150 Achievements of Liberalism in America


The accomplishments of liberals over the years, by both Republicans and Democrats, is quite remarkable.

Did you realize before the unions invented the idea of weekends, there was no such thing as two days of rest every week? Many countries still have no word for it.

Prohibitions against child labor, paid vacation, public universities, Clean Air Act, Head Start, the FBI — the list goes on. Sure, conservatives helped back in the day when they weren’t destroying America. But these are liberal ideas.

These concepts that became programs emerged from a national activist heart seeking to improve the lot of common people. Encouraged by Jesus’ teaching to care for our neighbor — to be our brother’s keeper — Americans embraced these ideas and improved the lives of millions.

The list is here.


Posted in Both Faith and Politics | Leave a comment

Don’t Look for the Label

Just because I identify with many issues labeled Democratic that doesn’t mean I am anti-Republican. I am not against Republicans. I am against ignorance, against hate, against racism, and against Fascism. I want to destroy these ideological enemies of free people, not destroy the people that are burdened with them.

Posted in Both Faith and Politics, Faith, Politics | Leave a comment

The Hijab

Part of the dig against Muslims is that they want the opportunities of the West but refuse to assimilate into, and even express intolerance for, their adopted culture. The hijab is a very visible symbol of this idea.

But this practice is not exclusively Muslim. Consider Hasidic Jews, or the Amish, who segregate themselves from mainstream American culture. Many branches of Pentecostal Christianity have rules against immodest dress, alcohol consumption or even women cutting their hair.

When I first saw women wearing hijabs, I felt sorry for them. I presumed that they were dominated by conservative husbands and fathers who made them dress that way in public. What I have come to find out is that many women, starting in high school, voluntarily wear the hijab. They have various reasons. They want to be observant. They want to set themselves apart from the secular world. They want to proudly proclaim their heritage or family tradition. And who can fault these reasons?

The French government has banned wearing the hijab in public places. We could hardly do that in the U.S., at least on religious grounds (because of the Constitution).

Every day, I see many women wearing the hijab. I would wish for these women the freedom to be modest with the courage to go against convention for faith reasons. But I would also wish for them the freedom to abandon the hijab if it represents a form of religion that has no bearing on their relationship to the Almighty and is simply a reflection of some ancient teaching that gets in the way of their full expression as free and equal members of our egalitarian society.

Posted in Both Faith and Politics | Leave a comment

Why Do Working-Class People Vote Against Their Own Self Interest?

Liberals whine about the fact that the Right always controls the message so well, leaving the Left to defend their position and play catch-up.

Of course, a conservative message is generally easier to convey because it calls up memes and metaphors that are already in the citizens mind. For example, if I tell you that you can spend tax money better than the government can, I naturally accept this as truth. Unless someone tells you that big beneficial projects (like Hoover Dam) are only possible when we pool our money, then the appeal to individual responsibility and personal economic freedom is the impression that remains.

But simplicity of message doesn’t explain it all. I believe the problem is more troubling than that.

John Haight is a social scientist, professor and author (The Righteous Mind: Why Good People are Divided by Politics and Religion) who has done some good work deciphering the motivations of the Left and the Right. He wrote an article in The Guardian, which is a fascinating look at the “why” that so baffles liberals.

I don’t know if Haight has all the answers but his findings sure make sense as a starting point for discussion.

Haight basically says that, while local elections are about issues (i.e., transportation bond), the national elections are more about patriotism and our collective values (i.e., illegal immigrants who didn’t wait their turn).

Conservatives make a lot of noise about individual responsibility while Liberals talk about community.

Here’s an example. For the working class, tax cuts are an easy sell but may be counterproductive to any short-term savings. Just because you reduce the individual tax burden of a working person by a few dollars doesn’t necessarily bolster the overall economy, despite a simple pocketbook analogy. But if we divert a portion of public funds (tax dollars) into a jobs training program for our town or efforts to bring a new factory to the town, the entire community benefits, through the creation of jobs and enhanced spending power of workers.

But the promise of a complicated infrastructure that helps improve a community, and produces jobs, is a lot more difficult to comprehend (and, more importantly, believe in) than offering a simple tax cut.

How can a liberal politician grab enough of a voter’s time to explain something complicated when the opposition is happy to issue one platitude after the other.

Haight likens the political conversation to an anatomy of our taste buds. The tongue is divided into regions that can distinguish between sweet, salty, bitter, etc. Of course, we all like sweet but a steady of sugar is not be good for us. We need to cultivate a palate for the things that will fortify us over the long term.

He pitches the taste buds analogy into these taste regions that appeal to different parts of the moral tongue.  They contrast like this: care/harm, fairness/cheating, liberty/oppression, loyalty/betrayal, authority/subversion, and sanctity/degradation.

In learning to communicate with conservatives, this breakdown alone can be helpful in improving the conversation.

A recent transcript, which goes into detail is located here.



Posted in Both Faith and Politics | Leave a comment

Can Neo Calvinism Stand Up?

A lively debate on Calvinism happened recently. And it would actually good TV. Four serious pastors brought their beliefs to a dog fight and the heat and light were exchanged.

Maybe you may say that a debate over the implications of the so-called new Calvinism are irrelevant and arcane to American protestant. Or just too much inside baseball. But I was thoroughly fixated by the exchange and, I’ll bet, you will be, too. I believe this discussion has particular implications for American Christianity and even American politics because where you stand on these issues predicts where your beliefs on civic matters may lie.

After all, at the heart of our American experiment are many unresolved issues surrounding the active role of God in our views of individual freedom, the source and meaning of Manifest Destiny as a divine right, our support of Israel and our national beliefs about separation of church and state.

To me, this is more than esoteric sparring. The pastors were cordial enough to each other, and I’m am sure they all went out for a beer afterwards.  But during the event, they demonstrated an intensity worthy of the topic.

In the debate, I particularly like Brian Zanhd, pastor of the Word of Life church in St. Joseph, MO. His presentation and defense were impeccable, measured and reasonable. I learned a lot and these two videos could be an interesting  part of a small group discussion that would do the participants a world of good.


Posted in Both Faith and Politics | Leave a comment

Optimism: Essential To Our Future

sharotcoverThe Optimism Bias, a new book by Tali Sharot, takes the position that we are wired for optimism, that cynical pessimism is not our natural state. And that optimism is necessary for our survival as a species.

That’s a comforting thought. I consider myself an optimist. But I have always considered that the rest of the world was not and that this was a force to be pushed back upon. Part of my mission on this earth has been to spread optimism in my own small way, to be encouraging to those around me. Now, in this book, I see that an optimism evangelist is a good thing that serves the great good.

One of the last things that Jesus is quoted as saying to his disciples is in John 16:33, “”I have told you these things, so that in me you may have peace. In this world you will have trouble. But take heart! I have overcome the world.” This is very optimistic, indeed, to Christians like me, who not only believe that Christ conquered death by rising from the dead but declared that the world, with its rules, shortages and , has little power over him, or us.

The Second Law of Thermodynamics says that everything is falling apart. That’s a tad pessimistic. But Christians, following Christ’s statement, can be the harbingers of the good news that there is a life beyond this one and that we can join Christ in this new world beyond our world.

If it is so that this present life is not the end and that we are spiritual beings having a human experience, then Christians indeed have some good news for this realm. Can I hear an amen?  Why not optimism? Its all good.

This book is one of a collection of books on the Brainpickings website located here.

Posted in Both Faith and Politics | Leave a comment

God Has No Religion

I believe religion is the human pursuit of God. It is fraught with ego, misinterpretation, manipulation and fraud (including self-fraud). But when we see that God is pursuing humans in the establishment of a cooperative personal relationship, great things happen. But it is not religion.

Image of Ghandi

Image of Ghandi

Posted in Both Faith and Politics | Leave a comment

Image of the earth from the moon

What’s the problem? Let’s just enlarge the tribe beyond our geographic, cultural, philosophic and religious borders. How? We can assimilate a God’s eye view of God’s total creation.

Posted in Both Faith and Politics | Leave a comment

Conservatives Motivated by Fear

Its what you thought for many years but wouldn’t say because it sounded so snarky and racist.

But now science is bearing up the notion that conservatives and liberals reason differently at a very basic level.

This Bill Moyers article presents a well-designed study of how the progressive and regressive minds work. And, yes, it’s not just that we have develop various conclusions about life based on rational input. Its much, much deeper than that.

Turns out conservatives, who generally advocate for a powerful military, harsh punishment for all sorts of things, more rigid societal structure, and love for guns, do so out of a sense of fear, protecting what’s mine, and the consequences of letting down our collective guard.

Furthermore, this fear mechanism, which served humans well thousands of year ago, is deeply embedded in the primitive recesses of our brain and is not likely to be expunged by simple debate about alternative ways of looking at our world.

Fearful people are putty in the hands of such information outlets as Fox News, which is blasting colored news reports, conspiracy theories and negative stereotypes round the clock. Such alarmism makes perfect sense to these citizens, even to the point of welcoming a Biblical armageddon as a cleansing operation for this present world. The net result is a stance that mandates that we pull in our resources, protect what is ours, and hate those who are no part of us.

For example:

Disease-ridden immigrants are overrunning our border defenses. Non-whites are aggregating too much power for our republic to stand. Capitalism and our guns will protect us from government overreach. Science is basically an atheistic enterprise bent on destroying well-established Biblical tenets. Birth control is abortion by another name and part of a movement to reduce the white population and equalize power among women and minorities.

This type of thinking leads, then, to some extraordinary beliefs. For example, no need to worry about the health of our planet, our CO2 belching lifestyle, or greenhouse gasses because Jesus is returning soon (discussion closed). Since God has blessed America in the past, we have to be the police of the world and intervene wherever it seems appropriate. And, since we’re the good guys, we must always prevail.

Superstition and even lies are accepted as okay because they reinforce these beliefs. This leads to a situation where even established “facts” are derided as evil propaganda. Ignorance is openly celebrated, because to “know” too much will lead one astray.

When our republic was new, the immigrants who poured in were often displaced populations who wanted to breathe free. They were often poor with little to lose and were banking on the promise that hard work equals prosperity.

Now our country has become the overlord, bent on protecting our eroding turf. We have no use for a rising tide that will lift all boats. Indeed, all boats are not worthy of being lifted, many would say.

Fearful societies are not generous, are quick to blame others, and have a tendency to hold onto simple-minded solutions that religious and political fundamentalists are happy to teach.

And there is no easy way to offer a counter view. A more liberal philosophy is harder to create and promulgate in bumper sticker sound bites. A liberal view, by definition, requires a more creative, patient outlook to see long-range results. The nuance often comes off as equivocation (or double-mindedness). Liberalism is often viewed as a sacrifice of individual rights for the good of the many, and even goes against the notion that there are no “self-made men.” A liberal mind seeks cooperation between groups for the sake of the common good. A liberal outlook can see over the mountain to a more hopeful future, not based on chains, but on a generosity that may not be immediately obvious.

The article quotes John Jost, a researcher with several decades of data under his belt:

There is by now evidence from a variety of laboratories around the world using a variety of methodological techniques leading to the virtually inescapable conclusion that the cognitive-motivational styles of leftists and rightists are quite different.

This research consistently finds that conservatism is positively associated with heightened epistemic concerns for order, structure, closure, certainty, consistency, simplicity, and familiarity, as well as existential concerns such as perceptions of danger, sensitivity to threat, and death anxiety.


One of the reasons for this blog is to help fellow travelers move away from the errant and mistaken Fundamentalist view of Jesus and Christianity to a more revolutionary (and accurate First Century) view of his character and message. Salvation is not an adherence to a bunch of rules that limit our world, but an opening of the eyes of our heart to his message that the Kingdom of God is here now. The banquet is prepared. We are all welcome to it. This belief makes us open our arms ready to live from abundance and embrace a world that needs the hope that Christ provides.


Posted in Both Faith and Politics | Leave a comment

Help For Poor Families From Someone Who Knows

Tianna Gaines-Turner, a child-care worker from Philadelphia, spoke before a Congressional committee last week. She’s no power player. She’s a low-wage worker who, with her husband, have been squeezing out a living for the last decade.

Several times over the years, they thought that they were on the way to a better life, but some emergency, illness or event robbed them of any extra security. Their condition remains stagnant or worse.

Laziness is not the problem. She and her husband leave home before daylight every day and arrived back home long after the sun has gone down.

Her remarks, captured here on the Bill Moyers site, contains some very thoughtful and well laid out advice to lifting poor families out of poverty.

But are her remarks reaching anyone on the Paul Ryan-chaired  committee?

Gaines-Turner was chosen to represent a group to which she belongs, Witnesses to Hunger program. She asked the committee to use her group, real families who are called “the working poor,” to be consulted on any ideas the Congress may try to pass. Imagine that: an actual constituent actually participating in actual legislation that actually effects them.



Posted in Both Faith and Politics | Leave a comment