Category Archives: May You Live In Interesting Times

To Make a Better Life

Sometime back before the American Revolution, my ancestors, probably including those of both English and Irish nationalities, immigrated to what would become the United States.

They were part of the great migration of European peoples to the Americas. Native Americans would suffer greatly, pushed further and further into less fertile areas, forced to give up sovereignty and lands.

Slaves and their descendants suffered also, shackled by prejudice that denied them the American dream.

For people like my ancestors, however, the new lands allowed them to flourish as they probably never would have in Europe. Like other immigrant families, some of my ancestors did better than others. A few became well-off, others became small farmers, others eventually landed in urban areas, becoming workers and small business owners, surviving both depression and times of war.

My own parents kept their home during the Great Depression of the thirties, saved by one of President Franklin Roosevelt’s new deal programs. Later, they managed to send my brother and me to college. We both enjoyed middle class American lives.

Not surprisingly, I have sympathy for immigrants. I think one of the greatest gifts the country has been granted is renewal brought about by managed immigration. Indeed, the castoffs of Nazi Germany, given sanctuary in the United States, helped power the defeat of that same regime.

Some of my beliefs, I freely admit, come from my Christian faith, a belief that those who are blessed are obligated to bless others. We the blessed, are called to share those blessings.

This country has allowed some to amass great wealth. I don’t believe that being rich is in itself a sin. I do believe it is a great responsibility. The responsibility is to choose between the path of the rich man in Jesus’ parable who ignored the poor seeking crumbs from his table, or that of the one known as the Good Samaritan, who chose to help the needy one he happened to meet.

Humor, a Good Time, and the Christian Faith

Jesus apparently liked a good joke. He certainly showed humor in the ways he sometimes talked about the, perhaps, overly serious religious folks of his day.

He talked of people so concerned about the sin of their brother that they are unconcerned about their own sin. (“Why do you see the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye?” (Matthew 7: 3, RSV) Someone walking along with a log sticking out of their eye becomes concerned about a speck in their brother’s eye.

Jesus apparently liked having a good time socially, too. He often was invited to banquets and feasts and seemed to enjoy them, sometimes taking opportunity to teach while attending them.

He also taught us to despise the rich man who refused to share his food with the poor man next to his table, while we are to welcome back the sinner who repents, inviting him in for feasting and rejoicing.

I grew up in a teetotaling Southern Baptist church, but we shared numerous picnics and dinners together. The Christians I knew liked laughing and jokes. My father never drank a glass of alcohol in his life, but he often attracted neighborhood friends by inviting them into our house for sharing jokes and fellowship on a cold winter evening. As a child, I sat next to my mother’s chair and enjoyed all the conversation and laughter.

In summer, we pulled up yard chairs on our porch and enjoyed the long summer evenings together.

I believe Jesus would have us share the Christian faith by having a good time with our friends and neighbors, whom we care for as Jesus did the people around him.

Print versus Digital

A long time ago, my home town of Nashville, Tennessee, had two print newspapers. The editorial boards were usually on opposite sides of issues—local, national, international. One paper generally favored the Democrats while the other cheered for the Republicans.

Today, Nashvillians are fortunate to still have one print newspaper, though you can read it digitally as well. Of course, a great many people don’t read any newspaper. Their news comes from the internet.

That practice gives freedom to anyone to express political and other opinions. No editorial board or owners oversee what goes into public space.

Of course, one is free to lie, if they wish. “Fact checkers” can’t possibly keep up with all of us spouting opinions, as, indeed, I am doing here.

Giving anyone with a computer access to public space is both freeing and dangerous. All sides of any issue can be debated. Unknowns as well as the powerful can join in.

Newspapers printing lies can be sued and, if found guilty of falsehood, may be required to compensate the one they maligned. While one can still sue someone who spreads falsehoods about them on the internet, individuals tend to lack resources to do so.

Centuries ago, the invention of moveable type gave rise to an explosion of new ideas and eventually to more political freedom for ordinary individuals. Unfortunately, the journey to this freedom included wars and terrible suffering for some.

Today’s internet may be yesterday’s moveable type. Let us hope we respect its power and learn to use it wisely. In fact, returning to that print newspaper (via internet or delivered to our homes as a paper copy) for our first look at the news may be wise: it takes more time but tends to call for deeper reflection.

Digital versus Personal

The Covid virus hit about the same time new computer technology increased our ability to connect digitally to other people from our homes. Ever since then, society has struggled to return to personal communities, including back into our offices but also into our religious and social groups.

Our family structures have been challenged for decades. The computer revolution further challenged other personal interaction. It’s tempting to burrow down further and further into our personal nests.

What are we called to do to grow community? Perhaps the old adage about simply showing up applies. Start attending religious and community meetings again. Go play pickle ball or restart that book group. Knitting? Crossword puzzle groups? Support groups for those attempting to overcome addictions?

Pick your own, but come out of the burrows and into community again.

Citizenship, Not Worship

Christians have a mixed relationship with nationhood.

Some of the first Christians, in the days of the Roman empire, were persecuted by the Roman government. Their leader was accused of seeking to bring in another kingdom. Even though Jesus said his kingdom was “not of this world,” the Romans were skittish about any kind of movement that might threaten their hold on Palestine, where the first Christians appeared. The Jewish people had always been restive under Roman rule.

Eventually, the religion of Jesus conquered the Roman world, not militarily but with its message of love and care for all, even enemies, over selfishness and material gain. Loving your enemies is a terrible weapon against them.

The breakup of central power as tribes from beyond the empire broke through to settled areas brought more challenges. Christians had to wrestle with varying amounts of power and what to do with it.

As Christianity became a majority religion, its leaders began a struggle, still with us, as to how important political power would be to the religion. In Europe, varying groups committed horrendous crimes against each other supposedly for the cause of their particular brand of “Christianity.”

The discovery of new continents gave dissenting religious groups places of refuge. Perhaps the numbers and variety of the dissenters is what led eventually, though not evenly, to our much praised “freedom of religion” in the United States.

Surprisingly, the number of Christian groups in the new country mushroomed for several centuries, despite the absence of a state religion. Could it be that giving freedom to believers for their own religious directions actually made Christianity stronger? Perhaps it freed them from political power struggles.

New challenges of war and the struggles of people in countries formerly governed by absolute rulers led to new ways of thinking. American Christians, having become more numerous as a result of their freedom to believe without government oversight, greatly influenced the country as it grew in both population and in size.

However, the success of religious groups in the United States may have led to a possible loss of influence. As Christianity became, practically speaking, a sort of “state” religion, perhaps its members became more like members of European established churches. Christianity may have lost some of its vitality, just as established European churches did.

At any rate, supposing any country, including the United States, is a “Christian” nation, or ever has been or ever could be, tempts us with a weakened Christianity. We tend to worship America instead of Jesus.

Jesus doesn’t need nationalistic trappings. Indeed, movements which lead in that direction only weaken the Christian message.

How to End Wars

One way to rid the world of war might be to increase democracy, according to an article by Michael Doyle (“Why They Don’t Fight; the Surprising Endurance of the Democratic Peace,” Foreign Affairs, July/August 2024).

Academics and politicians have become interested in “democratic peace theory,” the article states. Are democracies less likely to go to war? Of course, the United States, a democracy, certainly has attacked other nations in its almost 250 year history. So have major democracies in Europe.

However, according to the article, the difference is the general absence of war between democracies.

After all, states ruled by one individual or a few strong individuals do not have to ask their citizens to vote on going to war or much of anything else, as their citizens generally don’t vote, at least in free and fair elections.

The article not only delves into the current differences between strong democracies and more autocratic states but also between states with different degrees of democracy.

At any rate, the evidence of support for peace by citizens of democracies seems intuitive. A democratic form of government, by definition, gives the people the power of going to war or not. Why would I or any other citizen want war? The exception, of course, is after an obvious attack by a hostile power. Even then, our response should be proportionate, targeted at the perpetrators only, a matter of self-protection.

Testimony by Jon Ward

Testimony: Inside the Evangelical Movement That Failed a Generation by Jon Ward is a heart- felt indictment of certain aspects of conservative American churches during the 1980’s and 1990’s.

Growing up in that period, Ward was raised by his family in a conservative evangelical church culture. During that period, many sincere Christians, like the Jesus Movement people of the time, believed God would lead America to a time of justice for “the poor, the weak, the unborn, the neglected, and the downtrodden.” Unfortunately, churches like the one Ward was raised in did not pay enough attention to the ever present temptation to power by a few leaders, as happens when any movement gains strength.

Submission to God, Ward states, is a noble intention. However, a traditional anti-intellectual stance meant that some Christians of this time rejected the place of the mind in their religion. “The call to surrender to God was used to strong arm me and my peers into accepting, without question, what we were told by adults.”

While fighting against abortion, some did not pay enough attention to “fighting for the welfare of the born, for those who made it out of the womb, and into a world of poverty, suffering, and systemic injustice.”

The sincere desire for authentic religious experience is a noble pursuit. However, Ward points out, in his own life, too much emphasis on an emotional experience can encourage a faith that becomes a “self-centered, consumeristic, emotion-focused pursuit.”

In his conclusion, Ward states: “seeking truth alone is not enough. Truth must be accompanied by love.”

Alexei Navalny’s Death

The death was widely reported and commented on:

“Alexei Navalny, leader of Russia’s opposition, was killed in jail by the regime on February 16th, aged 47.” (“Obituary Alexei Navalny: Better Russia, where are you?” The Economist, February 14th 2024)

Russell Moore, “What a Murdered Russian Dissident Can Teach Us About Moral Courage,” Christianity Today, February 21, 2024.

Moore, in his column, tied Navalny’s death to the death of other Christian martyrs. “Before the world forgets the corpse of Alexei Navalny in the subzero environs of an Arctic penal colony, we ought to look at him—especially those of us who follow Jesus Christ—to see what moral courage actually is.”

Interesting that Navalny’s courage and comfort and purpose was increased by his Christian faith. Safe to say that many, perhaps most of the dissidents against Putin’s Russia, are not Christians.

Also, Putin and many of his supporters say they are Christians, too. Indeed, some of them oversee Christian churches.

One of the temptations we Christians experience is the temptation to betray our calling by the need to belong. Why do regimes like Putin’s put people in solitary places like Siberia? Often in solitary confinement?

Perhaps those who most suffer for Christ are those who suffer alone. Take a Christian away, not only from family but from Christian community, and they become increasingly vulnerable.

Yet the bedrock of Christian belief is based on Christ carrying out his marvelous work of suffering and redemption when alone—after the disciples had fled.

Christian community, from the beginning, has comforted and grown us in our Christian faith. It is a bedrock of Christian growth. Yet, ultimately, it isn’t the most important piece of our Christian faith. The most important is the indefinable friendship with Christ our brother.

Unity In a Divided Time

A long time ago my parents were suddenly awakened one Sunday morning by a neighbor’s phone call. “Turn on the radio,” the neighbor pled with my father, apparently herself awakened by bad news.

My parents did, of course, and learned of the attack on U.S. naval forces in Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, on December 7, 1941. Though Europe had been at war since 1939, many Americans hoped to stay out of this latest European confrontation. Europeans had been fighting for centuries, many figured, and it needn’t concern us. Now it did. Americans are rightly skittish about committing their young men and women to battlefields, but not when their own country is bombed.

One of the few other times I remember such unity was after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, when terrorists attacked the World Trade Center in New York City and the Pentagon in Virginia. Another plane crashed in Pennsylvania when passengers fought a fourth group of hijackers. I watched the newscasts that day on a TV screen at a U.S. consulate in Saudi Arabia, wondering how we would handle this awful challenge. Whether we correctly handled these attacks in the long run may be open to question, but for a long while, we were definitely united. Americans bought flags and gathered in patriotic groups and supported rescue groups and firefighters in New York City.

But how do we react to wrongs when they involve few of our own citizens, like the attacks in Israel and Gaza and Ukraine?

How do we remain united in working out these and other problems when we have such vastly different opinions about many issues, like abortion, aid for Israel, and immigrants?

Our country’s government is over 230 years old. We have almost foundered on different ideas, directions, and yes, sins, more than once, but we are still here. If we can learn one thing, it’s that we can continue only as we respect differences and continue to work together. We need each other, because none of us has all the answers.

Living By Ourselves

One of the greatest threats to our societies today is our growing lack of community.

The normal family for most of recorded history has seen family members either living with each other in a single household or close by. Whether living in the same house or merely a short walk away, however, children usually grew up knowing their grandparents and other kin.

Major changes began a century or two ago. Some of it happened to immigrants leaving native countries to settle in places with better opportunities, an understandable choice.

However, the coming of suburbs to developed countries led to a great sifting out. The more well-off parents and their children moved to newly built suburban houses while other family members stayed in the old neighborhood. As time passed, the suburbs increased and grew further from the city center. Fathers and then mothers spent more of their time commuting. More separation increased the distance between these families and those with less opportunities and talents.

In the past few decades, separation has increased due to many factors. More young adults went away to college or to distant jobs and stayed away. Most recently, the ability to work hundreds of miles from the big city where the jobs traditionally were located was increased by both computers and the Covid pandemic.

Alienation has increased and no doubt contributed to our epidemic of harmful drug use. Surely our decreasing human contact and caring have fed alienation and a feeling of purposelessness.

Lately, some worry about artificial intelligence leading to less and less need for human input.

Regardless, for the first time, a record number of people live alone. Any community must be sought out: Vocational? Political? Religious? Leisure?

The new arrangements often have nothing to do with families. Singles may marry or establish relationships, but they tend to produce fewer children, often none at all.

Interestingly, immigration, which is feared by many, has been a blessing to those societies who tend more and more to not reproduce themselves.

Has our striving for ultimate independence finally reached the breaking point? How do we come back together?

Rainy Day Soldier

“THESE are the times that try men’s souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands by it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman.” (Thomas Paine, Common Sense, January 1776)

Thomas Paine wrote these words in a pamphlet after the American army under George Washington had suffered serious defeats by the British at the beginning of the American war for independence. Though the war had barely begun and other hard times like Valley Forge lay ahead, Paine’s words may have made the difference between an early defeat of the colonists and eventual independence.

We can find parallels today in choosing to slog along and not give up. Ukraine’s war for independence from Russian leader Vladimir Putin is an example.

Other examples of holding on during a bleak time are less clear cut. For all of my life, the Middle East has experienced one crisis after another. Indeed, even long ago, soon after the time of Jesus’ life on earth, the Jewish people attempted to rebel against the Roman Empire and were completely defeated. Most have continued to live in other countries ever since, but a remnant has always sought to return. After the trauma of Hitler’s attempted murder of all Jews, the historic trickle of Jews returning to their ancient land became a flood.

Of course, other people live there, too, as indeed they always have. Today we are called to a harder but much more necessary task: to work for a just peace between all who call the Middle East their home.

Today’s rainy day soldier is not one who fights but one who is a peacemaker. The lines are not clear cut, as is usual in a physical war. Winning is not physical conquest but working so that every man, woman, and child in that historic place has a chance to peaceably make a life.

 

Exiting Gaza

“After decades of failed international engagement in Gaza, we owe it this time to the Palestinians, Israelis and Egyptians—and to ourselves—to get this right.” (Yair Lapid, speech to Israeli Knesset, October 16, 2023, as reported in “A Positive Exit Strategy From Gaza,” The Jerusalem Strategic Tribune, by Robert Silverman, October 2023.)

In his speech, Mr. Lapid outlines steps for achieving a real victory. “The real victory comes not from defeating our enemy but from achieving a better place for Israel and our Palestinian neighbors.”

Further, “Instead of taking the easy way out of town by dumping Gaza on some set of beguiling expatriates, the multinational governance team should be prepared to work with the local Gazans to build governance capacity—over the course of years.”

Mr. Lapid calls for withdrawing the Israeli Defense Forces as soon as possible. They would be replaced by a multinational force “with two separate missions . . . under a single head.”

One mission would be a multinational force “to maintain order and begin training a new Gazan police force . . .”

The other mission would be “a multinational civilian governance to help the Gazans rebuild economically and begin the process of governing themselves politically.”

Israeli-Palestinian issues became a tangled web due to the interests of numerous groups, nations, and historic events over centuries.

Mr. Lapid’s suggestions would seem a fair start toward a practical solution.

Timeout

Israel/Palestine; Republicans/Democrats; labor/management; Russia/Ukraine—and so on.

Perhaps it’s time to sit back and breathe deeply. Time to stow the rhetoric. Time to watch an eclipse and marvel at our solar system and our universe. Time to take a walk with family/friends. Time to read a book for fun.

Obviously, solving problems requires engaging with them, but sometimes we become so involved that we think the universe can’t succeed without us.

Best to understand that we’re part of the process, not the whole answer. We have choices as to how we engage. Perhaps we can develop a bit of modesty—we’re all of value but none of us has a perfect solution.

Best to listen before we spout off. We might ask divine guidance once in a while, perhaps even for the gift of loving our enemies.

The Parenting Dilemma

A survey finds that the more formal education a mother has, the more likely she is to opt out of the work force, or to work part time. This finding seems intuitive. Women with more education are more likely to marry better educated men. Their husbands are likely to have higher salaries and can support wives who don’t wish, at least at certain times in their lives, to work in a full-time career, or perhaps some prefer non-salaried work for a charitable group.

These women, however, have a greater choice of careers, if they want one, and of better paying ones. Their salaries would more likely pay for top notch child care. Why do some of them opt out?

Would more mothers of small children prefer to spend increased time with them if they could afford to do so?

We fear a return to the days when women were relegated to suburbia and made to feel guilty if they wanted to follow careers. Yet, if a mother wants to spend time with a child in the child’s early years, isn’t this worthwhile work?

Studies have shown the value of mothering in early childhood. What policies, both corporate and government, might encourage this kind of work for any mother who desires it?

But even here we are missing the truer picture. What about fathers who want more time with their children? Maybe a lessening of career as end all and be all for them, too, would allow them more time to father.

Perhaps in our emphasis on mothering, we’re in danger of losing the bigger need for parenting. Judging by our lowering birthrates, we certainly appear in need of this essential skill.

Abolishing Retirement and Taking Sabbaticals

The average age of retirement from the work force in 1910 was seventy-four. Now it’s more likely to be around sixty-two, even though we live longer.

In generations past, the majority of Americans worked on farms or in small businesses for their entire lives. The farms and businesses tended to be run by families and passed down to the next generation. As work became less personalized and more repetitive for many, the idea of a rest in the last years of one’s life gained in popularity.

What if, instead, we required a slightly bigger chunk of current salary to fund a system available for us to draw on at different periods of our lives, not just a set amount at a set age? Some already accept less payment to retire at sixty-two. These early retirees sometimes reenter the labor force in new careers, perhaps with lower salary, but doing work they enjoy.

Obviously, payments at an earlier age for what could best be called a sabbatical would be much lower at forty-two than at sixty-two.

Perhaps we need a more flexible pension system that would operate more like annuities. What if we had the option of dropping out for a year or so during our early and middle years, using small “pension” payments based on what we had already paid into the system? Some professions already include a sabbatical within their careers.

Pension systems could be tweaked to allow one to drop out at, say, thirty to raise children. Or at forty to finish a college degree. Or at fifty to work on an invention or direct a non-profit.

One would take a much smaller pension, of course, at a younger age, to reflect the lesser amount put into the system. A younger person, however, could work at a part time job while drawing a small pension and taking college courses or writing a novel or raising children. Or just exploring and searching for a clearer purpose for one’s life.

Retirement would become a graduated process. Retirement would cease being “retirement” and become another opportunity for change.

Mistaking America for God

Jon Ward concludes his book Testimony: Inside the Evangelical Movement that Failed a Generation with a testimony of his own calling: “My faith has been sparked by seeing that the real Jesus beckons me to follow him into a life of vulnerability that threatens the false gods of comfort and ease. Like many others, I’m trying to figure out how to walk that path. It’s daunting and scary, and most days I don’t feel like I’m doing a very good job. But it does at least have the ring of truth.”

This is not the tale of a man who left a conservative evangelical way of life but rather one who redeemed it, finding a more loving evangelical way of life, and is still going forward.

The message he was raised with is one known by many of us: God loves the world and has worked through Jesus to reach all of us with that love. The message can be powerful and life-changing, speaking of love and care and nurture.

The problem is not the message but some of the messengers. Unfortunately, some Christian leaders have been unspeakably corrupt as they used their leadership positions to glorify themselves and in a few cases used power for corrupt practices.

More often, some evangelicals have worshiped America more than God and turned the church into a “make America great again” pep rally. Some used church for spiritual highs, leaving out the calling of service to the world.

Their emphasis was not on Jesus’s call to serve him in meeting spiritual and physical needs of the world but on glorifying America. Completely absent was any call for repentance for slavery and a century of segregation.

It shouldn’t be hard for a Christian to reflect on Jesus’ example when he said that he himself, the Son of God, “ did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.”

 

Evacuation

During my orientation to the U.S. Foreign Service, one of the presenters confidently told us that, for sure, given a normal diplomatic career, we’d all be evacuated, due to war or civil turmoil, at least once from the U.S. embassy or consulate where we were assigned.

Actually, I was evacuated twice, upping the odds. Before you have visions of my being airlifted to safety by a U.S. military helicopter, however, I must confess that both were blessedly uneventful.

In Algeria, my tour was curtailed early because of ongoing strife in the country and increasing threats against diplomats and other foreign nationals. I left on a crowded Air Algérie flight to Paris where I enjoyed an afternoon and evening before flying out to Washington the next day.

In Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, terrorist attacks against Americans led to another embassy draw down of embassy personnel. This time I flew out on a crowded flight to Amsterdam and enjoyed an evening in another pleasant European city.

I was quite fortunate. Recent evacuations are more likely to mirror the kind recently carried out in Afghanistan and Sudan. In Sudan, the more recent, American embassy staff were brought to safety by helicopter, as chaos descended on the country.

The evacuations in Sudan followed dangerous battles between two strongmen, each wanting power and apparently too selfish to care about what they were inflicting on the citizens of their country.

Yes, U.S. diplomats are sometimes killed. Their names are inscribed on walls in a lobby of the U.S. State Department in Washington. Fortunately, however, most American and other foreign diplomats usually make it out. Left behind are ordinary men, women, and children facing civil war, including not only physical attacks but also starvation as basic goods run out and cannot be replaced.

The diplomatic world is perhaps chastened again by its helplessness, as its members leave carnage and perhaps memories of local friends and acquaintances who have no U.S. helicopters to bring them to safety.

 

Where Are the People?

Increasing internet use combined with Covid-19 has devastated our time with each other.

Restaurants closed as people ate at home. Workers met on Zoom. Shoppers avoided stores to buy over the internet. Town halls and religious groups experimented with hybrid meetings. Today, schools struggle to cope with returning students after two years of attempts at remote learning.

Covid led us through separations resembling a time of war. We are struggling to adjust. A lifestyle already dictated by automobiles and suburbs was upended further by the pandemic.

How do we relearn our people skills? How do we learn to meet together again? How do we come out from our home burrows?

How do we integrate singles back into society again? How do we help those caught in the drug epidemic to find restoring community? How do we overcome the easy use of guns to interrupt peaceful gatherings?

We are in search of community, of people gathering safely to share lives. We are in search of those willing to commit to each other and to care for one other.

As we confront our changed society, may we have the dedication, patience, and discipline to persevere and overcome the currents that would tear us apart.

May we grow the communities we so need.

Unhooking Illegal Drugs

That illegal drugs are a problem in the United States is obvious to many Americans. Finding ways to deal with the problem, however, is something of a problem in itself.

Alexander Ward listed in Politico some suggested solutions by various members of the U.S. congress, including at least one suggestion to bomb Mexico. (“GOP embraces a new foreign policy: Bomb Mexico to stop fentanyl,” April 10, 2023)

Targeted strikes against drug lords, labeling drug cartels as foreign terrorist organizations, and other ideas have been suggested by members of congress.

I’m hardly qualified to suggest ways to defeat drug cartels. However, I suggest that one way of battling illegal use might be to examine why so many Americans fall into the illegal drug trap in the first place.

After all, if Mexican cartels disappear tomorrow, other cartels in other countries will step into the market. If the market is there, sellers will rise to meet the demand. All sorts of different ways exist to overcome U.S. efforts against drug sellers.

What can we do to unhook Americans off drugs?

We could begin by exploring the question from a different angle: Why do some Americans, especially young Americans, avoid drugs?

I would think that families and care givers who love and support their children are the most important factor in raising drug free children. That is not to say that such families will never have children who become drug users. It would be of no help to parents who dearly love and support their children when a tough world finds a way to warp their children’s lives.

It is merely to say that parents who are able to love and support and spend time with their children are the best defense against habits that might destroy those children.

What can we do to encourage parents to be parents?

Begin with the basics: no child should go hungry or not have a secure place to sleep at night. As some cities try to help the homeless, provide special care to families and to parents.

This includes safe spaces to eat and sleep, but it also can include support to parents who might have a problem with drugs themselves to stay drug free. It can support as well any programs to help parents find jobs and learn useful skills.

The goal is a society which rids itself of harmful drug use by becoming a productive society and one less likely to seek harmful drugs.

People Versus Machines?

“Machines are not better at personal care, machines are not better cooks, and machines will not necessarily be better than people at driving trucks.”

Lant Pritchett, the author of these words, is a research director at the University of Oxford and a former Wold Bank economist. Pritchett makes the case for immigration over automation in “People Over Robots,” Foreign Affairs, March/April 2023.

He points out that some automation replaces the work of a laborer with the work of a customer, as when a customer must use a self-checkout machine. Pritchett doesn’t mention it, but I suspect some of us may miss the human interaction with a live cashier as well.

The dramatically lower birth  rates in developed countries, as well as the increasingly higher education levels, have led to a shortage of workers for “manual, nonroutine tasks,” Pritchett writes. We are, it seems, in need of workers while less developed countries have a surplus of potential workers. Pritchett sees as a waste of time and resources the efforts to develop machines for work better done by humans.

A lack of agricultural workers may result in less than beneficial results, Pritchett writes. Farmers relying on machines may prefer genetically modified products that can be better harvested by machines such as thicker-skinned tomatoes. Automation may tend to eliminate foods that can’t easily be harvested by machines, such as asparagus and strawberries.

As Pritchett points out, the movement of labor happens with or without legality. The problem with illegal movements is their tendency to exploitation and abuse.

It seems a waste of both people and nature not to provide for people-oriented immigration policies.