What Tribe Do You Hang With?

Are you a millennial, a Christian evangelical, a Trumper, a liberal, an atheist, a Roman Catholic, a worker, a college graduate, a libertarian, a senior citizen, or perhaps you claim the label “unaffiliated”? None of these? More than one of these?

Amy Chua suggests our lack of attention to tribes is one reason for U.S. failures in Iraq and Afghanistan.(“Tribal World: Group Identity Is All,” Foreign Affairs, July/August 2018.) She writes: “Once people connect with a group, their identities can become powerfully bound to it. . . They will penalize outsiders . . . . They will sacrifice, and even kill and die, for their group.”

Tribal identity is alive and well in developed countries also. Much of our civil unrest and some of our mass shootings are due to tribal identity turned violent.

Yet, at their best, groups nurture. They provide the love and acceptance we all need. Like other forces, they become dangerous only in their extreme forms.

Ironically, those likely to be captured by tribal extremes often are those who lacked a nurturing tribe as children.

Nurturing a child requires parental responsibility, but nurturing needs a community—a tribe, if you will— prepared to help the least ones: children who need medical care, parents who need job training, families who need secure housing.

We need tribal protection without disrespect for those in another tribe. Above all, we need nurturing tribalism, not destructive tribalism.

Compassion in a Time of War

On Good Friday, in preparation for Easter, a few Christians in the Middle Eastern country of Syria meditated and prayed. They gathered within the walls of an ancient monastery, Deir Mar Musa. During years of conflict and suffering, this monastery has endured, a witness for peace in a war ravaged country.

Suddenly a Muslim young man entered into a quiet corner of the monastery. He also was a searcher for a place to pray. He spread his prayer rug, then began his prayers. A photographer, Cécile Massie, there to observe the monastic community in Good Friday meditations, snapped the picture of the Christians and the young man in their prayers (Stephanie Saldaña, “All Sorts of Little Things: On Compassion in a Time of War,” Plough Quarterly, Summer, 2018).

Writes Saldaña: “Together and separately the Muslim and Christian faithful turn toward God. This shared prayer—and with it a hope—enters into our suffering and becomes known.”

In the midst of unprecedented numbers of refugees and victims of hatred and war, she identifies the meaning of compassion as “to suffer with.” She means to suffer with all, not just those of our religious persuasion.

Twenty-nine school children were killed in a bombing raid in Yemen on August 9

Twenty-nine school children were killed in a bombing raid in Yemen on August 9. Do we care?

In between our fascination with Trump’s latest tweets and discussions about who goes to the next Super Bowl, did we even notice the tragedy?

Probably nine out of ten Americans don’t know Yemen exists. Fewer don’t know that we sell aircraft and munitions to our ally Saudi Arabia who uses them to bomb people there.

A bloody war has raged for years in Yemen between one regime supported by Iran and one supported by Saudi Arabia and its ally, the United Arab Emirates. Mass starvation and bombings of school busses and wedding parties are part of the conflict.

Why are Saudi Arabia and Iran fighting? Because these two countries have been locked in a power struggle for years for control of the Middle East.

The two countries adhere to different interpretations of Islam, whose advocates have fought each other for well over a millennia.

Dan Simpson, a former U.S. diplomat, writes: “I don’t care what Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates may have done for President Donald J. Trump or Israel; this time what the Saudis are doing in Yemen is way beyond what the United States should tolerate.

“The two Sunni Muslim states have, first, added U.S. 9/ 11-vintage enemy al-Qaida to their and our allies in the war in Yemen, putting us and the terrorists who attacked us at home on the same side in the war against the Shiite Houthis there. The war in Yemen has basically nothing to do with us in any case. Second, the Saudis and their allies carried out yet another brutal air attack in Saada in the north of Yemen on Aug. 9 that killed among others at least 29 children in a school bus in a marketplace.” (“Dan Simpson: Beyond the pale in Yemen,” Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, August 14, 2018)

At the very least, we can keep the weapons we sell to Saudi Arabia from being used in the conflict. As Simpson says, “The war in Yemen has basically nothing to do with us in any case.”

Truth as a Fashion Choice

“The core issue is not Trump’s deceptions but the public’s self-deception: Why do we tolerate levels of deceit in political life that we would never find acceptable in our personal lives as parents, as friends, as neighbors and colleagues, and as law-abiding citizens?

“The answer, I believe, is that as our politics has reached such a state of remorseless combat that many people seem to regard telling the truth as a fashion choice — you can choose to do it, or not, as mood and circumstance vary.”

–Sally Quinn; “What Ben Bradlee Would Think of Donald Trump,” July 13, 2018; www.politico.com

I understand those working men and women who voted for Trump. They have been, to some extent, betrayed by the prosperous, and certainly maligned by too many liberals. Their vote was a protest, a wake up call.

I sympathize with Christian evangelicals, concerned about our sybaritic society, who voted for him, many with reservations about him personally. Some evangelicals who did not vote for Trump are speaking out against the choices of their fellow believers. There’s a dialog there.

My concern, instead, is for what I think of as Trump’s brown shirts: the people who would take up guns and kill—as indeed some have. Those who either are twisted inside or are frighteningly gullible—like the man who actually believed an absurd story that Hillary Clinton was running a child pornography ring out of a pizza parlor.

As Trump’s administration drags on, anything but unwavering support may cost you—your job or maybe your security clearance. Any journalist who brings up troublesome facts unfavorable to Trump’s policies is automatically labeled “fake.” Trump ignores facts, not only with constant lies, but with vile and dehumanizing insults.

That so many people today do not seem appalled by his lies and viciousness is troubling.

People Spending

“. . . focusing on human capital during the first 1,000 days of a child’s life is one of the most cost-effective investments governments can make.” (Jim Young Kim, “The Human Capital Gap, Foreign Affairs, July/August 2018)

Compared with weapons and military spending, the cost for good schools and healthcare for children is minuscule. These programs reap benefits down the road in healthier and trained adults. Yet, these programs tend to be cut when budgets are tight.

We no longer live in an age when one income can support the average family. If parents are so important to a young child’s life, why do we not encourage more leave time for parents when a child is young? Affordable child-care facilities close to workplaces?

Surely our political parties can unite around the need to bolster our spending on people-friendly policies.

Believe Me

John Fea, a history professor at Messiah College, Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania, has written a thought-provoking book, Believe Me: the Evangelical Road to Donald Trump. Fea dedicates his book to the 19 percent of evangelical Christians who didn’t vote for Trump.

Nostalgia can be a form of fear, a longing for a supposedly better time which actually never existed, Fea says. He portrays Trump as using this kind of nostalgic fear.

Many of the 81 percent who voted for Trump did so because of fear, the author believes. Since colonial times some evangelicals have feared witchcraft, Catholics, immigrants, Communists, and liberals. Now they fear secularism.

Fea names as idolatry the tendency of some evangelicals to see the United States as the kingdom of God. Trump touts “making America great again.” Which time in American life is so great that we should return to it?

American life in the 1950’s, as Fea points out, might have been generally benign to American middle class whites. It wasn’t that for many American blacks.

He uses the term “court evangelicals” for some religious leaders who support Trump. He compares them to past leaders who served kings and risked being corrupted themselves.

Fea finds a different hope for Christians who decry the current cultural morass. He is inspired by the model of the civil rights movement, “a Christian approach to politics.” This involves: “Hope, humility, and a responsible use of American history.”

My takeaway: evangelical Christians may have to decide between serving political ends to advance their kingdom or returning to the example of their leader, Jesus. He built a community that changed the world through the way they lived.

August 7, 1998

Unless you were directly affected by it because of your profession or your family ties, you probably don’t know the significance of that date, twenty years ago.

Bombs detonated simultaneously at U.S. embassies in East Africa: Nairobi, Kenya, and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. That day, 213 were killed in Nairobi. Around 5,000 were injured. Most of the dead and injured were Kenyans, either working at the embassy or in nearby buildings. Twelve Americans were killed.

In Dar es Salaam, eleven Tanzanians were killed. Eighty-five Tanzanians and Americans were wounded.

The July/August 2018 issue of The Foreign Service Journal is dedicated to the “remembrance, reflection and resilience” of the American, Kenyan, and Tanzanian survivors.

Among the personal stories:

The information systems manager in the Nairobi embassy, a Kenyan, almost buried under debris, realized he was still alive and crawled out to rescue others. A picture shows him on one side of a bloodied survivor helping him walk to safety.

One American remembers planning to meet his wife for lunch at the embassy, then, at the end of that day, having to tell his daughters that their mother had been killed.

Another remembers leaving for a meeting in a part of the embassy that was less damaged, then returning to his office, moments after the blast, to find all his colleagues dead.

The survivors remind us: no one ever gets over this kind of experience.

They dealt with grief and with post traumatic stress.. Some struggled with getting their minds around the utter evil of an act which devastated the lives of so many innocent people.

They learned the vital importance of community. Many mentioned an overwhelming realization of love for their family that influenced them the rest of their lives.

Over and over, survivors stressed how grateful they were for the leadership of the ambassador, Prudence Bushnell. She strived to bring the community together to get through the horrible nightmare.

In her recounting, Bushnell said, “I discovered a depth of sadness and breadth of anger I did not know I had. I also learned I could not take away anyone else’s pain, trauma, anger or sadness, but I could accompany them.”

Another lesson from survivors is the healing many found in turning their experience into service for others. One said, “From that moment on, my life’s purpose has been to promote understanding between people of differing backgrounds.”

Lessons learned: Family, community, and service were priceless weapons in surviving August 7, 1998. They remain so in all the senseless tragedies since then, from September 11, 2001, to the massacre at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Florida this year.

Why Prayer?

Columnist Leonard Pitts Jr. wrote a thoughtful piece recently: “No need for condescension in matters of faith” (The Seattle Times, July 26, 2018).

He mentions a woman who escaped from a deranged gunman in a retail store. She requested prayer.

Pitts criticized another woman’s twitter feed disparaging this call for prayer. One of her tweets said, “It gives people’s egos a huge boost to believe they have the power to influence ‘Almighty god’ . . .”

In contrast, Pitts quoted a preacher: “ . . . prayer is not just a plea to get out of those trials. It’s also a way of getting through.”

Indeed, prayer is not a way of getting God to do what we want. It’s a way of grabbing God’s grace to get us through hard times and live courageously.

The question has been asked: Whose side is God on when competing groups request God’s help in overcoming the other?

The perspective of the question is in error. It’s not: Whose side is God on?

The right question is: Who’s on God’s side?

The purpose of prayer isn’t to get God to do our will. It’s to help us find our way to do his.

Off our Radar: Tax Cuts for the One Percent

Why did the U.S. Congress pass a tax plan in 2017 that lowered taxes for wealthy Americans, who already profited from a favorable tax system?

An article in The Economist (“Free exchange: The ballot or the wallet, July 21, 2018) suggested that, as the rich get richer, they use their increasing wealth to tilt the political system in their favor.

With more money to pay for political campaigns, is it any surprise that a wealthy citizen might favor politicians willing to inflame voters over any issue except creating a fairer tax system?

Years ago Senator John McCain tried to interest citizens in campaign finance reform. Few voters expressed interest, and it faded away.

Nothing says we can’t revisit campaign finance reform again.

Working Smarter

The industrial revolution freed us from backbreaking physical labor. Now the tech revolution is freeing us from repetitive mind labor.

Eventually, after we recognized and lessened the harms of the industrial revolution (child labor, practices injurious to workers, income inequality, etc.), our lives improved. More goods produced in less time translated to better salaries for shorter working hours. More young people finished high school. Many went on to higher education,

Problems of today’s tech revolution mirror those of the industrial revolution. Good jobs are disappearing. Income inequality is rising. Many of our schools are underfunded, unable to prepare students for the newer world.

Yet the benefits of the tech revolution could lead to improved lives like the industrial revolution eventually did, if we use the lessons learned from the older revolution.

The industrial revolution led us, eventually, to old age pensions and medicare and unemployment insurance. Those programs are some of the reasons the recession beginning in 2007, damaging as it was, did not turn into another Great Depression.

Extreme poverty alongside great wealth was a hallmark of the industrial revolution until the Great Depression of the 1930’s finally shocked us into changes. World War II, bringing together the different classes to defeat a recognized threat to our country, also helped.

Our economy took off after World War II. Much of it was the result, finally, of ordinary citizens sharing in the wealth resulting from the industrial revolution.

The tech revolution could lead to similar changes: Shorter work weeks. More time to care for family and friends and communities. More training for the next new job. A health system that serves all. Opportunity to think and pray and read poetry.

And more time to learn about the other cultures and ideas thrust on us by our digital connections. Indeed, the tech revolution could open up an era of constant learning, if we overcome our addiction to its toys.

As in the past, a more equal tax system can provide money to pay for these changes. Our wealthier citizens who have so benefitted by our new revolution could pay it forward.

The Case of the Missing Statement on MH17

Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 (MH17), passing over Ukraine on July 17, 2014, was downed by a Russian missile. All passengers and crew died. On the anniversary of that downing, in 2015, 2016, and 2017, the U.S. State Department has issued a statement to mark the anniversary.

Not this year.

According to ForeignPolicy.com, a statement was prepared but never issued. (Robbie Gramer, Amy Mackinnon. July 18, 2018)

Some speculated it might have to do with the private meeting on July 16 between U.S. President Trump and Russian President Putin.

A few days later, Australia and the United States held their annual meeting to discuss mutual security interests of the two countries (AUSMIN). The participants held a press conference following the meeting.

One reporter relayed a question from an Australian citizen whose three young children, along with their grandfather, were among those who died when MH17 was shot down. “Secretary Pompeo, will the United States, our friend and ally, help Australia hold Russia to account, and how? “

Secretary Pompeo expressed condolences, and said, “We . . . continue to support every effort through the Joint Investigative Team to hold the perpetrators for this heinous activity accountable.”

Several relatives of the children and grandfather have, nevertheless, criticized Trump for not holding Putin accountable for the MH17 downing.

Writing Down the There

Reviewing my earlier novels for newer editions, I revisit my struggles to explain what my stories are about.

I’m not even sure I can define their genre. They’re all over the place. History—yes, at least “near” history, post World War II. Romances? Sometimes. Mysteries? Partly. Relationships and spiritual struggles? Often.

I write because it’s there. Whatever “there” is. Even as a child, I imagined stories to make sense of experiences.

My religious faith occupied and occupies a defining part of my life. I do not, however, write books to “convert.” I’m neither evangelist nor apologist. More searcher, I suppose.

I don’t set out to write what has been defined as “inspirational” or “Christian” books, but neither do I hide a faith journey as a part of my characters’ stories. At least two editors have told me that I can’t go between like that, neither fish nor fowl. Well, I do, but it hasn’t been easy.

My earlier novels do bend more to the “Christian” kind of writing. However, my first book issued by a publisher (the then Broadman Press, in 1984) was the closest to “inspirational” writing. Yet, this book’s main character was a divorced woman, something unusual in those days for a “Christian” publisher.

My newer series is the story of an Appalachian young man traveling literally and figuratively between two worlds. his home, in the 1950 and 60’s, and the world as it evolves in later decades and into the twenty-first century.

I call it “near” history. Our rapid journey from what we were only a few decades ago to what we are now surely spans more changes than ever in human history. Why? How?

When the culture of a religiously influenced generation meets a different world, what happens?

Specifically, what happens to the beliefs and allegiances of an Appalachian young man and his family and friends in a world of terrorism and refugees and upheaval?

It’s an intriguing quest.

Winning Without the Popular Vote

The selection of the American president by the electoral college, not by popular vote, went unnoticed in most presidential elections until recently. Most presidents who won the popular vote also won the electoral college.

The term “college” is misleading, though written into the U.S. Constitution. It’s simply a group of people elected every four years by the different states to decide on the president and vice-president for the next four years.

The electors may not even appear on the ballot. Normally, however, in each state, electors have been chosen by each political party to represent that party’s candidate. The electors meet in December to officially elect the president and vice-president.

The number of electors for each state is based on that state’s representation in Congress. The number is equal to their two senators plus one for each of the state’s representatives in the U.S. House, plus three for Washington. D.C.

The winner in a state takes all of the electoral votes, except in Maine and Nebraska, who allot part of the vote proportionately.

Obviously, more populous states will have more electors based on House representatives. However, the advantage of population can be diluted by the addition of two electors for every state regardless of population.

In the recent past, population growth has concentrated in cities. Rural areas have, in many cases, lost population. Yet states with less population still retain the same number of senatorial electors as those with growing populations.

The Economist, a British-based magazine, pointed out the growing importance of the electoral college in seeming contradiction to the democracy Americans are so proud of. “In two of the five elections for 21st-century presidents, the minority won the electoral college.” (July 14, 2018; “American democracy’s built-in bias”)

Our elections are still dependent on the 18th century thinking that shaped our Constitution. Direct election of a leader by popular vote was still too radical, even for the document’s framers.

Various schemes have been suggested to steer the electoral college to a more population-based makeup.

Unless it does, the growing divisiveness of Americans may be reflected in more “minority” governments.

Tattoos and Bibles

“Many people in El Salvador [a Central American country] say that the only way to quit a gang is in a body bag. But . . . Pentecostal churches offer a way out alive.” (The Economist 1848 Magazine, April/May 2018, “Salvation,” Sarah Esther Maslin)

The violence in El Salvador’s gang ridden culture is horrific. Tattooed gang members and police fight daily battles. A church in that country’s capital, San Salvador, the Eben-Ezer, attempts to make a difference. Besides religious meetings, members bake bread, which they sell for support.

The work offers no quick fix. Members sometimes revert to past ways, unable to quit drugs or drawn back to the former way of survival. A couple of pastors “acknowledge that they’re trying to do what many consider impossible: spirit away members of El Salvador’s powerful gangs. But they believe this is the country’s only hope.”

El Salvador is one of the most dangerous places on earth in terms of homicides, The gangs appear to meet the needs of young men from dysfunctional families searching for community and a place to belong.

Gangs offer protection and a kind of family. Serving a gang gives at least some sense of purpose.

Thus, the church as community is not a mere slogan. A refuge for former gang members must be powerful enough to overcome the expectation from police and the gangs themselves that this new life will fail.

Indeed, the struggle to survive in El Salvador is intense. One can only hope and pray for divine deliverance, even one person at a time.

Is My Child Exempt?

Mavis Bliss wrote an article (“Moral Free-Riders” in Sojourners, May 2015) about the temptation to make exceptions for ourselves from moral choices.

What if you fear dangers from the vaccination of your children against childhood diseases and decide not to do it? When too many people decide not to vaccinate their children, the “herd” immunity given to society from a high vaccination rate lowers.

“In a public without herd immunity, the risks posed by disease far exceed the small risks associated with vaccination. In other words, free-riding does not work when everyone is doing it. Herd immunity does not require universal vaccination, but it does require vaccination of a sufficient majority.”

Bliss suggests that the following people should be exempt from vaccination: babies too young to be vaccinated and those with low or compromised immune systems, such as some elderly and cancer patients.

Deciding not to vaccinate a healthy child, Bliss says is a morally risky choice, imperiling the children of one’s neighbors.

Loving my neighbor as myself implies loving my neighbor’s child as I love my own. We seek what is best for us all, not just my child, my family, my community, my nation.

Winning the War Is Only a Beginning

Today, we thrill at victories portrayed by movies like Dunkirk and Darkest Hour. We laud the victory of allies over axis powers in World War II, as we should.

But we have forgotten what came afterward, the quieter victory. We have forgotten the work that led to the triumph of democracy, lessons that we might use today in dealing with current crises.

In June, 1947, U.S. Secretary of State George C. Marshall outlined a plan to help a devastated Europe recover from the ruins of World War II. Called the European Recovery Plan, it was popularly known as the Marshall Plan.

The Marshall Plan was symbolic of the United States’ decision to choose a different path from the one the country took after World War I. After the first war, the U.S. retreated into isolation. After the second one, The U.S. chose a new path to avoid future “world” wars. From that standpoint, the Marshall Plan worked.

Democratic European and North American countries succeeded beyond anyone’s dreams. They became the promised land for victims of oppression, war, and poverty. Indeed their success has fostered the current gigantic waves of desperate people, straining the ability of democracies to take them in.

But reasons for the numbers go beyond the usual failure of some societies to care for their people—the ever present corrupt governments and regional conflicts.

Too often since the end of the Cold War, the United States has led coalitions against newer enemies and then quit.

The wars, in fact, in Iraq and in Afghanistan, have made the world less safe for democracy. They have contributed to much of the refugee flow.

Hal Brands, in a Bloomberg opinion piece, summarizes the Marshall Plan: “The U.S. would ultimately provide a major infusion of money, along with technical expertise, diplomatic support and other assistance, to make possible a collective recovery program.” (“The Marshall Plan Taught Lessons Trump Refuses to Learn, June 5, 2018)

In his article, Brand contrasts the outlook of those who carried out the Marshall Plan with that of our current government leaders: “There is little recognition by the president of what Marshall and his generation instinctively understood —that things can go south in a hurry if the U.S. does not use its power and creativity to foster a secure and prosperous world.”

Governing from the Ground Up

The bus service on the semi-rural island in Puget Sound where I live charges no fares, except for one route into a neighboring island.

The bus service is not free, of course. A tax voted in over 30 years ago by county residents funds the service. Students needing to get to jobs after school, seniors with local doctor appointments, and commuters traveling to the ferry for work on the mainland all use the buses.

A recent vote by the country transit board retained the fare-free rides. The majority of the 850 comments, gathered online and in meetings from citizens, were opposed to charging fares.

Reasons given by respondents for retaining the fare-free busses included “concerns over the loss of ridership, impacts to the environment, cost of collecting fares versus the revenue generated, impacts on vulnerable populations, and operational scheduling impacts.” (Jessie Stensland, South Whidbey Record, June 26, 2018)

Local governments are not immune to corruption and poisoned politics, of course. Nevertheless, within our partisan-blocked national government, citizens can consider other ways to work their will.

Note: Just as in national politics, freedom of the press is essential. Local newspapers provided notice of the proposed fare charges, as well a forum for discussion.

A New Game of Dominoes

Remember the domino theory? The United States went into Vietnam because, if Vietnam fell to communism, it would knock others into the communist orbit.

We lost that war, and a domino game indeed plays out—just not the one we envisioned. Instead, Ben Barber writes, “Today’s dominoes are not allies of Beijing or Moscow, nor do they practice central state economic planning. They are crony-capitalist, one-party states. (“Authoritarianism Gains in Southeast Asia,” The Foreign Service Journal, May 2018).

With the possible exception of Tunisia, the Arab spring attempt to establish democracy in North Africa and the Middle East has been a failure. Autocracies, like Saudi Arabia, says Barber, “kept the lid on and ensured domestic peace, at the cost of stifling the tender shoots of democracy.”

We “liberated” Iraq, but the vacuum created by that liberation led to all sorts of mayhem, including the Islamic State.

We fought proxy wars, which usually failed. By contrast, during the days of the original domino theory, we never fought the Soviet Union directly. Instead, we strengthened our own nation so that, for a time, people who worked hard could buy homes and send their children to college and start businesses of their own. That kind of policy defeated the Soviet Union.

Our war in Southeast Asia lost the lives of thousands of Americans and a million and more lives of civilians. Our reward, says Barber, was crony capitalism in those countries.

Now, one after the other, more nations are choosing capitalism—the worst kind. They are choosing capitalism without the laws and the oversight of democracy.

Banana Republic Reckoning

The crisis on our southern border did not suddenly appear out of nowhere. The refugees result from a long history of corruption and mayhem in the Central American countries from which they are fleeing.

From at least since the 1800’s, the countries usually were governed by corrupt dictators, often military figures, content to take bribes and allow business interests to manage the countries as their fiefdoms. Laborers were nothing more than machines to harvest crops, including bananas, as cheaply as possible.

For generations, Central American countries were known for these “banana” governments, hence the term “banana republic.”

Unfortunately, the United States did little to push for changes. Too many American economic interests were tied to corporate profits from those countries.

Eventually, leaders arose who challenged the injustices. Some were religious leaders like the Roman Catholic archbishop, Oscar Romero, murdered for his actions on behalf of the poor. Others were political leftists.

We could have chosen to support meaningful change as championed by leaders such as Romero. Instead, we chose to fixate on a “communist” menace, choosing continued support for corrupt dictators, closing off opportunity for a better way.

Eventually rebellion set in, resulting in bloody civil wars. Masses of people suffered under the murder, torture, and crime that resulted. Some began fleeing, as many of us would flee in the same situation.

We still have choices. We can continue to see the flow from Central America only as the enemy, as a threat. Or we could understand their choices to flee as mirroring our own choices were we faced with rape and torture and little economic opportunity.

Former Vice President Joe Biden urges us to address “the root causes driving migration from this region” (“Commentary: Try diplomacy to aid migrants instead of detentions,” Chicago Tribune, June 27, 2018).

We could support safe places within those countries—houses, small communities, perhaps, offering safety for women and children, places where asylum seekers could apply without dangerous journeys north.

We could invest in job training centers, perhaps even drug treatment facilities

We might consider such investments as payment on a debt we owe to our past poor choices.

Worship of the Talented

“Many of the great failures of the last 50 years, from Vietnam to Watergate to the financial crisis, were caused by extremely intelligent people who didn’t care about the civic consequences of their actions.”

So writes New York Times columnist David Brooks (“The failure of the educated elite,” The Seattle Times, May 30, 2018).

The old system of power depended on who your parents were and on the hereditary passing of power. We exchanged it for a more just one based on merit.

Yet, Brooks points out, the old system had qualities that the new system lacks.

Blue bloods from the older system like George H. W. Bush “won World War II and built the American Century.”

In contrast, those put into power under the new system, based on merit and education, are passing down advantages to their children but not to the nation as a whole. Our society has become more unequal than ever, says Brooks.

What the new meritocracy lacks is “a civic consciousness, a sense that we live life embedded in community and nation, that we owe a debt to community . . . ”

The new system will work when we pass good things not just to our children, but to our neighbor’s children as well.