misleading narratives about the election, the sheep would have accepted the conclusions of the 60+ different federal judges (many of whom were appointed by Trump!) that the elections was free, fair, and without widespread fraud. If these same shepherds hadn’t kept stringing along false hopes that Mike Pence would magically overturn the election on January 6, the sheep would not have been so devastated when the inevitable certification of the election results happened.  

If conservative Christian pastors and theologians had taught their flocks to love their enemies, instead of dominating and killing them, we would not have seen Christian banners and symbols waved as battle flags and taken into the halls of Congress. If these Christian leaders had accurately taught that white supremacy and Christian nationalism are satanic heresies from the pit of hell, these sheep would not have been so bloodthirsty and eager to overturn the legitimate election of someone who doesn’t represent those things to them. If these Christian shepherds had spent more time speaking against the dangerous Qanon / End Times conspiracies actively spreading in their pews instead of against scary liberal acronyms like “CRT”, “BLM”, and “AOC”, maybe their congregants would have been less likely to fly to Washington DC to beat up cops and scrawl “Murder the Press” on the Capitol walls.

A STUNNING 45 % of Republicans support the storming of the US Capitol Link

The blame for what happened on January 6th does not solely fall on the far-right: If the liberal shepherds who run social media corporations such as Facebook and Twitter had heeded the warnings of experts and taken steps to stop the radicalization of sheep on their platform via viral fake news and incendiary accounts, there would be far fewer people falling prey to conspiracy theories like Qanon or the election fraud narrative. Granted, there’s always a few kooks in every society, but without the aid of social media their numbers would be much smaller.  [On a related note, I have actually come around to agree with conservative pundits that Section 230 should be repealed and the federal government should regulate social media corporations much more firmly than it currently is. These massive, greedy companies have shown over and over that they care more about profit than people; they are the bad shepherds that are allowing wolves to eat their sheep and cannot be trusted to keep self-regulating without any checks and balance.]  

Those are just a few of the bad shepherds who are to blame for the shameful actions we saw on January 6th. To my knowledge, none of these shepherds have publicly repented of their ways. What will God’s judgment upon these bad shepherds look like? And perhaps an even more important question: who will raise up a generation of good shepherds to better guide the sheep?