Thursday, September 21, 2017

Are There Lessons for America from the 1950’s?

Reminders of the era of the 1950's.
I am a member of the “baby boomers,” representing children born from roughly the end of World War II to the period of the early 1960’s.  While American culture in this era was not without need of moral and spiritual revival, many would consider the 1940’s and 1950’s as one of the most favorable times in which to grow up as a child in America.   For the sake of brevity, I will refer to this era, which encompassed my elementary school years, as “the 1950’s.”

So, I was interested to learn that two university professors have published an op-ed in The Philadelphia Inquirer entitled, “Paying the price for breakdown of the country's bourgeois culture.”  Amy Wax is the Robert Mundheim professor at the University of Pennsylvania Law School; and, Larry Alexander is the Warren distinguished professor at the University of San Diego School of Law.

Wax and Alexander open their article with what many of us would agree is a pretty accurate summary of the current state of socio-economic affairs in America today:

Too few Americans are qualified for the jobs available. Male working-age labor-force participation is at Depression-era lows. Opioid abuse is widespread. Homicidal violence plagues inner cities. Almost half of all children are born out of wedlock, and even more are raised by single mothers. Many college students lack basic skills, and high school students rank below those from two dozen other countries. 

"I don't shrink from the word 'superior'." -- Dr. Amy Wax 
The authors admit that the ”causes of these phenomena are multiple and complex, but implicated in these and other maladies is the breakdown of the country’s bourgeois culture.”  Although the term “bourgeois” generally means “middle class,” it can also suggest values of materialism, pro-capitalism, and anti-communism.  Wax and Alexander may be using the term “bourgeois” in their title to grab attention, but their intent is to call readers to consider the merits of “1950’s middle-class values” which they outline as follows:


Get married before you have children and strive to stay married for their sake. Get the education you need for gainful employment, work hard, and avoid idleness. Go the extra mile for your employer or client. Be a patriot, ready to serve the country. Be neighborly, civic-minded, and charitable. Avoid coarse language in public. Be respectful of authority. Eschew substance abuse and crime.
Evidence of moral decline in America.

According to the two law professors, these cultural values “reigned” in the era of the 1950’s for two reasons.  They “could be followed by people of all backgrounds and abilities,” and they were “backed up by almost universal endorsement.”  The principle assertion of the authors is that adherence to these values and disciplines “was a major contributor to the productivity, educational gains, and social coherence of that period.”

As if to anticipate the skepticism and pessimism of our divided culture, Wax and Alexander quickly admit that not everyone of the 1950’s era adhered to these values: 

There are always rebels--and hypocrites, those who publicly endorse the norms but transgress them. But…even the deviants rarely disavowed or openly disparaged the prevailing expectations.  Was everything perfect during the period of bourgeois cultural hegemony?  Of course not.  There was racial discrimination, limited sex roles, and pockets of anti-Semitism.  However, steady improvements for women and minorities were underway even when bourgeois norms reigned.  Banishing discrimination and expanding opportunity does not require the demise of bourgeois culture.  Quite the opposite: The loss of bourgeois habits seriously impeded the progress of disadvantaged groups.  That trend also accelerated the destructive consequences of the growing welfare state, which, by taking over financial support of families, reduced the need for two parents.  A strong pro-marriage norm might have blunted this effect. Instead, the number of single parents grew astronomically, producing children more prone to academic failure, addiction, idleness, crime, and poverty.

Whether or not you agree with Wax and Alexander, most readers will not be surprised at the harsh manner in which their article was received.  And if it were not enough for the authors to laud the values the values of the 1950’s, they also claim that “All cultures are not equal. Or at least they are not equal in preparing people to be productive in an advanced economy.” 

Note that the authors are not saying one culture is better than another--only better at preparing human beings to have productive lives in the cultural context within which they will live.  Nevertheless, in several articles, including articles in the U. Penn student newspaper, the Daily Pennsylvanian, the authors are accused of using “hate speech” and preaching “white supremacy.”  One of these articles, entitled “Notions of 'bourgeois' cultural superiority are based on bad history,” was written by five of Amy Wax’s own law faculty colleagues at U. Penn.  Imagine that occurring to you as a professor at the beginning of a new academic year. 

Professor Dorothy E. Roberts and colleagues consider Wax and Alexander’s “nostalgia for the 1950’s ‘bourgeois’ culture” to be “bad history” and compare it to a defense of Confederate statues that promote white supremacy.   They add that, “nostalgia for 1950’s ‘bourgeois’ culture erases its historical context and serves as a thinly veiled argument for… Anglo-Protestant superiority….”

In defense of Amy Wax and “1950’s values,” Heather Mac Donald, asks readers of National Review:

Were you planning to instruct your child about the value of hard work and civility?  Not so fast!  According to a current uproar at the University of Pennsylvania, advocacy of such bourgeois virtues is “hate speech.”  

Mac Donald then points out the flawed and biased approach of Roberts et al and other liberal progressives who view “1950’s values” with disdain and who accuse Wax and Alexander of promoting cultural bias and racial supremacy.  Mac Donald summarizes by putting her finger on what she calls the “primary sin” of Wax and Alexander—the need to change human behavior with emphasis on individual responsibility:

The op-ed’s primary sin was to talk about behavior. The founding idea of contemporary progressivism is that structural and individual racism lies behind socioeconomic inequalities. Discussing bad behavioral choices and maladaptive culture is out of bounds and will be punished mercilessly by slinging at the offender the usual fusillade of “isms” (to be supplemented, post-Charlottesville, with frequent mentions of “white supremacy”).  The fact that underclass behaviors are increasingly common among lower-class whites, and not at all limited to poor blacks and Hispanics, might have made it possible to address personal responsibility.  That does not appear to be the case.

Some of my readers will question the notion that America ought to consider returning to the values of the 1950’s.  Questioning is a good thing--if accompanied by an objective analysis.  I hope my article does not discourage readers from doing just that. 

Some of you who may be skeptical of the Wax-Alexander assertions are not “baby boomers.” Others, like me were not yet adults during the 1950’s.  I was an elementary schoolboy who had seen little of the wider world outside my rural, farm community.  I have great memories of those years, but I was not immune from learning of moral and ethical transgressions within our family and our community.  Thankfully, God was already showing me His provision through Christ to forgive my sin, make me His child, and teach me to understand the world and His plan for me.

So, let no reader think that I look back on the 1950’s with a fog of nostalgia or with colored glasses.  Rather, I believe the articles I have cited and others are affording our nation with the opportunity to have a polite discussion and debate about what is good and redeemable about American culture of past and present, and where changes are needed.  I hope you will read the assertions of the Wax-Alexander article and of opposing articles such as Roberts et al; and, critiques such as that of Mac Donald.  I am not optimistic that a “polite discussion” will or even can happen without a moral and spiritual revival.  As long as we choose to view our history with an arrogant disdain that refuses to acknowledge the importance of individual responsibility for moral and ethical choices, there is little hope.

The Book of Proverbs teaches the connection between wise discernment by the individual and the corporate benefit of individual righteousness to the nation as a whole:

Wisdom rests in the heart of the discerning;
 it is known even in the heart of fools.
Righteousness exalts a nation,
but sin is a disgrace to any people
.
                               Prov. 14: 33-34 (NET Bible)

We must realize that “individual righteousness” is not “self-righteousness.”  The Bible says that all of our self-righteousness is but filthy rags to God (Isaiah 64:6).  Therefore, God instructs us in Titus 2:  12-14 to deny ungodliness and worldly desires and to live sensibly, righteously and godly in the present age, looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus, who gave Himself for us to redeem us [give us right standing before a Holy God] from every lawless deed, and to purify for Himself a people for His own possession, zealous for good deeds.”

Heather Mac Donald does not offer much optimism for American culture.  She concludes her article asking,

What if the progressive analysis of inequality is wrong, however, and a cultural analysis is closest to the truth?  If confronting the need to change behavior is punishable “hate speech,” then it is hard to see how the country can resolve its social problems.


When I read the progressive liberal critique that considers  the mention of timeless, multicultural values like hard work, moral uprightness, and civility as “hate speech,” I am reminded of the Prophet Isaiah’s warning of coming judgment:

Therefore My people go into exile for their lack of knowledge;
Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil;
Who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness;
Who substitute bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!
                                                        -- Isaiah 5: 13a, 20

What About You?   Do you have good memories of the 1950’s or of reading about that era?  Do you agree with authors Amy Wax and Larry Alexander that America would benefit if we were to return to some of the values the 1950’s?   What is your answer to the hope for America as a nation, and more broadly for human civilization?

Tuesday, September 12, 2017

Faith at Work in a Hurricane-Ravaged America

Irma flooding in Charleston, SC
Many Americans who have been concerned about and praying for hurricane-ravaged areas in TX, LA, and FL are encouraged to see whole neighborhoods, churches, and local and federal agencies coming together as never before to provide assistance. Faith-based groups have exercised a particularly large role in the recovery effort in Texas and Louisiana. According to the The Daily Caller, “Faith-based relief groups are responsible for providing nearly 80 percent of the aid delivered thus far to communities with homes devastated by the recent hurricanes.”

I was surprised to see that the contribution from people of faith was this large. Even though televised news has provided accounts of how Christian and other faiths are working heroically, much of the attention seems to center on government agencies, particularly FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency).   Josh Gill, writing for the The Daily Caller, uses the dominant role of faith-based groups to make the point that once again the private sector is outdoing the government.  Gill writes, “Christian non-profit organizations have outdone FEMA and provided the vast majority of the relief aid to victims of Hurricanes Harvey and Irma.”

While statistics may support Gill’s opening statement to his article, I was glad to read in Gill’s article that the real issue is not competition between private sector and big government or between faith-based and secular groups.  Instead, Gill emphasizes the cooperation between these groups in a wonderful, complementary relationship that reflects the evidence that the Spirit of Christ is at work in these acts of compassion, generosity, and sacrifice.

Still, it is easy for those of us who consider ourselves political and social conservatives to relish stories that demonstrate how private enterprise outdoes big government.  Cheryl K. Chumley of the The Washington Times writes that “…people who put God first, people who are committed to serving Jesus, people who are driven by a moral compass that comes from above, are the real doers and shakers and movers — the ones who see a need and respond.  The Big Government types?  They see a need and dial their lawmaker — call for a committee hearing — petition for a study.  It’s only after they navigate the hoops, and fill out the proper forms, they respond.”

While Chumley’s contrast between Christ-followers and “Big Government types” can be supported by comparisons of amount given to charitable causes, I am more encouraged by the fact that the hurricanes are providing opportunity for Americans of all persuasions to strive for understanding and cooperation.  On the one hand, there is no doubt that God means what He says in His Word  that “without faith, it is impossible to please Him” (Hebrews 11: 6).  This truth means that if Christ were to return today while Christ-followers are working alongside Christ-denier’s at a hurricane recovery site, only the Christ-followers by their faith in Christ's shed blood “…will be caught up together with [other Christ-followers] in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air… (v. 17).”  But on the other hand, this promise of sins forgiven and assurance of eternity with God ought to make the believer all the more Christ-like toward other believers and toward unbelievers as they serve together in needy neighborhoods.

In this spirit of unity, purpose, and compassion, Christ-followers who work cooperatively among unbelievers or people of other faiths can be the salt and light that Christ calls us to be (Matthew 5: 13-16).  Chumley explains how this biblical principle has influenced true Christ-followers and in so doing, has made America great in years past:

America’s greatness was, is and always will be rooted in the fact that our rights come from God, not government. With that, comes a responsibility — that we conduct ourselves on an individual basis as if we believe in God. Bluntly put, it’s what the founders believed; it’s how they envisioned a moral and limited government not just shaping, but staying around a while. Happily, it’s what a large portion of America’s population today still believes.

Those who live by this kind of faith in God, understand the importance of a complementary relationship between faith-based groups and government.  Rev. Jamie Johnson, director of the Department of Homeland Security's Center for Faith-Based & Neighborhood Partnerships understands this principle.   The Daily Caller’s Joshua Gill quotes Johnson as follows: “FEMA cannot do what it does so well without the cooperation of faith-based non-profit organizations and churches.  It's a beautiful relationship between government and the private sector and it is something to behold."  According to Johnson, as Gill writes, “FEMA does not assign work to the state agencies or the faith-based groups.”  Rather, according to Johnson, "we affirm the work that they are already doing ... FEMA brings the groups into its national command center to work with us because they have their people on the ground."


Samaritan's Purse praised FEMA for its excellent cooperation.
Luther Harrison, vice president of North American Ministries at Samaritan’s Purse, said in USA Today, “FEMA, they have been a big blessing to us, they’re an assistance to us. For Hurricane Irma, the majority of our equipment has already been dispatched to Texas ... so our office in Canada is bringing their equipment across the border and FEMA was instrumental in helping us clear that with customs and getting all the paperwork done."

In the midst of the upended communities, flooded homes, and scattered rubble we can see a blessed unity of purpose among people of all persuasions.  After all, the grace of God is present in all human beings, and at times like these humans sometimes rise to show the character of the One Who made us and died to redeem us.  

As we remember those in hurricane-ravaged areas along our southern coast, we pray that God will protect lives and restore the material infrastructure of homes and communities.  In the process of restoration, may God bring spiritual revival to many individuals, families, communities, and our nation through the witness of people of faith serving on behalf of those in great need.  As the Apostle Peter so aptly wrote,” But set Christ apart as Lord in your hearts and always be ready to give an answer to anyone who asks about the hope you possess (1 Peter 3: 15 NET).

What About You?   Comments are always welcome.  If you are considering material donation to assist hurricane recovery efforts, I would recommend Samaritan's Purse whose website is https://www.samaritanspurse.org/