No, this moment in history is not normal. We live in a time of crisis that revolves around political and geographic fragmentation, a loss of faith in institutions, an enormous wealth gap between the rich and the poor, and under the constant influence of social media and its monitoring and algorithms. We’ve seen this before in history. It may have not been the internet in previous occurrences. Instead it was the radio, or the pamphlet. It occurs about every 80 years or so after a period of global hyper-connectivity experiences a backlash. The world counteracts against all of the global and ethnic integration, loses faith in the traditional forces that have kept society together, and moves toward an emotional, chaotic period of dangerous ideologies. People retreat into conspiracy theories; religious cults and bizarre sects flourish as institutional religion declines. What makes this period different is the speed and the scale at which this is happening. Nothing exemplifies this recklessness more than the QAnon movement that is growing globally and now has elected representatives in the U.S. congress. In a time when much of the Christian movement in the world is choosing to focus on political power and ideology, QAnon represents the next dangerous frontier for the church where service, theology, and compassion could be replaced by fear, conspiracy, and division.

 Conspiracy theories are nothing new. They are especially prevalent during time of rapid transition and confusion. People who are attracted to conspiracy theories are often those who feel powerless against forces bigger than themselves, are inclined towards a victim mentality, or resent where they are in life. Conspiracy theories offer four big payoffs: 1) They make powerless people feel like they have valuable, insider information. 2) They quickly identify an enemy who can be blamed for all of their ills and concerns. 3) They have the potential to create communities of people that bond over being against the world together. 4) Finally, a conspiracy theory is a very convenient belief because it can never be proven wrong. After all, if you don’t agree, it’s just because you have been manipulated by the dark forces. Enter QAnon.

 In many ways, groups formed around conspiracy theories can serve as a pseudo-church or cult – one that puts the person in a self-centered frame of mind and is constantly seeking to identify enemies and live in perpetual fear. That’s what unhealthy religion does as well and we’ve seen plenty of that lately. In many places, global Christians are more interested in accruing political power and winning the argument than changing their community and serving those least like them. The message of Jesus and the New Testament is replaced by the dysfunctional Israelite mentality that wanted a king with political power (that didn’t go so well). If theocratic politics is akin to dysfunctional Israel reborn, QAnon is like the gnostic movement, which deviated from Jesus’ teachings in favor of a detachment and disdain for the world.

QAnon followers are your neighbors, they are in churches, they might be your dad or your grandma. They believe that QAnon is a person deep inside the U.S. Government in the Department of Energy (or some other department) who is exposing lots of secretive information about how their political enemies are conspiring against them and society. It often involves conspiracy theories revolving around child molestation, but can include warnings about vaccines, can be hostile to both education and science, or can go on about Satanism or how technology is being used to control people etc.  QAnon conspiracies often go after liberal Hollywood celebrities like Tom Hanks (who is a Greek Orthodox Christian and not really that political). Then there are conspiracies about the illumnati, UFOs, Bill Gates and the idea that some politicians actually have lizard skin underneath their human skin (no joke). It’s often the case that a QAnon follower is someone who is pretty naive about the internet. They access it in lesser known parts of the internet like 4chan, 8chan and Reddit and take it all at face value. It all sounds pretty goofy, but 22 Republicans in congress and 2 independents have supported QAnon beliefs. QAnon is alive and well in Europe, Asia, Latin America and elsewhere.

But who is Q? The primary sources are James and Ronald Watkins, a father and son team who gained control of the message board 8chan, which is filled with lots of questionable material including child pornography. They were based in the Philippines and started posting on October 28, 2017. Q believers don’t seem to realize that the Philippines is a hub of dark web entrepreneurs who spread pornography, scams, and conspiracies from the safety of some nice home in Manila. The most wanted criminal in the world was a thirty-something, obese American who brilliantly realized how to sell illegal pharmaceutical drugs over the internet to Americans with remote doctors signing off on the prescriptions. He made billions of dollars off of the opiate addiction of Americans. The Philippines was a good base of operation because it’s so easy to pay-off the authorities in that country. Cyber-libel cases are also extremely rare in the Philippines (The F.B.I. eventually arrested the cyber-drug dealer). Of course, the Q leaders have managed to monetize their conspiracy theory with books, t-shirts, and other memorabilia. Unfortunately, the F.B.I. has not always been able to stop actual acts of violence in the name of QAnon and those are expected to grow exponentially in the near future. Watkins had previously made money by starting porn sites designed to get around Japanese censorship rules. Fortunately, it looks like the Philippines finally had enough of this embarrassment and chased Watkins back to the United States.

[Side note: For those of us interested in actually fighting sex trafficking, QAnon is not helpful. Their stupid conspiracy theories interfere with the actual work of rescuing people from human slavery. It’s deeply counter-productive and minimizes the issue so that false and ludicrous charges are constantly on the web and in the media; while the real criminals get ignored.]

So how did your sweet, church-going Grandma become a die-hard QAnon follower? Well, it can be addictive. Q releases regular “Q-drops” of enticing information and follows it up with melodramatic writing along the lines of “I could get killed by sharing this information. I must go now.” It’s like being on a giant investigative team solving the world’s most dramatic and consequential mystery:  What evil forces are taking over the world? It can appeal to lonely people, people who are not good critical-thinkers, people who naively believe anything on the internet, and people who are angry. The primary in-road, however, is sharing Q’s political beliefs.  It then can become a vortex that sucks people in and no amount of intercession by friends and family members can break the spell. But how, specifically, does your evangelical grandma get caught up in a movement that originated with a pornographer based in the Philippines?

In some circles of Christianity (and Islam, and Hinduism, and Buddhism), there is a fascination with end-time prophecy. Looking for symbols and hidden messages in the Book of Revelation to identify current events has been going on since…well, since before that book was even written. QAnon taps into that same desire to uncover mysteries and find clues that lead to dramatic findings about what is going on in our turbulent world of 2020. A scientific reason for the pandemic is too boring, so a conspiracy comes to the rescue. Then there’s the political angle. Since much of Christianity has chosen to become very aligned with particular politicians and political parties; any conspiracy theory that adds fuel for hatred of the opposing party is welcomed with open arms. Certain segments of Christianity (certainly not all) have a real hostility toward science, education, and intellectualism. Something like QAnon provides reasons why none of those things can be trusted. Then there’s the fact that we are living through a time of increased natural disasters, political division, a global pandemic, and other apocalyptic-like events that make people feel like they are the generation witnessing the biggest catastrophe in human history. It is not true, of course, but QAnon is not for students of history. Good old Q has even dropped scripture in his hate-filled messages from time to time. That really confirms the truth of Q for Grandma because the reality is that QAnon is becoming an extra-Biblical source that guides her life. A key to Q’s manipulation is making it seem that no other source of information can truly be trusted. Q makes predictions that never come to pass, but that doesn’t matter to QAnon followers. That just means he is throwing people off track on purpose. QAnon becomes an emotional and spiritual belief for Grandma. It’s not about reason and healthy skepticism in a world where, say…anyone, myself included, can post their opinions on something and have it instantaneously beamed around the world. QAnon people will often claim that they do research, but that research is usually limited to any website or source that aligns with Q’s presuppositions.

 QAnon evangelists are now all over Youtube and have their own websites and social media. It has far outgrown Q. Many of these Q evangelists come from the evangelical Christian world. They are your grandma, but with more social media savvy and who know how to monetize it. The next generation of scamming televangelists may primarily be online and linked to Q-like conspiracy movements. As QAnon grows, it will morph into whatever people want to believe, whenever they want to believe it, and the Bible will be used to justify all of it. This is the birth of a new age of heresy and cults–the kind that always flourish in times like these. There’s nothing to stop a new QAnon from emerging and being part of a more outwardly fascist movement, or leftist movement, or any other ideology. Wherever people feel like powerless victims amidst all this global change and want to uncover the identity of the cabal oppressing them, there we will see a QAnon-like cult emerge.

 So what can society do about this? The country of Finland is teaching kids how to identify fake-news and navigate the internet beginning in elementary school. These are the kinds of skills and skepticism that need to be developed in every country. Conspiracy theories are raging around the world and leading to deaths in places as closed as Myanmar and as open as the U.S. In the same way that you can’t yell “fire” in a crowded movie theatre because of the potentially dangerous consequences, some forms of monitoring and censorship have to become more prevalent. Do we really want videos on how to traffic women or groom children to be on Youtube and Facebook? There are limits to how much poison our societies can withstand in this cyber-world.

For Christians, the chances of more people in their churches getting caught up in this kind of thinking is very real. Complicating things is that many of these Q believers will be citing scripture or will claim that they and Q are totally in line with the Bible. This is where the subjective nature of Bible reading combined with a church that has become hyper-politicized will come back to bite in a big way. Institutional Christianity has a habit of creating the monsters that then erode it. In previous eras, the church survives because of people who choose to seek service instead of power. People who find opportunity in global crisis instead of oppression. People who express and live out hope instead of fear. And people that transform their societies for the better, rather than condemn them. To paraphrase Martin Luther King, the church needs to spend less time being the thermometer and more time trying to be the thermostat. Grandma would do far better spending her time delivering freshly-made cookies to the newly homeless in the post-Covid economy than spending four hours on the internet trying to find out which Hollywood actor is a cannibal. And she will feel better for it. This shouldn’t be rocket-science for true Christians. In fact, just about everything Jesus says in the Bible will lead someone away from the mentality that it takes to be a Q believer. One mentality is completely centered on self-sacrifice (hence the symbol of the cross), and the other is completely centered on self-protection. You can’t serve two masters.

Until the world knows how to navigate social media better, and the countries of the world regain their social and economic equilibrium, our societies and the church will be forced into a box. We will constantly be presented with a choice: Do I want to spend my time living in fear or do I want to spend my time making a difference in my community? The level of destruction and the duration of this era of crisis will depend on how the majority of us answer that question.  That’s the real Q.

Patrick Nachtigall is the author of the new humorous memoir No Religion Required: A Memoir of Faith, Doubt, Chocolate Milk, and Untimely Death.  He has also written on the strengths and weaknesses of American Christianity in his book In God We Trust:  A Challenge to American Evangelicals.

There have been quite a few videos and articles (and studies) floating around that are trying to make the point that Covid-19 is not very deadly.  They are along the lines of “you have more chances of being eaten to death by koala bears than dying of Covid-19.  Of course, these go viral and are used to make it seem that everything should be operating normally.   It’s a combination of “monday-morning quarterbacking,” misunderstanding the primary issues and  data, and a failure to understand the primary issues. So this is an attempt to flesh it out.
 
THE PRIMARY ISSUE WAS NEVER DEATH: Even in the very beginning (and I said this back in February), the biggest threat was its infectious nature and the fact that nobody was sure what it would do to the body or how exactly it spreads. All we know is that it was exponential (and indeed it turned out be exponential and global). The greatest on the ground threat was hospitals being over-run in areas where breakouts occurred. All of those things were real problems, it was far more deadly and infectious than the flu, and the situation got better due to the people that risked their lives and took the virus seriously.
 
So much like the Y2K problem or preventing a terrorist attack; if our societies mobilize and do the right thing, they don’t get credit for the tragedy that could have happened. It becomes “over-blown.”
 
Of course the death toll is going down, because doctors have learned on the fly how to treat it better, there are a number of different medicines which can really slow Covid-19 down (especially if done early), people are social distancing and taking less risks, and the most vulnerable to death (the elderly, the sick, the obese, those in public transportation) are staying away or being very cautious.
 
THE INFECTIOUS NATURE REMAINS A REAL PROBLEM: We now know what kind of activities and places raise the chances of infection. Many places (like the beach), are not easy for the virus to spread. But bars, indoor places where people are signing, nursing homes, hospitals, factories and dormitories are particularly dangerous places. The USA could be far more open and normal now if everyone had truly agreed to cooperate and extra measures were taken in the most dangerous places of transmission.
 
At the very beginning, I said the key would be for countries to adapt new hygenic culture. Most countries have done that and are relatively open. East Asia continues to lead the way, but they have cultures that take it seriously and don’t fight about it.
 
THE DANGER OF LONG-LASTING SYMPTOMS: One out of every 5 TEENAGERS is having long-lasting symptoms. Covid-19 is unusually good at attacking multiple, critical organs at the same time–including the brain. About the same percentage of people that got SARS and MERS still have not fully recovered. This is a big deal. It can end athletic careers, singing careers, and even take away the sense of taste, which is one of the worst things that can happen to a human. Furthermore, we now have multiple reports from around the world that you can catch it twice, or catch a different strain and be more sick the second time around. The chance of the average person getting it is very slim if you are healthy. Many Americans, people in Britain are not healthy.
 
THE SILENT SPREADING FACTOR: It’s still impossible to know if someone has it or not–even with testing. No test is 100% accurate and it seems like 20%–and especially children–can carry it and not feel symptoms. The asymptomatic nature still presents a big danger, particularly to vulnerable people.
 
THE TREATMENT IS WORSE THAN THE DISEASE: Only if your country deals with it terribly. Having hospitals overrun and not even knowing what the virus did would have been worse. But most countries did the so-called “hammer and the dance” approach. A massive total lock-down in the first weeks, followed by a new infrastructure of contact-tracing and mitigation strategies, and a new hygenic culture. Then outbreaks are dealt with when they pop up and isolated. It was not rocket-science. The US and UK never decided on a strategy so they were never really open or closed. This failure of government to mobilize the people and infrastructure is absolutely the worst option.
There are theories that because Covid-19 is a lab creation and not directly from nature (it’s a hybrid genetically), it will not have the staying power of an ordinary Corona Virus.
There’s also a theory that Covid-19 hits a particular region hard, spikes up exponentially, and then drops exponentially.
That would be good news.
The bottom line is that these kind of viruses may be more common in the future.  Due to environmental degradation, how we consume meat, the ease of travel, and the large populations of our cities; more pandemics may arrive in the future.  Some countries passed this test with flying colors.  Others are on a steep learning curve, but clearly in learning mode.  And then there are a handful whose response has been so confused, incoherent, and divided that they get a “D” or an “F” on this first big test.  They have not really improved their infrastructure, they have not met their social obligations, they have not scientifically educated their people, and they have damaged their economies and their people psychologically by not being able to figure out the hammer and the dance.  Sadly, the U.S. and Britain are two of those countries.

Since I love all things ‘80s and never actually left the decade, I am creating my list of the most iconic, defining pop songs between 1980 and 1989.  It’s my blog and I can do what I want.  And it’s helping me stall from doing the exercise and work I am supposed to do today.  These are NOT my favorite ‘80s songs. Most of these songs wouldn’t make my top 10 list of favorite songs.  These are the songs that I think were indispensable to the decade – the ones that captured the sound, the vibe, and became the timeless classics.  Here we go!

“Every Breath You Take” by the Police

This song appeared on the Synchronicity album and I believe is the 2nd most played radio song of all time (behind John Lennon’s “Imagine”).  It was the hit of the summer of 1983 and I believe it was #1 for 8 weeks.  It’s a great song not just because it’s catchy, but because it captures that feeling of being obsessively in love.   Sting and the Police were obviously a big part of the 1980s, but it’s the deceptive simplicity of the song that makes it such an earworm.  Technically, it is the most successful song of the 1980s.

“Billie Jean” by Michael Jackson

It’s a classic bass line that Jackson admitted to ripping off from the great Hall & Oats song “I Can’t Go for That (No Can Do).”  The Quincy Jones production is so smooth and that Rod Temperton/Jackson/Jones music of the early ‘80s was Jackson’s best.  His music declined significantly once Temperton was gone.  Oddly, Quincy Jones didn’t like the song and wanted it cut off of the Thriller album.  The song had a very unique, smooth vibe and Steve Baron made an iconic video to match the song which really helped to kick off the mega success of both Jackson and MTV.  Jackson wrote the song about a stalker, which is also what Every Breath You Take is about.  I can still remember the exact moment I first heard it.  I was on a ferry heading for Seattle, and it was riveting.  Like many of Michael Jackson’s songs, the lyrics have him portraying himself as a victim.  He’s often confessing things, complaining, or a victim in a lot of his songs going all the way back to his music with “The Jacksons.”  Freud would have a field day with that.

“Sweet Child O’ Mine” by Guns N’ Roses

This song exploded in August of 1988.  It was everywhere and GNR became THE band that year.  Of all the heavier rock songs, I think this one wins because the band had a bigger following and more “credibility” than a lot of hair metal and heavy metal bands.  The unforgettable guitar lick that opens the songs and carries it was just a practice exercise that guitarist Slash came up with.  It mixes sentimentality with hard rock and ends on a more ominous note than it starts out with.  I like the song, but it takes me back to a period in my life where life really began to suck super bad.

“Tainted Love” by Soft Cell

Along with the Human League and Gary Numan, around 1981 we began to get a glimpse of what New Wave was going to sound like.  There are more cool examples like Joy Division’s “Love Will Tear Us Apart” or bigger hits like Devo’s “Whip It,” but Tainted Love was not only synth heavy but had the heavy British accent to go along with it.  It sounded space-age to me and the “beep beep” sound repeated in the song still sounds good.

“Careless Whispers” by George Michael

Even though it was on Wham!’s Make it Big album, it was called a George Michael song–a precursor to his eventually going solo.  The lyrics of the song are so adult and sound so autobiographical and true that it is very surprising that George wrote it when he was 17 and had never been in that kind of a deep relationship.  Many people older and more experienced would never be able to come up with lyrics that convincing and emotional.  The song is beautiful, sad, wistful, and beautifully sung by Michael.  But of course, it’s that unforgettable sax solo which makes it a regular listen in elevators and lounges around the world.  I love the video which captures the song perfectly and was filmed in Miami.  The humidity wrecked havoc on George’s hair which is why he wears a hat in parts of the video.  He flew his sister to Miami to fix his hair and it cost $10,000.  It’s considered the most expensive haircut ever. This is also the first song I ever danced with a girl to.  She asked me.  I’d like to thank that girl (who wishes to remain nameless) right now for validating my masculinity in an 8th grade dance at Twality Jr. High.

“Do You Really Want to Hurt Me” by Culture Club

You may not remember, but there was a whole big androgynous craze in the mid-1980s.  Marilyn, Dead or Alive, Annie Lennox, Prince, Michael Jackson and Boy George played around with gender.  America was shocked that evening when Culture Club appeared on “Solid Gold.”  I remember that night watching this geisha girl who called herself “Boy.”  Of course, shortly thereafter it became clear that Boy George was a boy.  But it’s also the song itself with a very unusual mellow introduction, a Sade-like smooth middle, and then a funky bass-driven middle part.  The whole “Kissing to Be Clever” album is still one of my favorites of the 1980s and isn’t dated at all.  It’s a wild mix of calypso, rap, smooth jazz, and I don’t know what else.  It’s a beautifully produced album that captures the comfort with classic soul music that a lot of white ‘80s music had–particularly from England.

“With or Without You” by U2

This makes the list because it was kind of the beginning of UK new wave and soul starting to disappear from the charts.  By 1988 and 1989, it was pretty much gone.  It was replaced by harder rock, the Teddy Reiley Atlanta New Jack crap, and rap.  U2 had already been around but this first single off of arguably the 1980s most defining album, The Joshua Tree, made my broken-hearted Spring Break of 1987 a wee bit better.  The song is one that we can all relate to at times in our life and the slow build to the crescendo before it fades out more quietly again is lovely.  Edge’s guitar part is so simple but so memorable and captures that U2 sound perfectly.  He talks about using notes sparingly and viewing each note as “expensive.”  The song that launched them into the stratosphere from the album that launched them into mega-stardom belongs on this list.

“Born in the USA” by Bruce Springsteen

It’s probably no one’s favorite Springsteen song, but it captured mid-1980s vividly.  Dying small-towns and ignored Vietnam Vets finding their voice lent power to the lyrics and of course it was made to be an ironic anthem–the kind of a whole stadium could sing along to–and they did!  This was used by Ronald Reagan to rally the country, which made Springsteen mad because it’s not a song about American triumph, but about America’s forgotten people.  It’s definitely a powerful song and Springsteen’s final scream at the end is as raw and real as it gets.

“Walk This Way” by Run DMC

I loathe this song and was not into Run DMC.  But this song has to be on the list of iconic songs because it brought rap into the commercial mainstream, brought rap to MTV, resuscitated Aerosmith’s dying career, and gave rap credibility within the rock audience.  An old Aerosmith song was re-imagined by the groundbreaking Run DMC.  It was produced by Rick Rubin who went on to have an incredible career.  MTV was criticized heavily for avoiding black artists and it wasn’t until this 1986 song and video that black music got it’s own shows and heavy rotation.

“Girls Just Wanna Have Fun” by Cindi Lauper.  This song was so full of melody and pep, I thought she was a British act when it came out in 1983.  I find the song annoying now, but it captured the positive, colorful sound of a lot of ‘80s music.  Full of melody, full of interesting little sounds, and sung by a colorful character which the ‘80s was full of (Adam Ant, Boy George, Madonna, Prince, Michael Jackson, Billy Idol, David Lee Roth etc.).  She’s So Unusual was her first and best-selling album.  The Hooters were the backing band on the album. “Time After Time” is the better song, but GJWHF gets the nod.

“Take On Me” by A-ha.  It’s still one of the best music videos ever made, and the song makes the list because it is the quintessential, catchy ‘80s pop song.  The Norwegian trio would never have a bigger hit even though they would go on to make many more albums over 30 years.  The irony is that this simple, catchy, stripped-down song is nothing compared to some of the gorgeous ballads that guitarist and writer Pal Waaktar-Savoy has written.  Songs like “Love’s Never a Forever Thing,”  “Summer Moved On” and “Hunting High and Low” are just a few of the truly gorgeous pieces of music Pal has written.  But he will always be remembered for Take on Me and it’s peppy, Scandinavian cartoon sound.

“What’s Love Got to Do With It” by Tina Turner.  There always has to be an old veteran that makes a comeback in any decade.  Tina Turner’s Private Dancer album was a monster and she emerged as a strong, empowered woman after having lived in the abusive relationship with Ike Turner.  She ended up selling out large arenas she never could have with Ike, became a Buddhist, and moved to Zurich.  This song was her comeback hit and just has that classic ‘80s sound; lots of melody, interesting transitions and sounds, and a talented artists playing and singing.  I’ll always associate it with July 4 at Fort Vancouver in 1984.

“Purple Rain” by Prince.  I remember buying the album and wondering what was with this slow, gospel-like song.  Then the song continues to build and build and Prince’s voice gets more urgent and strained, until it ends up in one of the all-time classic blistering guitar solos in rock music history.  The 8 minute song was too long for the radio, but stations played it anyway.  It was at this point that we all realized that Prince was not only an amazing guitarist but maybe one of the greatest rock guitarists in all of rock history.  He had the greatest vocal range of any singer.  His deep voice and low notes are very resonate, but he has a lovely tenor voice also, an amazing falsetto, and then there’s the “insane man scream” as Dave Grohl calls it.  The song was an amazing climax to the song and the movie.  But tell me which song on the radio in the last 20 or 30 years comes close to this level of musicianship, passion, and complexity?  Despacito?  Please.

Well that concludes my overview of the 12 songs that define the 1980s which was fun and meaningful to exactly one person:   me.

What song do you think exemplifies the 1980s that I missed?

A friend of mine asked if China-style Socialism can be implemented in the U.S.A.? Since we are going to be hearing a lot about “America becoming socialist” this week, I thought I would put my answer here.
 
“Socialism” is too broad of a word. Every democracy has a healthy mix of Capitalist and Socialist policies. Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and many other programs conservatives are dependent on were labeled “socialist” when they were introduced. But it didn’t turn the country socialist. It was the result of the rich-poor divide getting too great.
 
Ironically, right now the U.S government is practicing a form of state-controlled socialism/manipulating the economy. Your tax money is being used by the government to artificially inflate the stock market. The Federal Reserve is literally printing money and giving it to junk bonds, hedge funds, and even Apple–which has had record profits this year. Farmers were given millions in bailouts too. That’s “socialism.” It’s just socialism for corporations which no one ever complains about. It’s only when tax money goes to the poor that the socialism alarm is sounded. But in this election season, all we are going to hear is the word “socialism” said in an over-generalized way.
 
It would be impossible for the United States to truly implement China-style socialism. The U.S, is the world’s only reserve currency and the place where countries and companies around the world park the bulk of their financial capital. They wouldn’t do that if the U.S.A. were truly a socialist nation or becoming one. China’s economy is made up of state-owned enterprises and “private companies” that the government has full access to and can interfere with anytime. If the government wants to put surveillance equipment into Huawei phones, they can do that at anytime. But all of these companies practice capitalism, just under an authoritarian system. So China too is a hybrid economy; but far too regulated and controlled by the government to ever be deemed truly trustworthy by investors over-the-long haul; which is one of the reasons many companies are moving out of China.
 
The United States is truly made up of independent capitalist companies. But the Federal Reserve is using taxpayer money to choose winners from those companies in the American economy which is not supposed to happen in true capitalism. It’s highly dangerous and will lead to an economic day of reckoning.
 
Both the U.S. and China lie about their economic statistics, both flirt with authoritarianism, both have “socialist” elements and both practice a hardcore version of Capitalism that doesn’t leave families with much room for error. There’s virtually no true “socialist” safety-net in either country and both are now experiencing extreme wealth divides. The difference is that China is a one-state party which is bad. And the United States has the core fundamentals to remain a genuinely capitalist society. Both countries are drowning in government debt because of truly stupid decisions over the past 20 years.
 
Since both countries have broken their social-contract with the people; both countries will have to initiate programs to even the divide between rich and poor. People may want to call that “socialism”, but it’s not. It’s something all economies have to do when the wealth imbalance gets too big. Roosevelt and even General Eisenhower were labeled “socialists” and “communists” when they had to make adjustments. Reagan raised taxes when deficits got out of hand, so he would be labeled a “socialist” now.
 
Eventually in both countries (and the U.K. and many other countries), money will have to be re-directed to the middle-class and poor people because they all went too far in rewarding corporations and the wealthy. Both China and the US are massively in debt, so they both will have governments that need to keep overspending to stay afloat. That is the box both China and the US created between 2000-2020. They are now so in debt and so trapped, they have to keep spending and adding debt to survive. Makes no sense, but that’s the trap they are in unless they want 50% unemployment or higher.
 
Now we will go into a period of adjustments and people will be panicking about “communism” and “Socialism;” but people should know the stock market already is under government control and bailing out rich companies with bad debt. It’s only when normal people get helped out that people start complaining.
 
If the Democrats win, the next big debate will be about MMT–Modern Monetary Theory which will be labeled “socialism.” MMT is Printing money out of thin air to give away and not worrying about debt. That’s risky. But of course, the FED has ALREADY been practicing MMT since 2008 and that’s MMT. That’s Dick Cheney’s “Deficits don’t matter” stuff. It doesn’t matter whether it’s a Democrat or a Republican President. They call it “Q.E.” (quantitative easing) instead of socialism or MMT. So when you hear all the panic about socialism this coming week; just know, it’s already been here for a long time. Demand more intelligent conversation on the subject instead of generalized slogans that are not really about analyzing the state of the country’s economy.
WHEN CHRISTIAN RESPOND TO BLACK LIVES MATTER with “all lives matter,” “God doesn’t see color,” “Let’s just preach love;” ”let’s not throw stones” and then cite some Scripture, I am sure they mean well, but it’s hurtful, and I think they are missing at least three important things:
 
1) RACISM AND PREJUDICE IS A PROBLEM WITH BELIEVERS TOO: The fact that Jesus and God don’t see race is not the point. The Bible and Jesus himself had to constantly bring up the issue of prejudice by religious people including to his own disciples because it was still a problem even AFTER they believed. Followers of Christianity and Religious people DO SEE RACE and ETHNICITY which is why Jesus told the parable of the Good Samaritan so that it would continue to be retold. The ethnic and religious tension against Samaritans was justified by RELIGIOUS PEOPLE and even his DISCIPLES. There was prejudice by believers against women, lepers, Romans, Hellenic Jews, and against Gentiles by Jesus’ followers. It didn’t magically disappear. And so the Scriptures are constantly having to put forth images of different ethnic groups, races, and people being equal. It would be nice if believing in God and ”loving” automatically eradicated institutional racism, but it doesn’t–not even within the church. Abraham Lincoln pointed out in his 2nd Inaugural Address that both the North and the South ”read the same Bible.”’
 
2) AFRICAN-AMERICANS TODAY ARE APPEALING TO BIBLICAL PROMISES FOR A PARTICULAR INJUSTICE OCCURRING NOW: African-American history includes a long history of Black Christians having to remind White Christians of the promise of Scripture—(not the happy, cherry-picked love Scriptures, but the justice and equality themes the church was not living up to 1700 years after Jesus).
 
At the College of William and Mary in Virginia is a document written in 1723 written by uneducated slaves trying to remind their Christian leaders and judges of the deeper themes in the Bible they were being forced to believe in. They wrote:
 
“Baptised and brouht up in a way of the Christian faith and followes the wayes and Rulles of the chrch of England which keeps and makes them and there seed Slaves forever. Wee doo hardly know when Sabbath comes for our task mastrs are as hard with us as the Egyptians was with the Chilldann of Issarall.”
 
(They also wrote that they were afraid of signing their names)
 
….“for freare of our masters for if they knew that wee have Sent home to your honour wee Should goo neare to Swing upon the Gallass tree.”
 
The Christians were their task masters and they were having to appeal to Hebrew enslavement by the Egyptians to wake them up; not using isolated cherry-picked verses, but the overall theme and meaning of the Bible.
 
3) PEOPLE DON’T USE SCRIPTURE TO DEFEND RACISM BUT THEY DO USE THEM TO AVOID TALKING ABOUT RACIAL PROBLEMS: While African-American preachers historically focused on grand themes in the Bible, like justice and freedom, as well as the Prophets, White preachers liked to cite short little Scriptures out of context as a way of silencing the slaves and arguing for obedience, encouraging them to look the other way, ”turn the other cheek”,”wait upon the Lord” and remain slaves. Scripture can be used to discard the issue.
 
I remember being told in Kenya that a road I was going to walk down was a road where people were regularly mugged and robbed daily. The story of the Good Samaritan was more real and modern to them than it is to someone living in a rich, Western country. ”That road you have to walk down daily” doesn’t exist everywhere for everyone.
 
In the same way that the Bibles stories about plagues, famine, pestilence, persecution, imprisonment, agricultural disaster, and stories of rural agrarian life are not as relatable to rich Western Christians as they are to the larger number of non-Western Christians who are still living lives that are much closer to 1st Century existence; Scriptures about Justice and racial reconciliation do not resonate as much with most White American Christians as they do to Africa- American Christians. Why? Because those issues are not as much a part of the road they have to walk down daily. Consequently it’s easy to throw out an isolated Scripture and try to defuse the race talk.
 
I get told a lot to just talk about love when I post on social media and that’s really just a way of trying to silence and spiritually shame me. (Fortunately, for every negative private message I receive, I get 10 positive messages). But I’m not going to be silenced, because it’s not about me. It’s about something bigger that will affect our children and grandchildren. It’s about the world I want my son to live in. It really is a time for white Christians and all of us to stop and learn. It doesn’t mean you are bad. But we have very clearly been living in an era recently where people have lost a sense of shame about racism. It’s practiced more openly, leaders in different countries around the world use it to win elections, racist cheers are common in stadiums around the world in a way it wasn’t before, racist groups are growing and more open, it’s enabled (even by Christians), excuses are made, and subtle and not so subtle ways of trying to silence people are practiced on Facebook and beyond. This post is to show how this is an old tactic. The question is are we going to name it, feel shame, and address our systematic sins? We have to. Quite often love is about listening and learning.

It is well known that the evangelical church struggles in Europe.  On a continent where the evangelical population can be as low as 0.25% (Greece) and where 4% overall church attendance is considered good (Germany); many evangelical churches find themselves struggling to maintain churches with more than 20 committed people.  The northern protestant countries such as England, Scotland, Sweden, Germany, and Holland are likely to see the most success, and some countries outside of Western Europe like Ukraine and Romania show a decent amount of growth. But for the most part, Christianity is in decline and evangelical churches barely survive.

The few that seem to be thriving are almost always made up immigrants, persecuted or marginalized people like the Roma, or people who have parents that were active Christians—even if it was in the State church.  Quite often these churches have quite a few parishioners who are related to each other which adds to the numbers of the congregation. Converting an actual Czech person, Spaniard, or Greek is very difficult.

The usual reasons given for that is the fact that Europe is post-religious/post-Christian, having been the birthplace of the secular environment and the Enlightenment. It’s also true that the christian church under the regimes of Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini, Franco and many other dictatorships often served as an enabler of evil. There’s also the fact that religious wars decimated the European population for the past 2,000 years and church wielded too much power over nations. But I would like to highlight some “invisible factors” that are often not seen which create huge obstacles for the evangelical church and frustration for its leaders. It is my hope that understanding these invisible factors will help European evangelical churches to make adjustments or at least help them set their expectations correctly. The success of American Evangelical churches (not to mention those in the non-Western world) hangs over the heads of many European Christian leaders like a dark cloud of condemnation. Does that have to be the case?

Factor 1: Volunteerism

The evangelical church that arose out of England, Scotland and particularly America had a strong activist strain. Especially in the United States, the DNA of evangelical christianity was rooted in taking action, evangelism (marketing), and competing against other faith groups. In order to do that, a lot of volunteers were required. There were strong expectations that once you were part of the church, you worked for the church unpaid. That came easily to Americans, who as Alexander de Tocqueville noted in the 19th century, were activists by nature.

Europeans, on the other hand, come from high-churches (Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodoxy, Lutheranism), where duties fell to the priests and nuns. Attending mass was the only obligation, the professionals did the rest. The fact that most American evangelical churches have quite a large number of people who are willing to put in 10 to 20 hours a week in the church to run the nursery, cut the grass, or serve in long board meetings is really quite unusual and something often taken for granted. The evangelical church is highly dependent on people volunteering their free time with no expectation of financial reward.

Factor 2: The part-time pastor

In the United States, the vocational pastor is now being lifted up by some as a better option to the paid full-time pastor. The idea is that this gives the people more ownership and church involvement will increase. But as we saw in Factor 1, people are more likely to step up if they come from a culture that values volunteerism. The European pastor not only has little lay help, but they often have to work at a primary job in addition to running the church. This easily leads to high-rates of burn out. It also can result in churches that expect that pastor to do everything. It’s a cycle that becomes hard to break. Even if pastors decide to delegate and encourage more lay involvement, they are still dealing with an overall culture outside of the church (if not within), that doesn’t understand the concept of volunteering.

Factor 3: The commute

A further challenge for the European church is that the number of evangelicals and evangelical churches is so small, that often times the people within the church do not live in the neighborhood of the church. In fact, they may be commuting on the metro for 1 hour in Rome or Paris just to get to their congregation. This also makes lay-leadership difficult. The churches are often not that well-integrated into the neighborhood so they can’t really affect much change. They may not even reflect the culture of the neighborhood in which they are located. The commute also means that congregants are not available for many activities or lay leadership positions throughout the week.  In the United States, many churches draw from their towns, suburbs, or at least have a high population of people who own cars and can easily drive to the church throughout the week.

Factor 4: The minority complex

Because there are so few evangelical churches, the people within the church often feel marginalized by society. They are usually looked down upon (as religious kooks or part of a cult), and they may even face persecution in countries like Russia. There may also be subtle “soft” prejudices they have to deal with, such as landlords and city officials that do not want to give building permits, lease a room, or grant a visa to missionaries. This may not result in physical harm or death, but it can be very demoralizing and make running a church extremely challenging.

All of this can also lead to a separatist attitude. Instead of engaging post-Christendom, the church is tempted to withdraw further. It is very difficult to convert european non-Christians if the church is going to view only those that swallow the Gospel whole as people worthy of relationship. Too often, evangelicals are quick to condemn all of European society as if it has nothing to offer. This includes expressing a lot of hostility toward Catholics, Orthodox, or other state churches which these countries and cultures have been deeply shaped by. It is like saying “All Samaritans are completely useless, you must leave Samaria on your own and come to us.” There’s no sense that there may be important pieces of the dominant secular and religious culture that need to be engaged with and respected.

Factor 5: Legalism 

With such an overwhelming secular environment and feeling on the margins of society, evangelical churches in Europe are often very fearful of dying. That fear manifests itself as legalism—an extreme intolerance for anyone who doesn’t practice Christianity exactly the way the stalwarts of the church do.

It’s no coincidence that many European evangelical churches lose their young people. The adults in the church become extremely protective of their church traditions and become very inflexible in theology. Questioning the faith or expressing oneself differently becomes a problem. In fact, for newcomers, taking too long too assimilate can be viewed as unacceptable. The 19-year old recent convert that still has piercings, or dresses too provocatively, or still smokes is not integrated into the life of the church, given responsibilities, or even walked alongside.

The younger generations of the families in the church wrestle with a European, pluralistic world that the church does not even engage. The answers that work inside the small evangelical church, don’t work for them at the university, playground or pub. Too often, churches value their traditions more than they do becoming accessible to the very different culture outside of their doors. When that culture of legalism enters into the church, they are often not willing to go on a journey with the converted individual, but rather expect them to very rapidly conform to the acceptable expression of Christiaity.

Factor 6: Power-blocks/Small family business model 

Since so few people convert and the churches are small, it is often the case that evangelical churches in Europe are run by, or dominated by one particular family. That family becomes the power-block that becomes impossible to displace. One family may control all the decisions. Healthy decisions may not be made because it would be turning one’s back on family. The church politics can become stifling. The reality is that the evangelical model can be very much like running small business.

Since a small power-block has invested the most in the church, they have a hard time making room for new leadership. They feel that they have paid their dues. Healthy confrontation is avoided, and the church rises and falls on the commitment of that one family. This happens outside of Europe as well, but it is particularly likely to happen in European churches because so few convert, and family influence is one of the main ways that people discover and commit to a religion.

Factor 7: The Lack of a talent-pool

Evangelical churches are very dependent on having activities, programming, and outreach. The end-result is that organization becomes a key factor and people with great skill-sets in that area are needed to keep it running. In Europe, the church may have very few people so the diversity of skill-sets is very limited. Furthermore, so few people want to be pastors, that it is quite often the case that the lead pastor is not particularly talented in a lot of the key areas required for evangelism and growth. They may not, for instance, be very good organizers, or public speakers, or teachers; but these are the things they have to do to keep the church open. Churches in the United States, the Philippines, and Nigeria may have a much easier time finding people who have church management skill-sets. This is not to say that God cannot equip people—however many pastors struggle under the burden of working in areas that may not be their areas of strength.

Factor 8: High expense/low income 

Most Evangelical churches expect to have a band, at least a number of instruments, good audio visuals, a building space (preferably their own purchased space) and a variety of programs and activities. All of this costs money. It becomes a pretty high overhead expense when the church may have only 20 people. In some European countries, not having a church building of your own means the local people will never view you as a church and will always label you a strange cult. Of course, Christians can remain on the fringe and marginalized as Jesus said we often would be; but most European churches don’t want to remain that way. They want legitimacy so they can engage the community.

It can also be hard to create tithers from the congregation. Many live in countries where taxes may have to go to the state church, and so giving to their local evangelical church can seem like a second tax. With long histories in the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Church, many Europeans are not used to the start-up business form of the evangelical Church. These powerful state churches were not short of money, but the evangelical church seems to need it constantly. It can be challenging for pastors to create this discipline of tithing, which means finances can often be a problem.

Factor 9: The Overly-expressive style

The fastest growing and largest churches in Europe are Pentecostal and often made up of ethnic groups that are comfortable with that style of self-expression. Evangelicalism requires a lot of intimacy and high levels of trust. In low-trust societies like Bulgaria, or societies where people are expected to keep their personal thoughts and issues to themselves (such as Sweden and Finland), the evangelical form of religion is completely unnatural. The charismatic Christian may say that the joy of Christ will fill them up and they will become extremely extroverted. But there’s room for the silent, the shy, the modest in the Kingdom of God and that is often not recognized.

A sincere Finn may be very curious about Christianity and wanting a relationship with God, but the extreme extroversion required to show that one’s “on fire Christianity” may lead to discouragement. Once again, a particular style—one that fits very well with African, Latin American, and North American cultures, does not necessarily fit well in Europe.

The growth, when it unexpectedly happens in a place like Sweden, is often made up from immigrant communities, people who were already Christian or raised in Christian households, or who are unusual in their country for being so comfortable with a charismatic way of self-expression.

Factor 10: Imitating American evangelical structures/high maintenance 

Quite a few European churches have looked to Bill Hybels and Rick Warren for guidance on how to do church. But Hybels and Warren had churches in places with a high population of Christians, in a volunteer society, in a place of abundant wealth, and a place where Christian volunteers with excellent organizational skills are not hard to find (Chicago, Los Angeles). They have the freedom to dream up anything: time-consuming programs, large activities, and money to promote those activities. This is not the case in Europe, yet many evangelical churches in Europe feel the need to have a band, have a light show, and do all the extra things that American churches do so well. It creates a need for lots of volunteers, lots of money, lots of organizational skill and lots of time—all things that can be severely limited in the European setting.

Factor 11: Outside players and division

It often seems to be the case that small churches in Europe receive new people from other small Evangelical churches who come into the church and assume leadership. Time and time again, I’ve seen too many churches that have an outside Christian come in and critique the church and create a division in the church. They are often opinionated, left their last church under a cloud, and after a “honeymoon period,” begin to critique their new small church.

With so few churches to choose from, and almost all of the churches struggling, it becomes very easy for new folks to come in and target the church pastor and leadership. They identify the pastor as too weak, or the church music as too dull, or the theology unbiblical. The most common criticism is a “dead spirit” or a lack of charismatic worship. Even though evangelical European communities are small, there is a lot of church-shopping, hopping and disgruntlement. Outside players can become a big influence very quickly because there are so few people needed to influence change in the church.

Factor 12: Ethnic Churches

As previously mentioned, it is often the case that evangelical churches in Europe are primarily ethnic or made up of immigrants: Jamaican churches in London, Nigerian churches in Ukraine, Arab churches in Paris, or Chinese and Korean churches in Madrid. They were often started by the first immigrants to that community, or are a part of the new wave of evangelical missions from the Non-Western world to the West. They bring dynamism and sometimes significant resources to the evangelical movement in Europe.

These churches, however, are often unaware of how much their church style is tailor-made to fit their particular culture. Nigerian-style of worship doesn’t really fit the average Norwegian. The tolerance for authoritarian leadership in a Lebanese church may not go over well with the average Dutch person who expects more consensual decision-making. The insistence on only speaking Korean and reaching Koreans, may alienate the secular French person.

Often, ethnic churches are seeking to praise God and do discipleship, but they also are trying to preserve their cultural heritage. Quite often they are unaware that they are structured in such a culturally-specific way. It is often the case, as well, that they have no interest in reaching out to those of different nationalities.

Factor 13: The Cultural Christianity Factor

Because evangelicals are often demonized by Catholic, Lutherans, Anglicans, and Orthodox believers, they often retaliate by demonizing in return.  There are obviously key theological differences that are important and legitimate, but too often the evangelical forgets that the European’s whole society and family structure can be tied to their state religion. Not being a part of Catholic or Orthodox rituals can have a dramatically isolating effect. As with Muslims, the evangelical views these other Christian expressions as false teachings with nothing useful.

The evangelical church often wants to separate from these other faith traditions and theology, but ends up removing them and demonizing them to the point that it is much more difficult for the church to be the salt of the Earth within the larger culture. This is not always necessary.

Insurmountable Obstacles? Moving Toward Hope

Most likely, doing church in Europe will always be difficult. The continent has a lot of negative religious cultural baggage and secularism runs deep in Europe. However, many evangelical churches are making things more difficult for themselves or living under an unnecessary cloud of self-condemnation.

In order to be free to thrive, evangelical churches need to make some adjustments. Churches need to be rooted more in community than trying to create an institution on a particular city block. The church truly has to be the people. There’s no need to offer every program, meet in the exact same location, or have all the extra equipment we see in most churches around the world. Simply having a community that practices the faith together is enough.  Most people convert through friendship, family or crisis. The European church needs to simply have a strong community that reflects a hopeful alternative to dead religion or secularism.

Pastors need to equate success more with journeying with people through life, than putting on a Sunday event and seeing numerical growth. The secular European has a long way to go when they discover Christianity and it takes patience. They need a community that will extend grace and love unconditionally. They don’t need to be quickly viewed as someone to help manage a high-overhead organization or propagate the faith. It means allowing the younger generations to look different and express their faith differently. It means allowing the men’s barbeque or woman’s dinner and Bible study group to be the main point of community and the church.

It also means following the organic growth. If the men’s barbeque or woman’s dinner and Bible study group is the place where the most intimate community is experienced, let that be the main focus of church. There’s no need to expect a stereotypical Sunday service to be what defines the strength of the church. It’s the barbeque that might truly influence the neighborhood and win new people. Go to the places where there is traction, taking the Bible, prayer, and community as you go. It may not be the case that those strongest moments of community are on Sunday or at the weekly Bible study and that is okay. In the European context, it is probably better.

Ethnic churches have to be honest about whether they really want to preach the Gospel to all the nations or just one. And pastors need to be honest about their skill-sets and do the things they can do well—instead of trying to replicate everything done in the average American church.

Instead of demonizing all of Catholicism or Orthodoxy, evangelical churches need to look for overlap. It’s often the case that people in these other branches of Christianity are attracted to the intimacy and immediacy of evangelical faith, as well as the emphasis on community. The old faith can be the one where they remain a cultural part of their family, while the evangelical faith can be their heart faith. This will prove to be too controversial for many, but it is my opinion that without making that distinction between “cultural faith” and “heart faith;” a lot of people are being denied the opportunity to experiment and fall in love with Jesus. There are plenty of Russians, Finns, Italians, and Greeks who want to have a genuine Christian faith experience. They’ve never known there was an option outside of their national/cultural faith. It is easy for evangelicals to view religion as something individualistic that we choose; but in many European cultures, national and family identity are inseparable from daily life. There should be grace extended so that they may discover a form of Christianity they didn’t think possible.

It is a myth that there was once a time when Europe was super-Christian. Europeans often had a hard time leaving their pagan religions behind, there was often plenty of skepticism toward the church, and religious fervor and devotion was found in few people. The reality is that few want to follow the revolutionary life of Jesus. And in many places like Korea, Nigeria, and the United States, there are large churches filled with people that are simply going through the rituals—even in evangelical churches. Doing church is always difficult in this fallen world. But European churches have the opportunity to be free, and think outside of the box, by placing community ahead of institutional preservation. It is certainly possible that the adaptable European church could be a model for the whole Christian world.

At the end of the Cold War in 1991, it looked as though democracy had conquered the world. The 1990’s brought a wave of new nations throwing off regimes and authoritarianism and moving toward having free elections. Particularly across Africa and Latin America, genuinely free elections also led to a wave of pro-globalization, free-enterprise leaders from Chile to Liberia. But the 2000’s not only brought the September 11th, 2001 terrorist attack; it also bought great wealth disparity, areas within countries that missed out on the benefits of globalization, new ease of travel and migration, and the birth of social media. While many factors have led to the striking decline in democracy and the chaos we are seeing from Hong Kong to Ukraine to Washington D.C; there are four major issues that keep cropping up around the world as factors that fuel this phase of anti-democratic and anti-globalization movements.

1) The Country-City Divide

It was surprising when peaceful, and booming Thailand suddenly had a coup and a revolution. The 1990’s and 2000’s had been very good to Thailand. Tourism was booming, Thailand provided the bulk of China’s rice, and the nation’s infrastructure was growing at an astounding rate. Thailand had quickly joined the globalization train and Bangkok and the South of the nation was economically booming. Prime Minister Thaskin Shinawatra had ushered in a series of economic reforms that had brought large economic gains to Thailand’s poor Northeast, but which was also a time when much of the rest of the nation saw far greater growth. A coup occurred in September of 2006. Thaskin’s younger sister Yingluck was deposed as Prime Minister in May of 2014. While there were many issues that led to the instability of these years, the rural-urban divide was very clear in the conflict. Today the rural-urban divide is growing in the United States, France, Britain, China, Austria, Hungary and many other nations.

Globalization rewards cities and the few rural areas that have strong global connectivity, solid infrastructure, a well-educated populace, and experience dealing with immigrants and multiple-ethnic groups. Many rural areas throughout the world do not fit that bill. Modernization and wealth passes them by. Quite often they see their small-towns dry up as the younger generations feel to the cities where there are greater opportunities for jobs and a high salary. Rural communities are often more isolated and homogeneous which means they tend to have more traditional values. Those values often get over-turned by the influence of global media, international migration, new religions and secularism, and new expectations of openness and inclusivity.

The result is rural areas rejecting globalization, turning toward nationalist movements, and looking for political figures and parties that promise quick solutions to a problem that cannot be solved quickly. Lack of education, experience encountering multiple ethnicities and economic hardship encourage a radical inward turn that political parties can exploit.

2) Wealth Inequality

The second major factor driving democracy’s retreat is wealth inequality. The massive influx of wealth that globalization has unleashed has corrupted many governments and created a corporate class that dominates their respective countries–usually by-passing the established legal systems. Periods of globalization always lift overall living standards but create great wealth-disparities. These eventually reach a tipping point, as they did in the United States during the Roaring 20’s and the Great Depression. A failure to re-balance the economies tends to lead toward fascism or the complete overthrow of the upper-ruling class.

We now live in a world where the wealthy in Lagos, Manila, and Rio De Janeiro have more in common with each other than the do their own countrymen. A class of people has arisen that can move their assets around, buy properties in multiple countries, get the best education for their children, and buy immense political influence in order to live above the law in their respective countries. The number of billionaires in places like India, Russia and Nigeria is sky-rocketing. Housing costs in places as traditionally poor as Angola can be as bad as in major American or Japanese cities. What this has done is erode the middle class in many nations around the world. Democracy is particularly vulnerable to collapsing when there is no middle-class. Housing, educational, and medical costs are increasingly out of the reach of the average person in even a wealthy nation. The Scandinavian countries and Switzerland are exceptions; but those countries have more pro-actively set policies in place to protect the Middle Class and prevent great wealth-disparity. We should expect to see more reactionary Nationalistic movements in some places (where they will ultimately fail in bringing any economic transformation), or an increase in government spending to balance out the extreme disparity. As occurred in the United States after World War II, the road back to a Middle Class will most likely involve great investments in infrastructure, education, and property management.

3) Immigration

Many nations now have political parties that are anti-immigrant. On a recent visit to Peru, the frustration with Venezuelans escaping into their country was palpable. Nations like Germany, Lebanon, Italy, and the UK have been inundated with refugees, migrants, and foreigners looking for jobs. In some cases, like in the United States and Canada, there is no real cause for concern. These countries actually need a large number of foreigners settling within their borders. Other countries like the U.K., have probably let far too many immigrants in, in relation to their size. The dislocation that their population feels–particularly in the rural areas is justifiable. But the most interesting and discouraging fact is that countries and regions that have the least immigrants are often the hot-beds of racism, prejudice, and xenophobic movements. Many homogeneous parts of the United States, Poland, and Hungary are examples of places where hatred of foreigners is very strong even though barely any foreigners live in those communities. The more homogeneous the territory, the more they tend to panic about being “overtaken” by immigrants. Nevertheless, that makes these people vulnerable to politicians and movements that prioritize turning globalization and open-border policies. The tragedy is that within those countries, the more likely a region is to embrace multi-ethnic community, the more likely it will have a dynamic economy.

4) Social Media

Finally, the advent of social media has made governing more difficult. Today the actions of a politician can be recorded and distributed immediately all over the world. There is little time for reflecting or nuance. Twitter and Facebook have not only shortened people’s attention spans, but made discussion on important global issues reduced to angry soundbites.

Social media, particularly Facebook and Twitter, have become great instruments for demonizing people, and promoting conspiracy theories to mobilize rage against others. “Fake News” is not only a phenomenon in the United States, it is now a global problem. India has seen a wave of very dangerous messages distributed to its voting population through Facebook. The Rohyinga people in Myanmar are victims of terrible rumors that lead to them being hunted down like animals by the Buddhist majority. And Russia plants local-looking Facebook news stories throughout Eastern Europe, Western Europe, and the United States. They look like they are written by citizens of those countries, but are in fact written from troll farms in Russia that know how to use the vernacular and hot-button issues to so division.

Every country, like Thailand, has its complexities and particular problems that have led to this unstable moment. Democracies are always flawed, and are always on a spectrum with some being quite transparent (Sweden), while others are controlled in a very centralized way (Japan), while others are dominated by corporate interests (The United States), and still others are barely hanging on (Liberia). Some are really crime syndicates masquerading as democracies Russia). The spectrum always exists, but these 4 factors are in danger of crippling Democracy unless the people themselves demand nuanced correctives that bring both peace and prosperity. Democracy can never be taken for granted; as Churchill paraphrased when he said, “it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms.” We may be learning this lesson the hard-way.

 

It may seem that Iran and the USA have nothing in common; hence their global stand-off which has the world’s attention. But as I think about it today, there are some interesting parallels between Iran and the USA:

*Both have leaders that claim to represent the country’s dominant religion.

*Both leaders have religious followers that will accept anything those leaders say as “God’s will” because “God/Allah is in control.”

*Both are traditionally religious societies that are secularizing quickly as the citizens get sick of the combination of politics and religion.

*Both have weak legislatures, yet both are Democracies.

*Both have a history of de-stabilizing, poorly-thought out, military adventurism in the Middle East.

*Both are increasingly multi-ethnic/religious societies that have leaders in power desperately trying to defend one ethnicity and religion against all others (White Evangelicalism/Persian Shia Islam).

*Both have a growing elite that are financially very wealthy, while living standards for the general population are in decline.

*Both have large generational divides with the young wanting radical change.

*Both are bankrupting their nation through military spending and view military force and violence as the answer to most problems.

*Both have a strong-strain of religious apocalyptic-thought that puts their country at the center of end-time scenarios

*Both view themselves as indispensable world powers/civilizations (American/Western, Iranian/Persian)

*Both have leaders that love making over-the-top, boastful threats full of hyperbole and irresponsible machismo.

*Both are rooted in a religious dualism viewing everything through a good vs. bad / winners vs. losers (“Axis of evil”/ “Great Satan”paradigm that is rooted in their religious worldview. (Evangelical/Zoroastrianism)

*Both give off the impression that they are strong, stable countries; but both are facing incredible amounts of internal division and strife at home and are thus very fragile.

*Both are countries that produce highly entrepreneurial people that are good with technology and business.

*Both are known for having very friendly, fun-loving people which goes against their national image as war-mongers.

*Both have a population that loves the United States (Iranians, unlike their leaders, love the USA).

They say “you often hate what you are.”

Iran and the United States have some political, cultural, and religious similarities that lead them to over-reach often, make them enemies around the world, and both tend to box themselves in in moments of crisis giving themselves no good options. This is not a good combination. I could see one, if not both of these countries having a paradigm-shifting revolution before this is all over. Both the United States and Iran are on paths that are completely unsustainable in the future; financially, militarily, even religiously. The majority of the people in both countries know it and they are increasingly hostile toward their elites and their top-leaders. A backlash is brewing in both countries and the response of the government is centralization.

Both countries have young people that are disillusioned and seeing living standards drop very noticeably. And both are practicing theocracy (the mix of politics and religion), which always spells doom for those political religious parties in the end. Both countries desperately need to look in the mirror and fix what is at home. But as philosophically dualistic nations, they have a long history of passion over-riding common sense. Whether the good people of these countries can make their voice heard above the calls for war, retribution, and religious dominance will decide the future of both countries.

YOU’VE NEVER READ A BOOK LIKE THIS!

A survivor of a Japanese internment camp, the first person to cross the Atlantic in a kayak, and a para-glider that jumped off of Mt. Everest in a massive snow-storm; none of these people or things have anything to do with Patrick Nachtigall, yet he has the shameless audacity to write his personal memoirs.

Rarely is a book about spirituality and religion as funny and insightful as Patrick Nachtigall’s No Religion Required: A Memoir of Faith, Doubt, Chocolate Milk, and Untimely Death. From an orphanage in Costa Rica to a leper colony in rural China, this is the hilarious true story of a lifelong traveling, religious pilgrim wrestling with the strange and profound claims of Buddhism, Taoism, Judaism, Hinduism, Islam and Christianity. Adopted by Christian missionaries as an infant in Central America and wanting to follow in their footsteps in rural China, Patrick turns his memoir into an exploration of the dark side of institutional religion and how it sits side-by-side with humanity’s never-ending quest for spiritual fulfillment. Patrick uses academic expertise, personal experience and humor to re-examine the role that religion has played throughout history and in various cultures.

Blessed with a gift for storytelling as well as tremendously attractive legs, the various intimate true stories from Patrick’s life pose bigger questions for us all about “Why we believe in the supernatural?” “Why religions can so easily become poisonous?” “How religions deal with the dark side of life and suffering” as well as “How religions inspire us to do good.” Throughout his various misadventures around the world, the question lingers whether religion is even necessary in the 21st Century. Is religion something we have outgrown? Does it cause more problems than it solves? Is there room for both science and religion?

While many spiritual memoirs are dry, hard to relate to, and fail to challenge the author’s own religious assumptions, No Religion Required provides an honest, transparent examination of the author’s preconceived notions about religion, spirituality, and the Christian beliefs he was raised on. Drawing from his experience in over 80 countries and having lived and worked on 5 continents, Patrick is uniquely qualified to ask the questions that most haunt humanity in our increasingly secular and technologically-dependent world. No Religion Required promises to be one of the most enlightening books you will ever read whether you are religious, agnostic, or an atheist.

WHAT ARE THE CRITICS SAYING?

“To be honest, I was an irritable, self-centered narcissist involved in a life of crime before I read No Religion Required.”

-Mother Teresa

 

“There’s was not a single good idea I ever had that I didn’t steal from this book.”

-Albert Einstein

 

“The only time I am short for words is when I have to describe how vexatious it is to realize how bad my collected works are compared to this bloody masterpiece.”

-William Shakespeare

 

“If only I had read this book as a child, my life would have turned out so much differently.”

-Adolph Hitler

 

“I don’t read in English, so I have no idea what the book says.  Oh well, my loss.”

-Saddam Hussein

 

“I shudder when I think of how little I accomplished in my life after reading No Religion Required.”

-Mahatma Gandhi

 

The 29 years I spent in the limestone quarry at the Robben Island Prison waiting for my freedom was nothing compared to the pain I endured waiting for this book to come out.”

-Nelson Mandela

 

ORDER THE KINDLE VERSION NOW (Hardcover, Paperback, and Audio version Coming Soon)

YES!!!  I am an intelligent, kind person that smells good.  I want to order the book immediately, so I will do so here.

NO.  I am a stubborn, hate-filled person who hates puppies and babies.  Therefore I will not buy the book and prefer to be rickrolled here.

 

READ IT AND WRITE A REVIEW, SHARE ABOUT IN SOCIAL MEDIA, TELL FRIENDS, AND MAKE T-SHIRTS!

My latest article on why the political debate about “Capitalism”​ vs. “Socialism”​ is wrong, useless, and dangerously distracting. We’re at a crisis-point and need more sophisticated, nuanced discussions about economic success in the highly-competitive 21st Century.
On my last couple of visits to the USA, I have been shocked by how many people I met are working three jobs to make ends meet. Everywhere I went, there were “Help wanted” signs, but for low-paying jobs, with short hours and no benefits. On a previous visit in 2012, after a summer of traveling around the Mid-west, I had an even more shocking realization that it took me all summer to put together. Something seemed really different about the country I had moved away from. It took me a while, but I finally figured it out: There was now a very visible white-underclass. All of this is part of the post-2008 American Economy. Yes, unemployment is low-but that is made irrelevant by the fact that wages and benefits are even lower. Getting a job is not the challenge; it’s paying for rent, education, the baby-sitter, and health-care that is the problem.This is why the false choice of Reaganomics/Free-Market Capitalism vs. Socialism is a useless way to frame the economic debate in the 21st Century. When the stock market goes up or corporations make a big profit, that does not mean the money is getting to the average American on “Main Street.” Quite the opposite, it means the money is headed from Wall Street directly back to Wall Street. It’s a circular loop that cuts out the vast majority of Americans. The 51% or so of Americans who do have money in the stock market (mostly through pensions), have very small amounts invested. Nearly 40% of the stock market belongs to the top 1%. And while the stock market seems to be booming, that does not mean that the average American city or state pension is well-funded or ready for the largest generation (the Baby Boomers) to suddenly retire in the coming 15 years. The state, local, and national government are, in fact, not ready for this at all.And in this Capitalism-on-Steroids system, when big farming or large banking institutions fail, they get socialist bail-outs called “subsidies,” “bail-outs” and are labeled “too big to fail.” There’s an incredibly strong, reliable socialist-safety net… for corporations. Wealthy-Americans are hard-core socialists when the free government money is aimed at the 1%. But for the working mother who is a waitress, or the twenty-three year old paying $600 a month in student-loans; bankruptcy, bail-outs, and subsidies are viewed as socialist and as programs that reward the poor with an underserved entitlement that the more fortunate should not pay for. Why student loans are charged 8%+ interest rates, while bailed-out banks and car companies from the economic crisis of 2008 were charged 1%, is never fully explained by anyone. This is why Capitalism’s “survival of the fittest” is starting to ring hollow even in Trump country. It’s become very clear that being born with a silver spoon in your mouth, really does give a person significant advantages in every key area of life (health, wealth, education, housing, the criminal justice system) etc.Things have gotten so imbalanced, that Google is trying to give a token $1 billion dollar gifts to the city of San Francisco to bring down housing prices. Housing prices are so astronomical in San Francisco, that the tiny, two-bedroom house I grew up in–which now looks like a meth-lab, is worth about $600,000; and that’s in the suburb of Marin. The annual meeting of the wealthy elite this past January in Davos, Switzerland focused on the danger of wealth-inequality. The rich corporations and individual billionaires around the world are starting to realize that extreme wealth balances don’t end up well for the rich either! They create social upheaval aimed directly at the rich. The ultra-wealthy have overplayed their hand and Davos, Google, and the rest of the elite are slowly waking up to the need to make dramatic adjustments.

You know it’s getting bad when Bernie Sanders gets a standing ovation from a Fox News audience and Billionaire Hedge Fund Manager Ray Dalio starts talking about Modern Monetary Theory (MMT); (which argues that the U.S. can solve its enormous debt and entitlement crisis by taking on more massive debt because it is the world’s fiat currency and can get away with it). MMT might be a disastrous idea, but Dalio and Alexandria Ocasio Cortez are not idiots for trying to come up with such out-of-the-box solutions. Both the billionaire Dalio and Liberal Democrat former-bartender Cortez are correctly reading the situation. We do have 2 economies: One that is making enormous gains for corporations and wealthy individuals, and another that remains flat or moving downward for the vast majority of Americans. Unfortunately most of our politicians, news outlets, and people’s Facebook posts report on the economy as if it’s 1978. Our politics talks about economics in a Cold War Capitalism vs. Socialism framework that is totally out of date. As usual, our political discourse is about 20 years behind the actual issues and trends.

How Bad Is It?

-The average American cannot handle an unexpected $500 bill

-The average American only has about $120,000 saved for retirement at a time when people are living into their 80’s and 90’s. That covers about one year of retirement.

-The stock market is on an unprecedented hot-streak, but that money is being hoarded by corporations through stock buy-backs and CEO salaries.

-Many jobs are being lost due to automation. [This always happens, but what makes this different is that technology is not just replacing rote, service jobs or hard labor jobs. Today’s Artificial Intelligence can replace journalists, lawyers, and other high-skilled, white-collar labor. These are also machines that can learn and teach themselves new skills].

-In most places, 30% of American’s money goes into housing with just about every market being currently over-priced. Australia, Canada, and the UK are even in worse shape. Some of our key global cities are becoming unlivable for any normal person with normal wages.

-The number one concern of Americans is paying for health-care. Few are prepared, and advances in health care mean many elderly (and their children who have to take care of them in old age) are looking at living longer, but paying astronomical prices for medical services and convalescent care.

-College has gone up 500% over the price of inflation since 1987 while professor wages have dropped and the hiring of under-qualified and poorly paid adjunct professors is the norm. Public school teachers’ salaries are abysmally low for the service they provide for the country.

-The US had a $4 trillion national debt when Reagan left office. It is now $22 trillion with Trump adding an unnecessary billion in the last few months to cover losses over an unnecessary trade war (socialism for farmers). $19 Trillion was the point of no return where it’s not possible to pay it back (heading into Greece territory).

-Think of the amount of money each family rich or poor has to spend on technological upgrades, computers, phones etc. In many cases, these are not optional. This is what is required to do your work, do your banking, and stay in contact in a globalized world. It’s a large added expense that no one had in 1980.

-Due to the internet, the rich are able to see a lot more clearly what the rich have that they do not (a great recipe for revolution and populism).

-While 50% of Americans own stock, most own only a little bit of stock and get wiped out during the market crashes every 7-9 years or through fees. The stock market investors that truly win are the ones with large amounts of money and who can afford financial and tax specialists. That’s where the big gains are.

We’ve seen this before. When Roosevelt ushered in the New Deal (1933-1936), it was not because he was a pink, socialist, communist who believed in big government. It was because the United States had to create a government-supported socialist safety net to saveCapitalism. At the time, it was not at all clear that American Capitalism was better than Russian Socialism. Russia was making great advances and seeing raised living-standards while the average American was broke or in serious trouble. Roosevelt saved capitalism by making the “socialist” adjustment. And lo’ and behold; it did not turn us into Communists.

Neither did an extremely high tax rate. The period after World War II was the fastest period of economic growth in US history and established the Middle Class. Tax rates were also very high. Elvis paid 95% in taxes and was happy to do it. Republicans like Eisenhower expected tax levels to be high and that’s what helped to recover from the extreme imbalance of the 50 year rich-poor imbalance that led to the Great Depression.

Forty-years of being told that taxes slow growth and “all big government is bad” (except if it bails out large corporations), has left us with a class of downwardly-mobile Americans who believe any kind of safety-net is equivalent to Socialism killing Capitalism. Not only are they wrong, but I predict that these very same, big-government haters will be the first to demand big-government solutions when they find out their stock and pensions were not what they thought they would be as they retire. These hard-core Capitalists will end their lives as hard-core Socialists looking for big government to preserve their living standard. The boomers will return to the hippie-commune from where they came, before this is all over.

When the economy tanks in the next couple of years (not “if, ” but when), everyone will turn to government for the solution. Capitalism will go under the scrutiny that Marxism did after the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991. Our way of discussing American’s economy is going to have to get a lot more sophisticated than just “Capitalism vs. Socialism” arguments. Countries that succeed in the 21st Century will value 1) an entrepreneurial environment 2) corporate responsibility 3) taxes 4) unions, and 5) government involvement–especially in infrastructure and education. That’s the only way the United States can compete with the hungrier, rising nations of the developing world.

Countries like Singapore, Switzerland, China, and the Scandinavian countries are ahead of the curve. They see that it is not one thing or the other. It’s a constant-changing hybrid. There’s no room for outdated, cliche, ideological soundbites. Meanwhile, in the US, our political and economic discussions seem to be stuck in 1980. The longer it takes for us to mature our discussion and make it more nuanced; the longer it will take for the US to economically recover.