Musings on the Danger of Economic Disparities and Excessive Debt in America

     By Rudy Barnes, Jr.

President Biden has called the economy he inherited from Trump the worst in America’s history, but it’s actually two economies.  One has a booming stock market that provides little benefit to the other; and the two economies reveal dangerous income disparities and excessive debt that are getting worse, eroding the middle class and threatening the stability of America’s democracy.   

Charles Lane has noted, “The wealthiest 10% of households now own 88% of all stocks and benefitted from an 18% increase in the S&P 500’s total return in 2020.”  Policies of the Federal Reserve that promise interest rates near zero and the purchase of corporate debt have attracted investors to the stock market, and both parties support Fed “easy money” policies.

Fed monetary policies have created excessive private debt and an overvalued stock market that provides investors with unsustainable high rates of return.  Excessive debt is not only exacerbating economic disparities but it’s also creating a gigantic bubble on Wall Street that threatens an economic collapse; yet both parties ignore the problem.

The Fed already has a balance sheet of over $7 Trillion in private and public debt, and America’s national debt is an astronomical $27.8 Trillion, and certain to grow with President Biden’s budget proposals.  If the Fed can’t keep interest rates near 0%, increasing private and public debt will precipitate widespread bankruptcies and an economic and political crisis.

With a record spike in money supply and a volatile stock market that has increased 70% since March, runaway inflation in an overvalued stock market threatens a market crash.  The GameStop phenomenon illustrates how social media can fantasize stock values and further distort a dysfunctional and volatile stock market.  It’s a bubble that’s likely to burst.       

Even if the Fed can keep interest rates low and continue to prop up an overvalued stock market, excessive debt, inflation and increasing economic disparities foretell a looming economic and political disaster.  By supporting Biden’s massive stimulus spending bill rather than a smaller targeted relief bill, Americans and their political leaders are ignoring the danger.

Before Trump hijacked the Republican Party in 2016 it promoted fiscal restraint that checked the spending proclivities of Democrats, but today a majority of both parties ignore America’s excessive debt and vie over which party can spend the most on stimulus relief.  In America’s prodigal politics, there seems no limit on government spending and excessive debt.

The storming of the Capitol on January 6 may be a precursor to a major insurrection like the Boston Tea Party of 1773.  It was instigated by an angry middle class that had become hostile to its government.  James Carville once observed, in politics it’s all about the economy.  With increasing economic disparities and a national debt that defies repayment exacerbated by continued profligate spending, America’s ugly politics are likely to get even uglier.

  

Notes:

Laurence Summers sees the Biden Stimulus as admirably ambitious, but warns of big risks.  “As a massive program moves toward enactment and implementation, policymakers need to ensure that they have plans in place to address two possible, and quite serious, problems. First, while there are enormous uncertainties, there is a chance that macroeconomic stimulus on a scale closer to World War II levels than normal recession levels will set off inflationary pressures of a kind we have not seen in a generation, with consequences for the value of the dollar and financial stability. This will be manageable if monetary and fiscal policy can be rapidly adjusted to address the problem. But given the commitments the Fed has made, administration officials’ dismissal of even the possibility of inflation, and the difficulties in mobilizing congressional support for tax increases or spending cuts, there is the risk of inflation expectations rising sharply. Stimulus measures of the magnitude contemplated are steps into the unknown.”  See https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/02/04/larry-summers-biden-covid-stimulus/?utm_campaign=wp_opinions_pm&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_popns.

Brian Hamilton has asserted that America’s soaring debt is a looming disaster “Even as we deal with the economic problems of the pandemic, there's another crisis looming: our national debt.  ...The debt crisis is not going away, and the US needs to understand the consequences of increasing the national debt.”  Hamilton compares the nation’s debt crisis to global warming.  “  Some economists are concerned with the national debt but they always say the problem is off in the future. Unfortunately, a debt-triggered crisis is not something that can be reversed quickly when it becomes an issue.  The debt crisis of the United States is similar to global warming — it is an incremental but enormous phenomenon that could trigger disaster at a given point. Simply, dealing with the $27.5 trillion in outstanding national debt would be difficult to do if our lenders (us and people outside the United States) ever consider the reality of our strength as borrowers. Suppose they find the US no longer a reliable borrower?  See https://www.businessinsider.com/national-debt-problem-of-free-money-stimulus-checks-covid-relief-2021-1.

Edward Luce has cited America’s dangerous reliance on the Fed with its easy money and fiscal gridlock in Washington as “...the most visible threat to US political stability.  The Fed’s quantitative easing boosts wealth inequality by increasing the net worth of those who own financial assets, chiefly of stocks and bonds. The top 10 per cent of Americans own 84 per cent of the country’s shares. The top 1 per cent own about half. The bottom half of Americans — the ones who have chiefly been on the frontline during the pandemic — say they own almost no stocks at all.  ...The Fed’s inescapable bias towards asset owners has combined with the financial sector’s preference for size to produce a very skewed recovery. This has benefited big companies, even junk-rated ones, at the expense of small businesses, including financially-sound ones. And it has boosted wealthy individuals over median households. After 2008, the economic recovery coexisted with a so-called “main street recession”. Today we call it a K-shaped recovery. The majority of people are suffering amid a Great Gatsby-style boom at the top.”  See https://www.ft.com/content/bcb8d4d9-ca6d-45b7-aafc-9e9ecf672a5b.

U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen, a former chair of the Federal Reserve, has called for Biden to act big, reflecting long term re-think on government debt, arguing the country’s future economic potential can support more borrowing today and makes the roughly $26.9 trillion in U.S. IOUs seem less formidable. “The interest burden of the debt as a share of (gross domestic product) is no higher now than it was before the financial crisis in 2008, in spite of the fact that our debt has escalated,” Yellen said. “To avoid doing what we need to do now to address the pandemic and the economic damage that it is causing would likely leave us in a worse place ...than taking the steps that are necessary and doing that through deficit finance.”  Federal government interest payments are now nearly $600 billion annually, but historically low global interest rates have kept them roughly stable as a share of the country’s economic output since the 1990s. Coming on top of the more than $3.5 trillion borrowed in large part to fund the coronavirus response last year, “when do we hit the point where the thing starts to collapse?  Nobody is talking about it in either party anymore,” said Senator John Thune, a South Dakota Republican.  See  https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-economy-debt/yellens-call-to-act-big-reflects-long-re-think-on-big-government-debt-idINKBN29Q1BJ.

  

On jobless claims at historic highs and Biden inheriting the worst job market of any modern president, see  https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2021/01/21/900000-filed-jobless-claims-last-week-historically-high-level-biden-inherits-worst-job-market-any-modern-president/.

 

President Biden remained committed to his $1.9 Trillion Stimulus spending bill after rejecting a GOP alternative of $618 Billion.   “Speaking on the House Democratic call, Biden acknowledged that some lawmakers, including Republicans, get “hung up” on the price tag when the nation is already facing a ballooning federal deficit and skyrocketing debt. Congress has passed nearly $4 trillion in assistance since the beginning of the pandemic.  The economy is expected to bounce back over the next several months, even without more stimulus aid from Congress, the Congressional Budget Office said earlier this week. But employment levels are unlikely to fully recover until 2024.”  See  https://www.politico.com/news/2021/02/03/biden-dems-call-stimulus-checks-465484.

“President Joe Biden’s coronavirus rescue plan, and two of its key economic provisions, have broad support as Democrats try to push it through Congress, a poll released Wednesday found.

More than two-thirds, or 68%, of Americans support the $1.9 trillion package, the Quinnipiac University survey showed. Only 24% of respondents oppose the measure.”  Unsurprisingly, the direct payments to individuals with no targeting of those most affected by the pandemic are most popular. “The poll found 78% of Americans support the stimulus checks, and 18% oppose them.”  It seems that few Americans are concerned with increasing the massive national debt so long as they receive a check.  See  https://www.cnbc.com/2021/02/03/biden-1point9-trillion-covid-relief-plan-has-wide-support-poll-finds.html.

  

On the GameStop chaos as a bubble in the stock market, see  https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/01/29/gamestop-chaos-may-be-bubble-what-does-that-actually-mean/?utm_campaign=wp_opinions_pm&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_popns.  On GameStop as a new, destabilizing collision between social media and the real world, see 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/01/31/gamestop-signals-new-destabilizing-collision-between-social-media-real-world/?utm_campaign=wp_todays_headlines&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_headlines.

On how the rich got richer in the pandemic and exacerbated income disparities in America, see https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-rich-got-richer-during-the-pandemic-we-need-to-claw-back-their-gains/2021/01/25/d17c8a44-5f32-11eb-9430-e7c77b5b0297_story.html?utm_campaign=wp_todays_

headlines&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_headlines.

Musings on Unity or Reconciliation in Politics and Religion--There's a Difference

     By Rudy Barnes, Jr.

President Biden has repeatedly called for bipartisan unity to achieve his political objectives in the first 100 days of his administration; but that’s wishful thinking.  He would be well advised to promote a politics of reconciliation rather than unanimity.  Reconciliation doesn’t require political unity, only a willingness to find consensus based on political common ground.

In America’s polarized partisan politics, a radical right Republican Party and a radical left Democratic Party rely on partisan unity in their fierce competition for political power.  Likewise, in religion, unity on conflicting exclusivist beliefs is not possible; but  reconciliation on moral standards is not only possible but essential to peace in a world of increasing religious pluralism. 

Judaism, Christianity and Islam have common Abrahamic roots but conflicitng beliefs that defy unity; but they can be reconciled with the greatest commandment to love God and our neighbors, including those of other races and religions, as we love ourselves.  It’s taken from the Hebrew Bible, was taught by Jesus and accepted by Muslims as a common word of faith.         

Reconciliation on the altruistic moral imperative to love others as we love ourselves is an attainable objective in both religion and politics.  In politics it requires providing for the common good.  In religion it fosters religious peace in a world of religious hostility.  While such moral reconciliation is possible, a unity of religions or political parties is neither realistic nor desirable.  

By asserting unity as a political goal, Biden risks losing his political credibility to achieve reconciliation at two levels.  First, in the Democratic Party, where liberals oppose his moderate views; and second, in finding allies in the Republican Party to support important bipartisan legislation.  Neither will be easy, and together they represent a formidable challenge.

To be successful in Congress, the Biden administration must fashion a coalition of Democrats, Republicans and independents who share the moral ideal to provide for the common good.  It’s an altruistic political ideal that’s absent in America’s polarized partisan democracy, and one that’s not likely to survive a Biden administration.

Vice President Kamala Harris is the liberal heir apparent in a Democratic Party that has so far supported Biden; but that support will likely dissipate when Harris begins her expected campaign for the 2024 presidency.  That gives Biden only a limited window of opportunity to achieve bipartisan reconciliation on moral issues of political legitimacy.  

A politics of reconciliation requires making the common good a priority over narrow partisan interests.  It’s a formidable moral and political challenge for the Biden administration, and requires that Jews, Christians and Muslims promote the altruistic moral imperative of the greatest commandment to love God and neighbor as a common word of their faith and politics. Unfortunately, the unity of polarized partisan politics continues to trump political reconciliation.    

Notes:

Molly Roberts has written, Unity is dead.  Long live unity.  She observed, “The past four years brought us a riot of unity and division all at once. If polarization wasn’t more pronounced than ever before, it was certainly more visibly pronounced. The country was divided, and people on both sides were more unified than ever about which camp they belonged in. Reality itself turned controversial. Donald Trump was hacking away at the bedrock beneath us, and far too many were cheering him on.  Some, however, were not. Under threat of collapse, plenty of people who were previously rivals took shelter together: the so-called Never Trumpers who earned retweets from #Resistance zealots; the Lincoln Project crusaders who banded with establishment liberals; even the Bernie Sanders devotees who threw their voices and their votes behind a nominee who failed to inspire them but also failed to fill their loved ones with fear. “Unity” cropped up early on, remember, in those “Unity Task Forces” convened to bring the left and the somewhat-less-left together as the Democrats wrote their platform.

Earlier this month, the harmony reached its peak. Even a number of Trump grovelers and enablers stopped groveling and enabling long enough to stand up and say they believed in democracy’s most basic ideal. (Or they at least believed that a lawful transition of power after an election was preferable to an armed insurrection overturning the results.) ...Whatever the case, that’s already in the past. The common cause that united the unlikely frenemies has fled to Mar-a-Lago, which means there is more room for the little disunities that are the lifeblood of our politics: the infighting, the bickering, the blocking and the tackling. There is less room for an ode to something called unity, which is, when you think about it, just a word after all.”  See  https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/unity-is-dead-long-live-unity/2021/01/26/e2f30390-6020-11eb-9061-07abcc1f9229_story.html?tm_campaign=wp_todays_headlines&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_headlines.

In describing how Biden struggles to define his “unity” promise for a divided nation, House Majority Whip James E. Clyburn (D-S.C.) said, “Unity can be observed and felt, but not necessarily measured. “Unity to me simply means finding common ground — it doesn’t mean unanimity,” he said. “I don’t know why people think you can’t be unified unless you’re unanimous. That’s all Biden is talking about: trying to find common ground.”

Clyburn liked it to his 58-year marriage to his wife, who died in 2019. “There was never any disunity to our marriage,” he said. “But there was a whole lot of difference of opinion. We were seldom unanimous in what we did and what we thought, but there was always unity.”

Still, Clyburn added, though he believes Biden’s main goal is seeking common ground, the concept can also be warped — and even dangerous.

Sen. Christopher A. Coons (D-Del.), who often talks with Biden and spoke to him as he prepared the foundation of his campaign, said that some of the symbolic actions in the early days of Biden’s presidency — a day of service shortly before his inauguration, a memorial for coronavirus victims and a bipartisan invitation to lawmakers to join him for a church service — were designed with unity in mind. “It doesn’t mean uniformity, it doesn’t mean conformity or unanimity, it doesn’t mean we’re all going to agree on everything,” Coons said. “Bringing unity to the country starts with telling us the truth, having a real and concrete plan. It’s not just brave words. It’s actually doing the job of being president.”  See

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/biden-unity/2021/01/28/89707242-5fe6-11eb-afbe-9a11a127d146_story.html?

Term Limits for U.S. Supreme Court Justices

    By Richard Meyer, January 23, 2021

“Bring back amendments.” Justice Antonin Scalia said that to me in 1996 after I asked him for the most important step we could take to eliminate the huge political divide in our country.  Scalia had just given the Law Day speech for our small military legal office at Fort Huachuca, Arizona.   We had invited him with a “What have we got to lose?” attitude.  He came because he failed to R.S.V.P.  that he could not attend in a timely manner, so he felt honor bound to show up.   A classy move by a man renowned for professionalism by friend and foe alike.  

Scalia’s Law Day talk was about the merits of the American process.  He said it was a shame that such a critical part of our political system didn’t get people excited.  “If I want to lead a parade to support free speech, thousands will show, but if the parade is in support of bicameralism, I’ll be walking by myself.”   But it’s the process that gives our rights value, he explained.  Pointing to the rights in the new Russian Constitution, he said they seemed vastly superior to those in the Bill of Rights, but that they “…were not worth much because there was no process to protect them.”  His ultimate point that day was that the nation should be led by the people through their elected leaders, not “…Tony Scalia and eight of his friends.”

Scalia’s stance against judicial activism is well known, but his justification for that stance is frequently misquoted or misunderstood.  No, he did not feel the law should never change.  No, he did not feel that we should continue to live under the tyranny of a group of long dead white men.  Instead, he felt that the Constitution included a procedure to keep it relevant and updated called the amendment process.  The amendment process is difficult, but by requiring three fourths of the states to ratify an amendment, it is probably the most inclusive process in our federal government.  Sidestepping the agreed upon process causes not only voter frustration, but feelings of impotence and sometimes hate…  neither of which are a healthy part of a democratic political system.  By bringing back amendments and following the process our founding fathers created rather than ignoring it, we give the people back their role and voice in the democratic process.  Towards that end, I have an amendment to propose to you.

We should amend the Constitution to end life tenure for Supreme Court justices and instead place a maximum number of years they can serve on the Court.  We need to do this because the selection of judges has become the tail wagging the government dog.  

Former Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell believes the most important legacy of his tenure in that position will be the large numbers of judges and justices he helped appoint.  That statement is incredibly troublesome.  Article I of the Constitution details the immense power and responsibility of Congress… but it does not even mention the advice and consent power.  No, that power is only mentioned in Article II and presented more as a legislative limitation on the executive power.  So, in essence, McConnell is saying that his legacy is not in doing the many jobs tasked to his branch but rather in preventing the Senate from interfering in one job assigned to the President... a President elected by a simply amazing coalition of voters ranging from Baptist preachers to Harley riding bikers united behind the idea that he would nominate the ‘right’ judges and justices.  

If the most important thing our combined executive and legislative branches are doing is picking judges, something is very very wrong in the republic.   

Single issue voting has led to our current political tribalism which in turn drowns out meaningful debate on the myriad of other crises facing our Nation.  The perception of judicial activism is the new normal and we can’t put that genie back in the bottle, but perhaps we can mitigate the effects.  If we limit the time a Justice can serve on the Court (and then allow them to retire at full pay for life), we instantly de-emphasize the importance of each nomination and provide room for other issues to become a more significant part of the national debate.  

Plus, maybe, just maybe, we can bring back amendments in the process.  

Richard Meyer is Interim Executive Director, Center for Ethics and the Rule of Law, 

University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104

Notes:

We got here as a result of a perceived breakdown in the process that Scalia held so dear.

Agree or disagree with the Court’s decision in Roe v Wade, you should see that we continue to pay a high cost due to how it came about.  The national debate on abortion was instantly ended by the votes of seven lawyers.  By pulling the decision from the electorate and applying a new meaning to famous words that had already been interpreted countless times over the last century and a half, the Court radicalized those on the losing end of the decision.  It was the metaphoric equivalent of the head ref reinterpreting the rules and deciding to stop a close Superbowl in the middle of the third quarter and declare the leading team the winner.  

(Yes, I realize that Roe v Wade was using a precedent set by Griswald v Connecticut.  Following the precedent of a case that itself subverted the process does not remove that taint.  Please understand that this post is not about the actual substance of either case.  If you support reproductive rights and feel the Roe v Wade decision brought about a just result, imagine if that same Court (or the current Court in 2021) decided to practice some activism in the reverse direction.  They reread the 5th and 14th amendments and their prohibition against depriving one of life without due process of law as granting a right to life that begins at conception.  This would open the door for rapist fathers (or some other interested individual like the parents/grandparents of the mother) to go to court to require a raped mother to carry a child to term.  My guess is that in the next election you would find yourselves in the ranks of the one-issue voters, as many of your counterparts have been for the last five decades.)  

Meanwhile, in that same era the far less contentious Equal Rights Amendment was in the process of failing to get the necessary number of states for ratification.  Suddenly the entire paradigm changed.  If you want to change the Constitution, forget about the incredibly difficult amendment process, all you need to do is appoint the right judges to read it differently!  Social conservatives leapt into this new realm of conflict with both feet, the culmination of which was the election of Donald Trump as our 45th president.  Many if not most who voted for Trump felt somewhere between dislike and outright disgust with his personal character.  My how the party of character has changed.  Christians who voted for Ford over Reagan in the 1976 Republican primary because they were troubled by Reagan’s divorce were now lining up behind a man with enough divorces, bankruptcies, peccadillos, and allegations of worse to be the lead in a telenovela.   I suspect that even if the rumors were proven true, that the man was a Russian puppet that had complete disdain for the military he commands, yet still secure the conservative vote by promising to appoint the right judges.

Truth and Reconciliation in Politics and Religion in a Maze of Conflicting Realities

      By Rudy Barnes, Jr.

After the second impeachment of Donald Trump for instigating a riot in the nation’s Capitol, a maze of conflicting political and religious realities has made it difficult to find truth and reconciliation in America’s fractured democracy.  A consensus is needed on fundamental truths in politics and religion, and on the moral standards of political legitimacy.

What is truth?  That issue has resonated down through the ages since Pontius Pilate asked Jesus that question in the first century (John 18:38).  Today conflicting realities of truth defy reconciliation; and in 2016 churches lost their moral compass when most White Christians sacrificed Jesus on the altar of partisan politics by electing Donald Trump President.

Most Americans claim to be Christians, but they ignore the moral teachings of Jesus as God’s truth even as they worship Jesus Christ as the alter ego of God.  God’s truth is summarized in the greatest commandment to love God and to love our neighbors, including those of other races and religions, as we love ourselves.  It’s a universal truth taken from the Hebrew Bible, taught by Jesus and accepted by Islamic scholars as a common word of faith.

If Christians accept the teachings of Jesus as a moral imperative of God’s truth and as a standard of political legitimacy, Americans can find truth and reconciliation in our maze of conflicting realities.  If not, American democracy will remain polarized by conflicting concepts of truth and morality, and “us versus them” partisan politics will prevent a politics of reconciliation.

The Constitution remains the foundation of America’s rule of law, and the altruistic teachings of Jesus remain a universal moral imperative.  Thomas Jefferson considered the moral teachings of Jesus “the sublimest morality ever taught.”  Today even atheists accept them as altruistic moral imperatives in politics, even if they are ignored by most Christians.

Discerning truth in a maze of conflicting facts and conspiracy theories requires common sense and reason more than a high IQ.  Senator Josh Hawley (R. MO) graduated from Stanford and Yale Law School and clerked for Justice John Roberts, but he ignored the Constitution and reason when he sought to overturn Biden’s election based on non-existent fraud. 

Finding truth and reconciliation requires a consensus on the facts relevant to critical issues and on the legal and moral standards of legitimacy needed to resolve those issues.  But in America’s polarized partisan politics decisions are largely determined by the dominant party, so that truth and reconciliation will remain elusive. 

America’s churches are more a part of the problem than the solution.  They remain racially segregated with most White Christians voting Republican while most Black Christians vote Democratic.  In both America’s politics and religion issues of race are obstacles to finding truth and reconciliation.  A new paradigm is needed for truth and reconciliation in America, and it should begin with a moral reformation in the church.  

 

Notes:

In Kantian ethics, a secular categorical imperative is an unconditional moral obligation which is binding in all circumstances and is not dependent on a person's inclination or purpose.  

Thomas Jefferson related the moral teachings of Jesus to secular standards of moral legitimacy like that of Kant.  Jefferson embraced the moral teachings of Jesus but expressed contempt for the distortions and misuse of those teachings by Christian religious leaders. Jefferson wrote Henry Fry on June 17, 1804: "I consider the doctrines of Jesus as delivered by himself to contain the outlines of the sublimest morality that has ever been taught; but I hold in the utmost profound detestation and execration the corruptions of it which have been invested by priestcraft and kingcraft, constituting a conspiracy of church and state against the civil and religious liberties of man." Thomas Jefferson, The Jefferson Bible, edited by O. I. A. Roche, Clarkson H. Potter, Inc., New York, 1964, at p 378; see also Jefferson’s letter to John Adams dated October 13, 1813, at pp 825, 826; Jefferson's commentaries are at pp 325-379. While many Christians considered Jefferson a heretic, Jefferson wrote of himself: “I am a Christian in the only sense in which he [Jesus] wished anyone to be; sincerely attached to his doctrine in preference to all others and ascribing to him every human excellence, believing he never claimed any other.” (p 334) For Jefferson, being a Christian meant following Jesus as God’s word rather than worshiping him as God’s son. He emphasized the moral teachings of Jesus over the mystical, and in so doing emphasized discipleship over orthodox Christian beliefs, a distinction elaborated by Robin R. Meyers in Saving Jesus from the Church: How to Stop Worshiping Christ and St

art Following Jesus, HarperCollins, 2009. Jon Meacham affirmed Jefferson’s prominent role in shaping American values that are at the heart of legitimacy in American Gospel, Random House, New York, 2006 (see pp 56-58, 72-77, 80-86, 104, 105, 247-250, 263, 264; reference to Jefferson’s Bible at p 389); see also Meacham, Thomas Jefferson: The Art of Power, Random House, New York, 2012, pp 471-473. Denise Spellberg has provided a history of those pioneers of religious freedom and reason who influenced Jefferson and his experience with Islam in Thomas Jefferson’s Qur’an: Islam and the Founders, Alfred A. Knopf, New York, 2013. See Note 2, The Teachings of Jesus and Muhammad on Morlaity and Law: The Heart of Legitimacy, posted in Resources at  http://www.religionlegitimacyandpolitics.com/p/resources.html.

Senator Josh Hawley (R MO) is a well-educated American leader misguided by false concepts of political and religious legitimacy; and he supported the protest on January 6.  “Hawley’s idea of freedom is the freedom to conform to what ...his preferred religious authorities know to be right. In a 2017 speech to the American Renewal Project, Hawley declared, “...There is not one square inch of all creation over which Jesus Christ is not Lord.  We are called to take that message into every sphere of life that we touch, including the political realm.”  Hawley said. “That is our charge. To take the Lordship of Christ, that message, into the public realm, and to seek the obedience of the nations. Of our nation!”  For Senator Hawley, the Lordship of Christ is not that of Jesus, but of Donald Trump.  See Katherine Stewart in The Roots of Josh Hawley’s Rage at   https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/11/opinion/josh-hawley-religion-democracy.html.

The same disconnect with reality exemplified by Senator Hawley was evident in a Republican meeting in Charleston after the riot at the Capitol.  There are cracks in the absolute Republican loyalty to Trump, but most continue to defend him even after he instigated the riot at the Capitol.  See 523 miles from the US Capitol, a Republcan meeting in Charleston ends in a reckoning at https://www.thestate.com/news/politics-government/article248445260.html?ac_cid=DM362881&ac_bid=-884397294.

The unholy mix of white nationalism, the radical right politics of Trump’s Republican Party and distorted Protestant and Catholic evangelicalism are so fused together that it is impossible to define Christianity.  See How White Evangelical Christians Fused With Trump Extremism at https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#inbox/FMfcgxwKkRKcNbCdpSmkhWTRvkJCrxGZ; 

On How Catholic Leaders Helped Give Rise to Violence at the U.S. Capitol, see 

https://www.americamagazine.org/faith/2021/01/12/capitol-riot-congress-trump-catholic-bishops-james-martin-239697?utm_source=piano&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=7389&pnespid=k7lnpugHX1aNOgm1ji5p.j20aNrPOm6ByTBs__3m.

Most churches have subordinated the universal moral teachings of Jesus to exclusivist church doctrines.  That has allowed many beliefs and prophecies to claim to be “Christian”, although they conflict with the altruistic teachings of Jesus, reason and common sense.  See For some Christians, the Capitol riot doesn’t change the prophecy: Trump will be president, at

https://www.washingtonpost.com/religion/2021/01/14/prophets-apostles-christian-prophesy-trump-won-biden-capitol/?utm_campaign=wp_post_most&utm.

A Reckoning and Repentance Following the Storming of the Nation's Capitol

         Rudy Barnes, Jr.

January 6 was a day of infamy in American democracy.  A national political reckoning is needed to hold accountable those who instigated and participated in the storming of our Nation’s capitol, but that’s the least of it.  Those millions who saw (or should have seen) such an apocalyptic event coming should experience a deep sense of repentance for their negligence.

 The riot was no surprise.  Since November Trump has often stated that he would not concede and urged his supporters to protest the election, and he was initially pleased with the riot.  The problem is not so much Trump and his most vociferous Republican minions, but with almost half the electorate who have slavenly followed Trump to this debacle of democracy.

America’s corrupt standards of political legitimacy are as much a failure of faith as of politics.  Despite Trump’s depraved morality, most White Christians supported him in 2016 and 2020; and while many evangelical charlatans have openly promoted Trump, most White pastors have ignored him to keep politics out of their churches.  Their silence has been deafening.   

To redeem themselves and their church, pastors must repent of their sins of commission and omission.  They must promote the moral teachings of Jesus summarized in the greatest commandment to love God and our neighbors, including those of other races and religions, as we love ourselves.  In  politics, that means promoting the common good.

God’s will is to reconcile and redeem all people, while Satan’s will is to divide and conquer; but Satan has done a convincing imitation of God in politics and the church.  In the cosmic battle between the forces of good and evil, Satan is winning the popularity contest.  That’s bad news for America’s democracy; but America should never concede to God’s defeat.   

Abraham Lincoln was America’s first Republican President, and on the eve of America’s Civil War he quoted Jesus, who said that a kingdom or a house divided against itself cannot stand (Mark 3:23-25).   It’s ironic that our current Republican President has once again divided America against itself, and did so with the approval of most White Christians.   

Churches should never promote a political party or a candidate, but they can and should promote the moral standards of political legitimacy.  In The Lord’s Prayer, we pray that God’s kingdom comes and His will be done, on earth as it is in heaven.  In  a democracy, that requires making the moral teachings of Jesus as God’s word our standards of political legitimacy.

Jesus called his disciples to follow him, not to worship him; but the church reversed those priorities to become popular and powerful.  The nadir of its sacrilege was when White Christians elected Trump, and most continue to support him.  The church is shrinking, but most Americans still claim to be Christians. They can save their church and democracy with a moral reformation if they restore the altruistic teachings of Jesus to primacy in their faith and politics. 

Notes:

In a prescient commentary on Sedition and SIlence published in Sojourners on January 5, Jim Wallis raised the question: “Will Trump’s sedition and attempted coup be met with silence from faith leaders, especially white Christian leaders whose constituencies voted in their majority for Trump? There are at least two fundamental religious issues at stake here. First is the centrality of truth for Christians: Trump’s  weekend call to Georgia’s Republican secretary of state was filled with one lie after another. “I just want to find 11,780 votes,” Trump admitted. Brad Raffensperger said in response, “Mr. President, the challenge that you have is the data you have is wrong.” The next day, the state’s key election official said, “We believe the truth matters.” Does the truth matter to Christians and Christian leaders who supported Donald Trump?  Second, is the biblical abomination of racism and its ideology of white nationalism that stands at the core of the Trump base. It is telling that many of the president’s claims  originated in the dark corners of the web among QAnon conspiracy theorists and message boards often frequented by white supremacists. These sites also call on Trump supporters to come to Washington on the day of Wednesday’s congressional vote — and to come armed.  ...This is no longer just politics, it is theological heresy, and one that needs to be exorcised from white Christianity in America. 

An attempted coup, rooted in white nationalism, is now standing at the ready. When a president continually lies, then calls for action based on his followers’ belief in those lies, that reasoning isn’t just circular — it is evil. More is at stake now than politics. Let’s call it a choice between theological integrity and the idolatry of white Christianity in America. It is now the pro-Trump white Christian leaders who need to break their silence and allegiance to Trump and recommit their allegiance to the truth, and ultimately to following Christ.”  See https://sojo.net/articles/sedition-and-silence.

On January 6, the Editors of America, The Jesuit Review, echoed Wallis’ alarm, calling for accountability, repentance and reckoning after the storming of the Capitol. “This is an outrage. It is contrary to everything this country stands for and represents a clear and present danger to the constitutional order of this country. This attempt to disrupt and destroy the democratic process should be repugnant to the hearts of all Americans and must be denounced from every platform and pulpit in the country.

It must be noted that the cause of this violence is obvious. For more than four years, President Trump has waged a campaign of demagoguery and division, stoking our fears and prejudices for his personal gain, all while undermining the foundations of the constitutional order. He has been abetted by an army of supporters and apologists in the media and within the Republican Party, who, by turning a blind eye to his worst excesses, also bear some responsibility for today’s events. The right-wing extremists and white supremacists who stormed the capitol today were responding to years of dog whistles as well as overt encouragement from Mr. Trump and his closest supporters. In addition to the complicity of Mr. Trump’s unwavering allies, all Christians are left to reckon with the fact that the name of Jesus and the warrant of the Gospel have been publicly invoked by those defending not only Mr. Trump himself but also his cynical, destructive attempts to reverse the clear results of the presidential election.  

...“‘This isn’t who we are,” President-elect Biden said in response to this outrage. With respect, Mr. Biden, what has happened is in truth a part of who we are, and America must face that fact. Yet it is also true that if Americans can summon the courage to face this moment together with honesty and hope, then we will discover once again that the best of who we are as a country can overcome our worst impulses of the national spirit.” See https://www.americamagazine.org/politics-society/2021/01/06/protestors-capitol-riot-239661?utm_source=piano&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=7228&pnespid=j7dkt_lbXgWNAefLXwUZHENrQ6CDLPCx1XqwjyTz.

Michael Gerson asserted that Trump’s evangelicals were complicit in the desecration of our democracy on January 6. “The practical effects of the fascist occupation of the U.S. Capitol building were quickly undone. The symbols it left behind are indelible. A Confederate flag waved in triumph in the halls of a building never taken by Jefferson Davis. Guns drawn to protect the floor of the House of Representatives from violent attack. A cloddish barbarian in the presiding officer’s chair. The desecration of democracy under the banner “Jesus Saves.”

This post-apocalyptic vision of chaos and national humiliation was the direct and intended consequence of a president’s incitement. It was made possible by quislings such as Sens. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) and Ted Cruz (R-Tex.), who turned a ceremony of continuity into a rallying cry for hatred and treason. In the aftermath, Republican legislators who still don’t support Trump’s immediate removal from office by constitutional means are guilty of continuing complicity. All this leaves President-elect Joe Biden in a difficult position. Prudence would advise two weeks of patience and then an upbeat attempt to turn the national page. Justice would dictate arresting, trying and imprisoning President Trump for sedition at the soonest possible moment. As of now, I am in the justice camp. The only way to restore boundaries of law and decency is to enforce them. 

...As white nationalists, conspiracy theorists, misogynists, anarchists, criminals and terrorists took hold of the Republican Party, many evangelicals blessed it under the banner “Jesus Saves.”  The political and religious costs of a tight evangelical alliance with violent bigots and crackpots were easily foreseen. I and many others foresaw and foresaw until our fingers ached at the keyboard. Yet Franklin Graham, Jerry Falwell Jr., Robert Jeffress and the others either shut their eyes or shared in Trumpian hatreds. “There has never been anyone,” said Ralph Reed of the Faith and Freedom Coalition, “who has defended us and who has fought for us, who we have loved more than Donald J. Trump. No one!” 

...The collapse of one disastrous form of Christian social engagement should be an opportunity for the emergence of a more faithful one. And here there are plenty of potent, hopeful Christian principles lying around unused by most evangelicals: A consistent and comprehensive concern for the weak and vulnerable in our society, including the poor, immigrants and refugees. A passion for racial reconciliation and criminal justice reform, rooted in the nonnegotiable demands of human dignity. A deep commitment to public and global health, reflecting the priorities of Christ’s healing ministry. An embrace of political civility as a civilizing norm. A commitment to the liberty of other people’s religions, not just our own. An insistence on public honesty and a belief in the transforming power of unarmed truth.” See https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/trumps-evangelicals-were-complicit-in-the-desecration-of-our-democracy/2021/01/07/69a51402-5110-11eb-83e3-322644d82356_story.html?utm_campaign=wp_opinions_pm&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_popns.

 

Around 200 Trump supporters gathered at the S.C. State Capitol in Columbia on January 6 to share common cause with protestors in Washington, D.C. seeking to overturn the election of Joe Biden. “Zach Dunn, president of conservative group OverWatch USC, said he was at the protest because of “what many people see as a fraudulent election,” he told The State. Elections officials throughout America have said there is no evidence of widespread voter fraud in the presidential election. Dunn agreed there is no proof, but believed there was enough circumstantial evidence to warrant an investigation. “Much of the world is ignoring truth, and that’s why we’re here today,” said Tom Ward, 63, who spoke at the protest and favored investigating the election.

Michelle Graham, chair of the Republican Liberty Caucus of SC, was at the protest using a microphone and speaker to decry what she believed was election fraud. “We want to support Trump, but this isn’t necessarily about Trump. It’s about the integrity of the elections,” Graham said. “All of them should be investigated, even if we won.”

Several protesters wore QAnon shirts; others waved “Don’t Tread on Me” flags and a group of about 15 men standing together were wearing the Proud Boys’ yellow and black attire. One man walked around the State House saying the “Hail Mary” prayer out loud while marching alongside other protesters carrying pro-Trump banners.  The Columbia, SC, protest was in stark contrast to the scene in Washington D.C., where rioters stormed the U.S. Capitol building to delay Congressional certification of a Joe Biden victory.” See https://www.thestate.com/news/politics-government/article248315605.html.