Trying to catch up. I have not had my computer for a couple
of weeks. But we did have a whole lot of social activities and three different
groups of house guests. This is a VERY rare thing for us these days. Mostly we
stay at home and putter and do errands and occasionally have a conversation in
the street with a neighbor or maybe the grocery clerk. No socializing, no guests. But, whenever it rains, it pours. I slept 12 hours straight after the last
guests left. So, the social whirl is over, the bed linens have been washed and
rewashed three separate times and put back on beds to stay for a while, I have
my fixed computer back and a few moments to catch up.
So, Barr's speech
Jean: The main problem I see is that Barr is
over-generalizing about religion, the Media, the Founders, and everything else.
What simple-minded pablum.
When I read his speech, my reaction was the same as Jean's –
over-generalizing and simple-minded.
First of all, he fails to notice that many countries that more or less gave
up religion for secularism during the last 50+ years are doing better than the far-more-religious USA as far
as dysfunctional behavior is concerned.
One sees this in Europe, especially western Europe, and in countries
such as Japan, Australia, New Zealand, Canada etc. International data available at the links
below.
Michael Sean Winters does a pretty good job critiquing it.
I thought the Guardian article cited by Margaret was more or less spot-on
also.
Links for international data on marriage, divorce, etc.
Suicide data (a lot of “secular” countries doing better than
the US): http://worldpopulationreview.com/countries/suicide-rate-by-country/
Abortion rates (USA among the highest – much higher than most
w. European countries): http://worldpopulationreview.com/countries/abortion-rates-by-country/
Mental health/addiction: https://www.webmd.com/mental-health/addiction/news/20190221/us-leads-rich-nations-in-drug-overdose-deaths
Drug use: https://ourworldindata.org/drug-use
Divorce rates (USA is more or less high end of middle, with
many more secular countries doing better): http://worldpopulationreview.com/countries/divorce-rates-by-country/
Marriage rates (6.9
marriages/1000 population in the US): https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-eurostat-news/-/EDN-20190214-1?inheritRedirect=true
Children under 18 living with both biological parents (higher
even in godless, secular Sweden than in the religious USA):
Drepression: I had
some trouble finding equivalent information. But it appears that depression rates in the
US and depression in the EU countries may be roughly comparable.
Anne, I agree, having house guests is exhausting. Even if you love them, even if you want to see them. Glad your computer is working again.
ReplyDeleteIt doesn't appear that we're making America great again, or still. About the religion thing, I am cautious about conflating causation and correlation. At the least, it doesn't seem that we have been very good of late at applying our religious principles to public policy, such as the social safety net, and caring for the sick and poor.
Anne, welcome back.
ReplyDeleteChurch attendance in the USA is strongly associated with better health, happiness, and doing good for others (e.g. giving of time and money to secular as well as church charities).
The book American Grace and its associated study made clearer the mechanism of this effect. It resides in the religious networks associated with people who attend church regularly. That is, attenders who have religious networks of family, friends and small groups have these benefits. Those who attend but do not have religious networks don’t have any benefits. As Putnam one of its authors said, “going to church alone is like bowling alone.”
While non-religious networks also have some of these effects, religious networks have much stronger effects.
This may be a particularly American phenomenon, and have much to do with our relative lack of safety nets, both governmental and familiar. Other countries which either have strong government safety nets or strong family safety nets may not need the religious networks which are associated with health, happiness and doing good for others.
Around the world tradition values (belief in God, family, law, the value of human life) tend to be strong in agrarian societies. They constitute the safety net against bad weather and poor crops.
When industrialization occurs religious values tend to be replaced by secular values since workers are dependent upon a salary rather than the weather or their families. People who worked in factories or for large corporations where often able to plan for life time employment and job security.
Now that advanced nations are service economies, life has shifted from the basics to self expression, and there is evidence that religion has changed its role to serve more psychological functions (e.g. spirituality) rather than social functions (e.g. getting people to behave according to the values of the society).
All these explained in great length in the world values study
here
Jack, interesting. Was the world values study part of "American Grace"?
DeleteSecularism is an ism without a prophet. There is no distinct theory of secularism. So whether you are attracted to its apparent social outcomes, like fewer suicides, or are appalled, as Barr was, you are talking about everything that is different from the Middle Ages and nothing.
ReplyDeleteI'd rather talk about corporate capitalism. It may not explain everything, but it explains a lot of things other people attribute to secularism. Here are three:
1. Bowling alone. A lot of companies and unions used to support bowling teams or leagues. Companies don't anymore because togetherness isn't seen as adding to the dividend. Unions don't because they almost no longer exist.
2. Church non-attendance. Traveling team soccer, basketball and baseball games are played on Sunday morning because it's the only time family-oriented Dads can coach without having to postpone and cancel for job duties. The family that plays together doesn't have time to go to church.
3. Corporate capitalism has met many of our necessities and provided goods that make life better. But it has also sold us any number of entertaining distractions that produce almost compulsive behavior to replace social interactions.
You could skim Barr's entire list of horrors, and in most cases there would be the real or imagined needs of a Boss lurking in the background. The Sabbath was made for man, but seven days a week are at-will for the job.
Tom, you just touched on a subject that is one of my pet peeves. That is the degree to which sports have come to dominate the scene. Not just pro sports where the players make insane bucks, but going all the way down to preschool. It's getting so it's hard to find time to spend with the grandkids, because they're always doing some kind of sports activity. The oldest one is in volleyball. She's good at it, I'm glad she likes it. But they even schedule practice on Sunday afternoon. She goes to a Catholic school, so at least they don't schedule Sunday morning. But we're talking 6th graders. I guess one's quality time is going to be in the bleachers!
DeleteThere was a book review in Commonweal a couple of weeks back. The book was "Dominion: How the Christian Revolution Remade the World" by Tom Holland. I haven't read the book (it is to be released Oct. 29).
ReplyDeleteThe theme of the book seems to be summarized in this paragraph from the Commonweal review:
"...the “Christian revolution” has proved so successful in remaking the West that, two millennia on, it has become virtually impossible to separate Christianity from Western civilization. Whether we like it or not, we in the West inhabit a world that remains structured by Christian assumptions and informed by Christian ideas. Political and civic institutions, legal systems, codes of behavior, artistic tastes, practices of everyday life—they all, in one way or another, visibly or invisibly, bear the mark of Christ. The Christian revolution has been so complete, observes Holland, that two thousand years after his birth, it is no longer necessary to believe “that he rose from the dead to be stamped by the formidable—indeed the inescapable—influence of Christianity.” However secular one’s lifestyle might be, to live in today’s West is “to live in a society still utterly saturated by Christian concepts and assumptions.”
Is the book any good? I don't know yet, but there is enough there to make me curious enough to want to read it.
Religions are useful for stabilizing societies and keeping people in line. So are fraternal organizations, corporations, book clubs, schools, and sports teams. All these institutions, of course, can have a destabilizing effect when they are beset by infighting or become obsessed with an outside "enemy."
ReplyDeleteFaith is a whole other thing. I think that the effects of faith on society can be seen through the actions of the saints who followed the prime directive to bring God's love to others.
Apologists for religion (or fraternal organizations, corporations, etc.) like AG Barr are not always saints.
A lot of interesting points made here that I need time to think about.
ReplyDeleteIn the meantime, it bothers me that conservative Catholics like Barr and Pompeo are using their government posts to essentially try to make the case that it is appropriate for government officials to express specific (conservative christian) views in the context of their government jobs. Perhaps Barr's speech was OK - it was given by invitation to a Catholic university. Pompeo's placement of his christian talk on the website of the State Dept seems borderline illegal to me.
The coalition of conservative christians - evangelicals and conservative Catholics - seems to be working towards undermining the separation of church and state. Their cries of persecution, and their fear that their religious liberty is being infringed seems off-base. Christians are the majority in this country; most politicians are "christian" or at least claim a religion (at least nominall), ditto the judiciary. Their concept of religious liberty seems to be that they wish the liberty to enshrine their christian beliefs in law, and that religious freedom should be for christians primarily, not for non-christians, including atheists. They also seem to be saying, without evidence, that social problems would go away if only conservative christian views are made official law in the US - apparently by using the judiciary to impose those views on all.
It is clear that religious participation is not essential in the superior outcomes of many countries who have lower rates of societal dysfunction (divorce, marriage rates, abortion rates, teen pregnancy etc)than does the US.
You all have brought up some other issues - such as the change in corporate capitalism. The "bowling alone" theory may also be specific to the US. I do not know if other countries have a tradition of this type of formal activity, of fraternal organizations, etc. But, they are part of the modern world, and they also have adopted a social media, individual device for entertainment, lifestyle. Yet it does not seem that those countries see this as damaging the well-being of their citizens. They don't make modern communications media into a scapegoat.
Christianity may have seeped into the pores of western civilization over two thousand years, but it is also dying out as part of daily life in western civilization. Including in the US. It is dying in the rich nations, and growing in the poorer nations. Perhaps wealth and education are at the root of the dying out. I have been told that most Christians converts in India are from the lower castes. Due to the treastment they receive in their culture, and the explanation of their status in their religion, it is easy to see why the christian message would be attractive. In poor countries where there is little hope for a government action that would free them from extreme poverty, from wars and suffering, it is easy to see why christian hope is something to cling to. In the early years of christianity, the message was strongly welcomed by those of lower status - women, slaves, servants, the poor - before it was embraced by those with wealth and power (Constantine on).
It concerns me that at least some conservative Christians seem to desire religious freedom for themselves, but not for others who don't fit into their mold. Freedom "for me, but not for thee".
DeleteA lot of conservative Christians feel their freedom to express religious thought is repressed.
DeleteWe were talking about treatment meds in our cancer group, and a new guy who is some type of evangelical went on a big exhortation about how the only real healing is through our personal salvation through Christ Jesus, and wanted to close meetings with a Christian prayer for a cute (this cancer is incurable).
The group leader took him aside later and nicely pointed out the religious diversity in our group and suggested he form a prayer chain outside of meetings.
He was kinda huffy about it, but did as she suggested.
This has more or less divided the group into those who want spiritual Christian healing wrapped into the group, and those who want general fellowship and shared medical info.
This is really not what a bunch of sick people need.
Sounds like your group leader handed it right. Those who want a prayer group can form one on their own.
DeleteTo underscore two points Anne made at 2:32 p.m.yesterday:
Delete"Christians are the majority in this country; most politicians are "christian" or at least claim a religion (at least nominall), ditto the judiciary. Their concept of religious liberty seems to be that they wish the liberty to enshrine their christian beliefs in law, and that religious freedom should be for christians primarily, not for non-christians, including atheists." They do. I think the reason may be that they sense the eroding of their majority position and are fighting to remain top dog. But if they don't fight fairly, they aren't Christian.
"I have been told that most Christians converts in India are from the lower castes. Due to the treastment they receive in their culture, and the explanation of their status in their religion, it is easy to see why the christian message would be attractive." That is also a description of the first Christians in the Roman Empire. If someone is a stable genius who "built that myself" s/he is unlikely to see much up side in Christian religion.
And speaking of India, the ones who think religious liberty should be primarily for Christians should consider an opposite sketch, the government of India's President Modi. Who thinks religious freedom should be primarily for Hindus. Violence against Christians in India has increased dramatically since this alpha male nationalist was elected (deja vu, anyone?) However, this article makes the point that Modi may not be able to overcome the economic policies of his government. Including massive demonetization, in which 86% of the currency was taken out of circulation.
DeleteA side surprise in this article about India and Modi is that our acting secretary of state has been playing a moderating role in India's sticky Kashmir situation. Imagine that, someone in Trump's government trying to do diplomacy.
I was in India a couple of years ago, during demonetization. It was a pain in the nether regions. It's hard to be a visitor or tourist without cash.
DeleteJim, I don't even understand how that could work, with taking that much cash out of circulation. How did their whole economy not crash? I'm sure it was a royal pain for visitors, not to mention the locals.
DeleteI was there for two weeks, on a business trip, and we lived in the American-business-visitor bubble while we were there - which is to say, we were shielded from the poverty, misery and unrest.
DeleteA car service transported us each morning and evening from our luxurious American chain hotel to our modern offices in the sleek, new India. While we were there, the Uber drivers went on strike, and many of the taxi drivers walked out with them. So our car service, and other car services transporting Americans which we saw on the roads, put signs on the outside of their cars which said, "Transporting Americans" or some such. The idea was that these cars would be exempt from whatever retaliation might be visited on drivers who didn't honor the strike.
State elections also coincided with our visit - on the very day (a Saturday, I think) we visited Taj Mahal. Our hotel arranged for a minibus to take us to Agra and back, but several of our Indian coworkers volunteered to accompany us on the trip, because they were worried that Americans might be targeted on on election day, when nationalist passions run high.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/26/opinion/sunday/christianity-united-states.html
ReplyDeleteNick Kristoff says God ought to sue (Pat) Robertson and (Jerry) Falwell for libel. He attributes to them the datum that only 49% of millennials identify as Christian. (Gays and lesbians outscore Evangelicals in approval ratings, according to the same Pew survey.) Kristof blames religio-conservative blowhards. IMO he could add Catholic bishops and attorneys general who deplore secularism. But that's just me.
Meanwhile, the Trump Org's Woman in Scotland says Trump properties there would be doing much better if the Great Man could get away from his onerous duties -- and the emoluments "act" -- to play some golf at Aberdeen. [You can't expect a Scottish executive to know the difference between a law and a constitutional clause if her boss doesn't.) She spoke at a fringy Scottish church associated with sketchy American televangelists in an event sponsored by The Trinity Broadcasting Network. In passing, the Scotsman mentioned that TBN execs stay at Trump properties. Don't tell them religion isn't profitable. The whole story is fascinating.
ttps://www.scotsman.com/news/world/trumps-frustrated-at-inability-to-pursue-foreign-investment-deals-says-trump-org-executive-1-5033346
Don't we all wish Trump would go to Aberdeen and play golf, and stay there!
DeleteThe Nick Kristof column is behind a paywall, but I read enough from the teaser paragraph they let you see to conclude that I agree with him. The blowhards are doing a great job of reverse evangelism to increase the number of "nones".
Militant Christianity is a problem, but so is indifferent Christianity.
DeleteThen there is Christianity as a money-making racket. The movie about Madalyn Murray O'Hair, "The Most Hated Woman in America," features her road show with Rev. Bob Harrington, and they split the gate.
Con man or man of God? Here's his obit. https://nobts.edu/gatekeeper/news/2017/bob-harrington,-chaplain-of-bourbon-street-dies-at-89.html
Remember the "700 Club"? And Jim Bakker, and Tammie Faye. That was a bona fide scam, and he ended up serving time over it. Tammie Faye was another story; I think she really believed in what they were selling.
Delete"A side surprise in this article about India and Modi is that our acting secretary of state has been playing a moderating role in India's sticky Kashmir situation. "
ReplyDeleteI hadn't heard that, but I'm glad to hear it. Just FYI, Pompeo isn't one of the "Acting" cabinet members - he was confirmed by the Senate. Given who his boss is, there may be nobody in Washington with a tougher job.
Jim, sorry, I misspoke. It wasn't Pompeo, it was acting assistant secretary of state, Alice Wells.
DeleteI confess I didn't visit all the links Anne provided in the post, but I do think the comparisons of our American culture and society to those of other advanced nations is interesting. I agree with Katherine that it's somewhat difficult to discern the precise role of religion in all this. At least some (most?) of the advanced European nations actually have state religions, so they are not comparable to us in every respect. The chief issue which Barr sought to address in his speech was, Given that there is no state sponsorship of religion in the US, how much religious freedom should be permitted, especially to those who are in the minority (like Evangelicals or Catholics).
ReplyDeleteI don't think it's surprising in some ways that some European nations have better social outcomes. There may well be tradeoffs between personal liberty and social outcomes. It seems to me that one of the fundamental issues that Americans try to navigate via their politics is: What is the appropriate balance between individual freedom and social care? For example: a majority of Americans seem willing to put up with a higher incidence of gun violence as an unintended consequence of personal liberty.
For what it's worth...another NYTimes piece on Barr from the Sunday Review section.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/10/26/opinion/william-barr-trump.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage
The NYT article is pretty scathing of Barr. But this statement is certainly true:
Delete"...the lesson is the same one that applies throughout the administration: The fallout from the president’s maneuvering taints the people around him."
Jim, what an interesting time to be in India. We were tourists in a couple of countries over the years during periods of “unrest”. Very educational – opened our eyes to what happens elsewhere.
ReplyDeleteWhat “individual freedoms” do Europeans give up other than owning private guns without controls? Most countries in the OECD permit private gun ownership. They also have controls – registration, licensing that requires official training, waiting periods, bans on automatic weapons that are designed only to kill as many people as possible as fast as possible. They can own guns for hunting, and guns for their homes, but they must be vetted, trained properly, and licensed. This could theoretically allow the govt to know where to go to confiscate guns. Not a likely scenario. However, the numbers of deaths from guns in those countries is miniscule compared to here. In conversations with Europeans, the main reaction re America and guns is “What’s with Americans and guns?” They don’t get it. I don’t either.
I don’t see anything in American life that has more “individual freedom” than is enjoyed by Europeans. In some ways, I would say they have more freedom,
1. Freedom from several important worries:
*Health care - affordable access to health care; affordable medications. They don’t have to drive to another country to buy medicine, as some Americans do, or skip dosages, or buy from an untrustworthy source on the internet. Some diabetics drive to Canada to buy insulin, which they can’t afford here, or order from Canadian pharmacies on the web (technically against the law).
*Worry about the cost of educating their children to a level where they can get a decent job – affordable higher education, but also a different secondary school system that prepares young people for good jobs without a uni degree.
*Worry about retirement – they will have enough for a decent retirement, even if not luxurious. All the necessities though. They don’t have to worry that the latest stock market crash has taken most of their retirement savings. They also don’t have to worry about losing a pension from a company they worked for over decades that now can’t pay them.
2. Freedom of movement – if they live in an EU country, they can pursue the best job opportunities available, moving to another country in the EU for work without concern for visas and work permits. If the best educational option is in a different country, they can attend university there for the same cost as a national of the country. My French d-i-law did all of her higher education in England – BS, two masters, and a PhD – with the same tuition as an English student. Her parents felt that total fluency in English would be a big advantage in life.
If traveling in a different EU country, their health care cards will work there also. Some Brits are referred to hospitals in France for non-emergency surgery (such as hip replacement) that they may have to wait months or years for in England (the British NHS is the worst of the systems in Europe). Their British NHS card works there too. At least for now.
3. Freedom to spend more time with their families: with shorter work weeks (some countries limit it to 35-40 hours – more than that is illegal except for certain jobs) they can have dinner with the family. With 4-6 weeks annual vacation, even more time for family. My husband averaged 50-55 hours/week for 48 years - retired at 70 and worked part-time for 3 more years.
4. Freedom to take time off after the birth of a child. Generally full salary for months; a guarantee that the job will be available to return to (3 years in France); subsidized quality childcare when returning to work.
Nobody works the crazy hours Americans do except for the Japanese. My French d-i-law says the difference is that Americans live to work and that Europeans work to live.
Perhaps this, and not “freedom from religion” accounts for a higher quality of life and lower rates of social dysfunction.
Yes - some countries still have “state” religions, but participation is very, very low.
Anne - yes, it's an interesting list, and you make some good points. I suppose what is quintessentially American (or at least a lot of Americans think so) is the freedom, and the responsibility, of taking care of some of these things themselves, rather than depending on the government and the whole society to do it. To borrow a phrase that has entered political discourse in recent years, there is a strong streak of "I built this myself" among Americans.
DeleteI do think that, in the US, there is a lot of desire to make family leave more humane than it is now. I wouldn't be surprised to see improvements in that law, during our lifetimes, I hope.
Similarly, I think there is an opportunity to replace COBRA with something more humane. It seems insane to make workers pay the full cost of their health care, just at the time where their income has fallen to zero. (Does Obamacare alleviate that? I'm not certain.)
Jim, I think she has you on the advantages of having more time off and less to worry about.
DeleteI wonder where Americans (who remain mostly of European origin (but are increasingly -- over the president's objections -- becoming of Latin American origin) got the idea that it's more fun to work than to fish. (Teach a man to fish, and you have created a lazy bum; give a man a job, and he'll be able to buy his own fish?)
Possible answer: Ivy Lee; Whittaker & Baxter; Batten, Barton, Durstine & Osborn? But they created concepts, not goods or services. Americans wouldn't fall for that, would they, Marboro Man?
Jim, One thing you might have offered is Americans benefit from other countries' health care system. Wife of a friend of mine broke an arm in Canada. After treatment, he asked how he could pay for it. "You can"t," they said. "We have no way to bill you." Another friend needed minor surgery in Italy. When he offered a credit card, hospital officials told him, "What do you think we are -- a bank?" Innocents abroad, and not as proud as they used to be of their American health care system. So Americans can get it free and don't need no stinkin' card. We're No. 1!
DeleteAnecdotal - I started researching the health care systems of other countries after my husband had a stroke in France years ago. "Socialized medicine" was a dirty word in my house - as bad and scary as "godless communism". I believed my mother - for years. I believed the Republican party - for years. But eventually I learned to question - my mother, the church, and even the GOP.
ReplyDeleteSince we are not French citizens, the care (which was excellent) was not free (not free for the French either, since they cover it through personal and employer taxes - sort of like "medicare for all". But "free" at the time of service and universal access even if poor or unemployed. They won't ever be dunned with bills). We were eventually billed for it – one bill for three different hospitals, two lengthy ambulance rides, multiple high-tech tests (CAT, MRIs, Echos, ECGs etc), a couple of specialists besides the neurologist. The total bill was about $6000. He came home and spent two days at Johns Hopkins - one test, and one 4 hour repair of their interventional radiologist's error in dissecting his femoral artery. The bill, should we have had to pay it, came to more than $75,000. That's what people without health insurance would have been expected to pay. That's why so many uninsured end up in bankruptcy court because they can't pay their medical bills. The insurance company's rate was about $35,000 - still hefty compared to France, which involved a longer stay, more tests, etc. My husband was recently hospitalized for two days. He spent one night in the recovery room after an angiogram – and one night in a real room for a suspected heart condition - that bill pushed $90K. Medicare did not pay the whole amount of course. Fortunately we have medigap insurance as well.
Dramatic difference in hospital costs
A French friend was in France a couple of years ago and needed stitches. Her cost (she's not under the system there because she has lived and worked in the US for 19 years) was $35. She paid cash.
Although the US has by far the most expensive medical care in the world it ranks around 37th in quality outcomes. The American medical care system is also the only system in the OECD that is based on profit - hospitals', insurance companies', pharma profits.
I am now a believer in "socialized medicine" - it costs less, covers everyone, and has better outcomes than our system. I now believe that health care is a citizen's right, as are public schools, and roads, and police and fire - costs that should be shared by all citizens, even those who don't use them all (such as public schools). Some kind of universal health care should be supported by ALL who claim to be christians.
Tom - I was curious and looked up Canada and treating Americans. Apparently SOP is that they send a bill - as was done by France after we got home.
OECD figures
https://www.pgpf.org/blog/2019/07/how-does-the-us-healthcare-system-compare-to-other-countries
Forbes article (a nice, conservative business magazine)
… before the second Dem .. debates, Sanders traveled across the border in a bus ...to purchase insulin for around one-tenth of the U.S. price. He labeled the situation "a national embarrassment".
So …how does the American healthcare system compare with other countries? … taking a look at healthcare spending per capita in different countries is …a good starting point. OECD data shows that U.S. healthcare spending per capita (including public and private spending) is higher than anywhere else in the world by a considerable margin, despite the fact that the country lags behind other nations in areas such as life expectancy and health insurance coverage.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/niallmccarthy/2019/08/08/how-us-healthcare-spending-per-capita-compares-with-other-countries-infographic/#2236e773575d
Anne, If my friend had gotten a bill from Canada, he would have let everyone know about it. He was a Scotsman and lived all the way down to the stereotype of tight. If you went to lunch with him, you knew you were paying for two.
DeleteHis wife's experience was long ago, and the inability to bill foreigners may not yet have been fixed for foreigners. Or, since it happened in one of the Western Provinces (Alberta, I think), where you can still see cowboys, and everyone is your friend, maybe that particular hospital just wasn't bothering to collect on the day his wife was there.
My friend whose credit card was refused in Italy has an Italian last name. But he said the doctor was deeply offended when he pulled out the card.
Tom, maybe the Alberta folk are sort of Libertarian - not wanting to bother with the government imposed bureaucratic hassles of making up bills to send to wandering Yanks?
ReplyDelete