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.
Abortion is perhaps the single most divisive and electorally important issue in American politics today. This fact is strange when you consider that study after study shows the vast majority of Americans neither want abortion to be 100% illegal in all circumstances nor 100% legal in all circumstances. Most Americans occupy a middle space with some level of discomfort with abortion but not wishing for a complete ban (similar to the majority opinion about firearms).
SO…what if I told you that there was a series of pro-family policies that could significantly decrease the number of abortions? That’d be a huge win for conservatives! But what if I told you that these also happen to be policies that progressives would also support? You probably wouldn’t believe me. But follow my logic.
3. Partner-related reasons (including the relationship is bad or new, she doesn’t want to be a single mother, her partner is not supportive, does not want the baby, is abusive, or just the wrong guy): 31%
4. Need to focus on her other children: 29%
5. Interferes with educational or vocational plans: 20%
6. Not emotionally or mentally prepared: 19%
7. Health-related reasons (includes concern for own health or health of fetus, use of drugs, alcohol, or tobacco): 12%
8. Want a better life for a baby than she could provide: 12%
9. Not independent or mature enough for a baby: 7%
10. Influence from family or friends: 5%
11: Doesn’t want a baby or to place them for adoption: 4%
Now, imagine a legislative bill that included the following elements:
6 month guaranteed paid leave for both parents, w/ a job guaranteed afterwards
Free short-term birth control (i.e. condoms) available to anyone in schools, corner stores, etc.
Free long-term birth control available to everyone over 18 (i.e. IUDs, vasectomy, etc)
Comprehensive sex education in high school, w/ emphasis on building healthy romantic relationships and not rushing into sex
Increased housing option and support services for women with children fleeing situations of domestic abuse
The recent Biden child tax credit ($300/month from birth to age 6) being expanded to last for 10 years, with a provision to increase annually according to inflation
Subsidies for daycare for low and middle class families.
Universal, affordable health care for all mothers and babies.
Counseling and support services for expectant and new mothers required to be provided through every insurance plan – including doulas and other delivery support
Additional research and support for women with risky pregnancies and/or babies with birth defects (Down syndrome, etc).
Increased funding into research into the causes and potential treatments for infertility (i.e. endometriosis, decreasing sperm counts in American men, etc).
If you pay any attention to politics, you would know that the policies listed above would be incredibly popular with progressives. But consider how drastically the abortion rate would plummet if these policies were put into place! If our society provided all of the financial, emotional, and healthcare supports listed above, there would be far fewer unplanned and unwanted pregnancies. Honestly, based on how fast the abortion rate plummeted when Obamacare was signed into law (which provided cheap access to birth control), I predict the abortion rate could be cut in half in 10 years or less! And if my estimates are correct, it could all be paid for just by reversing the 2017 Trump tax cuts (with plenty of money leftover).
So the obvious question is–if this is a win-win for both progressives and conservatives, why couldn’t the federal government (or a state, for that matter) pass the above policies tomorrow? And the obvious reason is: many Republicans in government don’t like spending government money unless it’s for defense or a tax cut. The rhetoric about abortion, for too many elected Republicans, is just rhetoric: it wins elections and gets conservative judges into power, but as for actually helping women avoid abortion in the first place…it doesn’t seem to matter.
I would argue, it’s time for pro-life politicians to put their money where their mouth is. If abortion is an existential problem facing American society, then partner with progressives to pass the policies I listed above. And if it’s not, then stop using it as a cudgel in the culture wars.
“WHERE COMMON MEMORY IS LACKING, WHERE PEOPLE DO NOT SHARE IN THE SAME PAST, THERE CAN BE NO REAL COMMUNITY. WHERE COMMUNITY IS TO BE FORMED, COMMON MEMORY MUST BE CREATED.”
-George Erasmus, Native American Elder
Compared to most nations around the world, in the United States we have an incredibly short memory regarding our history. And that is particularly true when that history is unpleasant or uncomfortable. It’s much easier to buy into simple, nice, triumphal narratives that make us feel better about the past. But as George Erasmus’ quote points out, if you bury that ugly, nasty past, you can never truly forge real community. That is why truth-telling, particularly the form of truth-telling that comes through “Truth and Reconciliation Commission“-type projects, is such a crucial tool for correcting past injustices. The most famous TRCs have been in Rwanda and South Africa, but truth-telling tactics were used in Germany, Canada, Australia, and in a host of other countries.
In recent weeks, my tiny town of Carlisle, PA has made local headlines after a proposal for Truth and Reconciliation Commission was introduced by the Borough Council, as a key way to address systemic racism in this community (here’s the seventh, hopefully final version of the proposal). I am supportive of this Truth and Reconciliation Commission for a number of reasons, which I will explain below.
Carlise Borough hall
First, I think this proposal starts in the right place by first focusing on examining, illustrating, and documenting the problem of racial injustice.
According to the wording of the proposal, this TRC’s main work will involve: “(1) examining and documenting policies, practices, and actions by the Borough of Carlisle and the Carlisle Borough Council that have contributed to racial inequity and systemic racism; (2) providing opportunities for individuals impacted and traumatized by systemic racism to share their stories and experiences, relating to polices, practices, and actions by the Borough of Carlisle and the Carlisle Borough Council; (3) facilitating conversations among and between community members from various backgrounds; (4) collaborating with existing businesses, institutions, nonprofits, agencies, boards, and commissions; and (5) identifying, analyzing, and recommending to the Carlisle Borough Council institutional and policy reforms meant to mend the wounds caused by and combat systemic racism.”
These activities are all part of establishing a “common memory,” rather than one that selectively remembers the past. While merely documenting the past and proposing reforms is not the only thing that needs to be done, it is an important first step. I also appreciate that the TRC has an end date of December 2022, meaning that it is not some ambiguous, eternal project, but one with a clear timeframe and goals.
A second thing I like about the proposed Carlisle Truth and Reconciliation Commission is the collaborative way it has come about. According to conversations with Council members, the proposal came about after the recent town hall panel on racial equity in January, that featured a variety of local leaders and activists. An initial draft was put together, then sent to those same panelists, who offered feedback and revisions. A subsequent Zoom session generated some more revisions, and then more have come up after the proposal was introduced at the February Borough Council meeting. Next, the proposal will be voted on in March. What I really appreciate about this is how truly collaborative this process has been. Too often, government bodies create proposals that sound nice rather than being actually meaningful to the community (or on the flip side, activists create proposals that have no chance of governmental implementation). To have a truly collaborative approach between the Borough Council and community members is a very encouraging start.
The proposal for the TRC comes in the wake of unprecedented demonstrations this year in Carlisle to demand racial justice
Thirdly, I appreciate that in this proposal the Borough is taking ownership for the legacies of racism have been passed down from the previous generations. While of course there is still active racism happening in Carlisle, a large part of the economic and social disparities between different ethnic groups is due to governmental policies that existed in the past and have left a long legacy. For example, I have a friend who owns a house on Parker Street, and the original deed from ~1920 states that the house is not allowed to be sold to “Negroes” and members of other non-white races. While housing discrimination based on race is now technically illegal, for how many decades were whites allowed to build up wealth and real estate in Carlisle while Black, Indigenous, and other People of Color (BIPOC) kept out of this wealth generator? Real estate is just one topic; there’s tons of local issues like this.
Now, it would be easy for the Borough of Carlisle to say, “Well, all that injustice all happened in the past, and we condemn it – but it wasn’t our fault!” That is the common deflection of so many people in our society, refusing to take responsibility for anything and instead finding someone else to blame. But instead, by choosing to take responsibility for the past, present, and future of this town, the Borough Council is showing real leadership – a leadership that is all too lacking in our country. (In a different world, Carlisle wouldn’t need to be doing its own TRC because there would have been a national or state-wide TRC decades ago…but that’s another topic.)
Potential Objections to the TRC
Let me address a few concerns that others have brought up about the proposal for the TRC, and a share few concerns of my own.
Firstly, there have been a few (white) Carlisle residents who have voiced their opposition to the proposed TRC by saying that such a commission is a waste of time, because there is no systemic racism in Carlisle. To me, that’s an easy claim to put to the test. If there truly is no widespread, systemic racism in Carlisle, then the TRC will be truly unable to collect any stories, experiences, or evidence of it! But, if the TRC does indeed up with significant evidence about racism, wouldn’t that be something worth getting out in the open? As a Christian, I firmly believe that all evil gets worse when it is covered up. So instead of covering it up, we should be exposing it to the bright, disinfecting light of truth, where it can be properly dealt with.
Moreover, after just 7 years of living here I can tell numerous stories of racism in Carlisle that I have either personally witnessed or heard firsthand, not to mention very public displays like the KKK flyers in 2019, or the drivers who cursed out and mimed shooting Black Lives Matter protesters downtown this fall. One quick story: on my street this past June during the George Floyd protests, an elderly white landlord told me unprompted that he used to rent to Dickinson College students but stopped in recent years because “it’s been going downhill ever since they started letting all the minorities in,” saying something about it being a jungle down there. I called him out saying something to the effect of “Hey you can’t say that” but wish I had a better response in the moment. Looking back, I’ve only seen him rent his house to white folks in the 5 years I’ve lived on this street. Coincidence? Or … ? And if he doesn’t rent to non-white folks…is it any reason that those folks struggle to find affordable housing in Carlisle? How many landlords, businesses, etc. are racist like this man? And if he felt safe being blatantly racist to me, someone he had never met….who else is he influencing with his views? Anyway… I could tell dozens of anecdotes like this…and the fact that some people deny racism exists shows just how necessary the TRC really is!
Secondly, there are some who would argue that we need to simply move on and forget the past. Can’t we all just have unity? But trying to impose unity and historical amnesia without justice is a false peace, built on a foundation of violence and lies. It is only in a study of our past mistakes that we can begin to make amends and avoid repeating similar mistakes. As one anecdote: after their defeat in World War II, German soldiers civilians were forced by the Allied armies to watch graphic videos about the concentration camps. For most of these people, it was their first time seeing the full extent of the evil perpetrated in their name, and they were horrified. To this day, 75 years later, Germany still pays financial reparations to the descendants of Holocaust victims as well as to the nation of Israel. Moreover, anti-Semitic speech such as denying the Holocaust is illegal in Germany and carries criminal penalties. This does not fix the past, but it is a sign of contrition. In contrast, when there is no study of past mistakes and no redress of wrongs, it opens the door for the same or even worse mistakes to be made. Imagine if the Union troops had required Confederate civilians to actually come face to face with the horrors of slavery after the Civil War–would white Southerners have been so quick to turn to the KKK, to lynch mobs, and to Jim Crow laws?
German soldiers react to footage of concentration camps, 1945.
A third objection to the Carlisle TRC might be that there are more urgent things to focus on in Carlisle, such as COVID-19, mental health, crime, affordable housing, food deserts, infrastructure, sustainability, etc. A few quick responses: a. It’s possible to do multiple things at once. b. The TRC will operate semi-independently from the Borough Council and not necessarily distract from day-to-day activities. c. Nearly every problem in Carlisle also has a racial component to it. Minority residents have less of an access to affordable housing, affordable healthcare, healthy food within walking distance, smooth roads, healthy trees to provide shade, etc…I could go on and on. Some of these problems might be too big to fully solve in our tiny town, but isn’t it better to at least try to solve them for the people who need the most help? For example, hypothetically, if the Carlisle TRC discovers that in the past the Carlisle Parks and Recreation department avoided planting trees in minority neighborhoods, one possible avenue of redress could be to set aside a lump of money to deliberately plant extra trees in those neighborhoods. Why would that be a bad thing?
Those are a few of the major objections to the Carlisle TRC that I’m aware of. I have a few concerns of my own, which I will briefly share:
First, I’m afraid that the TRC will do lots of meaningful research but that nothing will be done with that info. Thus it is incumbent for us as residents to hold each other and our leaders accountable to act on the things that are revealed by the TRC.
Secondly, there is a concern I have that the TRC will not fully address the genocide and ethnic cleansing of the Native Americans that used to live in this area (not to mention those who were forcibly acculturated into White American culture at the Carlisle Indian School, the first example of such “Indian Boarding Schools”). Partially that’s due to the fact that there’s virtually no Carlisle Natives left here to share their stories and to offer redress to…but that doesn’t mean it’s not important. Carlisle first started off as a frontier/pioneer town on the western border of the original US colonies, with frequent confrontations with Natives, and we must not skip that piece of history.
Young Natives were brought to the Carlisle Indian School and “westernized”. Many endured abuse, racism, sickness –and many died, buried thousands of miles from their ancestral lands.
A third fear I have is that many white residents are not actually interested in learning the truth about racism in Carlisle nor doing anything about it. A one-sided TRC that exposes unsettling truths about racism but doesn’t involve white residents could cause these residents to double down on the status quo, or worse lead to a reactionary “whitelash“. There are probably a number of ways to try to address this concern, but one way is for white allies to bring as many of our fellow white neighbors and family members into this process of learning history. The truth may be painful, but it must be known.
Overall, despite my concerns I think that this proposal for a Truth and Reconciliation Commission in Carlisle to address racial injustice is a good idea, and long overdue. I look forward to seeing what this TRC brings to light.
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…..
