America: A Nation of Exiles, Misfits, and Second Chances. But has it gone too far?

America. There has always been something truly unique about this country. People of all sorts have been coming here almost ever since its discovery, and they keep coming despite all our faults and failures (and there are many).  Nations, far older than us, are constantly comparing themselves to us. We’ve become the world’s yardstick for practically everything, but who are we really?

We don’t tend to think about it much, but most of those who came here to settle were misfits and exiles. They were people who didn’t fit into society any longer. They came to escape the restrictions their native country had placed on them. For many, they were locked into an economic and social caste system irrespective of their intelligence, ability, or motivation.  

Many were just one slippery step from debtor’s prison. Others had already fell victim to the harsh judicial system, often for petty crimes committed in the name of survival. The lucky one’s found themselves “transported”. This was a way to be rid of petty criminals, social deviants, and malcontents while emptying out their overcrowded prisons and relieving a marginal social safety net based largely on charity.  They were typically sent abroad as “indentured servants” to work off their sentences in places which were often difficult and dangerous (Georgia and the swamplands of South Carolina were often a key destinations).

Meanwhile, others simply wanted to chance to start life over again and a chance to show the world (and themselves) what they could do if given the opportunity, and so they came by the tens of thousands.  Many bore  the same title of “indentured servant” as the felons, though under slightly better circumstances in most cases.

These individuals were mostly young, poor, marginally educated, with very limited opportunities. Many were orphaned. They voluntarily leased themselves out for a set period of time. This usually covered their passage (typically in steerage) as well as their labor with the hopes that, in the end, they would get their chance at a new life. It was a difficult and often risky choice, with many never seeing the end of their bondage, but it was better than what awaited them if they had remained.

A surprisingly large segment of immigrants also came to avoid religious persecution. It was commonplace for each country to have an official religion, often headed by a monarch,  to which everyone was expected to participate, if not in person, then financially. It wasn’t uncommon for so-called “dissenters” to find themselves harassed by authorities, fined, imprisoned, or stripped of everything they owned in order to pay the mandatory tithes. This new country demanded none of that. There would be no state mandated religion.  It’s easy to understand why, to believers, this was seen as the “promised land”.

Not much has really changed in all those centuries since the first Europeans set foot on this continent. We still attract the world’s misfits, exiles, and those looking to start over. America is a different sort of country. It is not a nation which evolved organically over time like Europe or Asia. We came about in less than a blink of an eye in terms of history. We were created as an experiment, born out of a sense of justice, fair play, and individual sovereignty.

 In lieu of having a long history to shape our nation, ours was based a heritage of ideas stemming from the Enlightenment, Judeo-Christian morals, and the philosophies of the Near East, Ancient Greece and Rome.  Even our government was modelled on the Roman Republic. All of which is nicely summed up in our traditional national motto---"E pluribus Unum” (“Out of Many, One”) along with our official national motto, “In God We Trust”, which reflects the desire of many to come here to seeking their religious freedom.   

The Statue of Liberty, which graces the entry into New York, reminds us that we are still a nation of second chances. It’s often the first thing arriving immigrants see. The plaque at its base bears the  famous poem by Emma Lazarus entitled “The New Colossus” which speaks of America as the “Mother of Exiles”. It urges the world to “…Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breath free. The wretched refuse of teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift up my lamp beside the golden door!”

Marvelous words expressing the aim of America to welcome all those seeking to be free, but something has changed since those words were pinned in 1883. America was conceived of as a welcoming melting pot, where all would leave behind the worthless hatreds and prejudices from wherever they came. Here they would become a new people---“Americans”--- sharing a common language with a shared set of values, laws, and uniquely American traditions.

Somewhere along the way something changed. We no longer concerned ourselves with those who come here in defiance of our laws. We stopped being proud to be Americans. Today, we have some 13+ million illegals living here with millions using taxpayer based social services they never paid for. They have no interest in adopting our language, laws, traditions or values. Worse, we have politicians, cities and groups which are fine with that. What happened?

According to a U.S. government budget committee report on the costs of illegal immigrants to taxpayers dated January 11, 2024, 69% of illegal immigrants don’t have an education beyond high school (compared to 35% of Americans) which impacts their work skills and employability. Each individual cost taxpayers approximately $68,000 each over their lifetime or about $42 billion.  In addition, the children of illegal immigrates (including children born in the U.S. of parents here illegally) received roughly $68.1 billion dollars (as of 2019) in taxpayers funded services. Taxpayers also picked emergency care and other medical costs to the tune of $7 billion dollars annually.

Some hid behind the 14^th Amendment, which was intended to provide citizenship for recently freed slaves following the Civil War, in order to claim legal status, thanks “anchor babies” as noted above. More recently, others have claimed asylum status when they’re only seeking employment without applying for a work permit (employment isn’t recognized as a legitimate reason for asylum status under international law).  Still others send their children with strangers and then come seeking to be reunited with them.

Even certain religious institutions blatantly choose to ignore immigrations laws, believing that somehow they are exempt from following the law, and going as far as not just encouraging them to migrate, but providing them with shelter, housing, job contacts, and even how to manipulate the system to access taxpayer based services. Of course, these immigrants fill pews and church coffers, as well as improve their political clout.

We became fixated on the “right” of these individuals to enter our country undeterred while other nations, ever anxious to rid themselves of hungry mouths they can’t afford thanks to antiquated societal norms, openly proclaim that we had no legal right to protect and secure our border.

Somehow, our right of national sovereignty had come under attack while their sovereignty remained securely intact. Immigrants now come, not to be Americans, but to transplant their country, language, values, traditions, and all! Some intend to even transplant their religious values despite not being compatible with ours. We’re the ones expected to conform and adopt, not the immigrant. What went wrong?

Our  English language is treated as unimportant. The government now caters to “diversity” instead of promoting emersion. Immigrants view the taxpayer funded social security net as an entitlement just for being here. They regularly send money home to support their families and community, which is perfectly fine. But why do they refuse to apply for work permits and pay their fair share of taxes to the country which makes it all possible?

At about the same time, we started to see more and more people no longer identifying as Americans. They had become hyphenated Americans, be it cultural, racial, ethnic, or whatever. In addition, the very notion of “American” increasingly became as a form of slander. The “ugly American” of the 1960’s had suddenly returned home.

We were increasingly taught to be ashamed of our collective history. Entire chapters of our history have become distorted and rewritten. Critical thinking skills have been replaced, and with it, the quality of education. Discipline is now seen as a form of suppression. In colleges and universities, students aren’t expected to take responsibility for the debts they willingly incurred despite many earning majors where there is no demand in the job market.

Even the Pledge of Allegiance is no longer publicly acceptable. Neither are displays of the American flag (which is now considered a “trigger object”).  Statues and monuments deemed “offensive” by a select few are defaced, vandalized, and removed.  Individuals with criminal histories are portrayed as heroes while law enforcement is viewed with contempt.

While America has always welcomed various religions, how do we deal with a religion which wants to impose its own religious laws on society, going so far as verbal and physically attacking people, blocking sidewalks and traffic while they “pray”? They become incensed at criticism of their faith but encourage attacks on other religions. In Europe, this has proven to be a disaster as the governments continually cave to their demands while punishing the victims.  

This is all part of a new narrative being preached throughout America---the “Gospel of Political Correctness” as proclaimed by so-called “woke” Millennials and Gen Z. To contradict the gospel in any way is regarded as blasphemy or heresy, often resulting in being  “canceled” (sounds like a euphemism used by the Gestapo or KGB). The good news, however, is that you’re freely entitled to their opinion at any time, whether you want it or not.

How does a nation founded on freedom of speech, religion, and association cope with this? How does a nation protect its national security when our borders are ignored?  How do we address the issue of hyphenated loyalties, a declining education system, no common language, or an agreed upon history survive? Historically, nations similar to this  have become ungovernable and ultimately imploded. No nation can be pulled in multiple directions and hold in the long run  (I’m reminded of Yugoslavia, the Austro-Hungarian Empire, as well as the Ancient Roman Republic).

I’m reminded of a quote by Theodore Roosevelt (perhaps our greatest president and certainly my favorite). In speaking before the Knights of Columbus at Carnegie Hall in 1915, the former president addressed many of these same issues when he said, “In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this predicated upon the person’s becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American…There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he’s an American , but something else also, isn’t an American at all. We have room but for one flag…We have room for one language here, and that is the English language…and we have room for but one sole loyalty, and that loyalty is to the American people”.

I couldn’t have said it better Teddy. Well done. The question  which needs to be addressed is whether we are going to heed Roosevelt’s word, spoken some 110 years ago or are we going to go the way of the Yugoslavia past or current Europe? America has always been a country of second chances for those with nowhere else to go. But for us, here and now, there’s no place for us to go. There’s no one coming to our rescue. Republics rarely, if ever, get second chances.

 

Thank you for reading "Another Opinion", the Op/Ed blog page for the "militant middle".  Here at "A/O" we truly value our readers. At A/O we seek the facts as they exist, not partisan talking points.  We hope you find our articles informative and engaging. Comments are welcome, provided they are not vulgar, insulting or demeaning.  Another Opinion is offered without charge and is directed toward all independent and free-thinking individuals. We ask, however, that you "like" us on whatever platform you found us on in order to keep our articles available for free to others. Lastly, in order to keep costs down, we depend on passive marketing, and therefore, depend on our readers to please forward our posts along. Below you will find links to the sources we used in writing this article. Thank you. 

 

Poems: The New Colossus

“Americanism”  by Theodore Roosevelt (1915)

Theodore Roosevelt: No Room in This Country for Hyphenated Americans

Hyphenate American

House Judicial Subcommittee Report: The Costs of IllegalImmigration to Taxpayers

Indentured Servants  

Protesting God's Chosen People: What's Happening on America's College Campuses?

Originally I had intended to write about the protests taking place on several college and university campuses in America, however, I realized that there was much more going on here. The protests appear to be about  a number of issues such as college investments in the defense industry, at least partly, by disinvesting  of anything which supports Israel. 

They want  their school to disinvest of anything which supports Israel. They are also protesting Israel ending its so-called "genocide" of Gaza and occupation of Palestine. What's more is that the protesters have started shouting down Jewish students on campus and blocking them from class. In short, these are anti-Israeli protests, which is a rarity here in America. They have become anti-Semitic protests. 

In addition, the protestors would like to see a change in U.S. foreign policy towards Israel. Specifically cutting back or eliminating all military support and ending what some call America's "blanket approval" of supporting nearly everything Israel does, especially towards the Palestine.  

There's big money in war and no doubt the various institutions are making good money on their investments in the defense industry. Keeping the U.S. a war footing  is a great way to stimulate an otherwise lackluster economy. Also many of these colleges have 6+ figure contracts with the DoD and defense contractors to conduct research for them and don't forget, college campuses are stocked with potential recruits like fish in a pay lake!

While the students would like to see a change in U.S. foreign policy toward Israel, the exchange of goods aren't the primary concern of the students. Their focus is on what the U.S. provides Israel in terms of military aid. That figure is around $15 billion dollars. 

Of that, the majority of the money---$5 billion---goes towards Israel's "Iron Dome" which is used to protect Israel from missile attacks, primarily launched by Hezbollah and Hamas (and more recently, ISIS and Al Qaeda operating in Syria). In addition, the U.S. military, with President Biden's authorization, has agreed to replenish all of Israel's ammunition used in their war with Hamas.

The protestors are also calling for Israel to end its reprisal against Hamas because of all the deaths and injuries of civilians in Gaza. In listening to some of these protestors (many of whom are wearing a Palestinian "keffiyeh" or headscarf made famous by the terrorist group "Black September" when they murdered the Israel Olympic team in 1976), they seem to think that the war is Israel's fault.

The truth is that Hamas, a terrorist organization which hijacked the government in Gaza, attacked Israelis at a open concert on October 7th, murdering 1,139 individuals (695 civilians, 373 members of the security force, and 71 foreign nationals), not including the dozens who were beaten and raped, nor does it include the hostages taken by Hamas.

Israel, which had been enduring dozens of missile attacks by Hamas on a regular basis, made the decision to put an end to Hamas, and who could blame them? How many times do you have to keep getting hit by rocks before you decide to fight back? No other nation (the U.S., China, and Russia included) would have tolerated this, and Israel won't either.

As an aside, Russia has repeatedly responded to terrorist attacks by Georgian separatists and groups like ISIS-K with at least equal ferocity. Meanwhile, while not facing large scale terror attack, China has had a number of smaller scale terror, but nevertheless responded with equal zeal and intensity.

It should also be pointed out that while Hamas is "officially" the government of Gaza following the overthrow of the previous government, it is a terrorist organization first and foremost. It has regularly used civilians as shields. It routinely fires missile batteries hidden in schools or next to hospitals and mosques. Homeowners are forced at gunpoint to allow Hamas to store weapons and ammo in their homes. It intercepts humanitarian aid and sells it on the global black market to buy more weapons.

The people of Gaza see only a fraction of the aid sent to them. Recently, there was a report of dozens of UN and other trucks packed with food, fresh water, medical supplies, and clothes, however, they were hung up on the Israeli side of the border. Do you think that's out of spite by Israel?

No. It's because Israel was await for a safe opportunity to release the vehicles out of concern that Hamas will hijack the shipment and either sell it or store it for its own use. The other problem was that if Israel escorted the convoy in, there would be a strong chance the convoy could be ambushed, killing Israeli soldiers, aid workers, and Gaza residents. 

Other issues being promoted by the protestors is their claims that Israel is engaged in genocide and/or is an apartheid nation along the lines of South Africa (if you want to accuse anyone of genocide, look no further than here and our treatment of Native Americans). Israel is home to Christians, Jews, and Arabs. In fact, ethnic Jews comprise about 73.6% of the population while 21% are Arabs. While the majority of these a Muslim, there is a sizable population of Druze and Arab Christians. 

Roughly 45% of Jews living in Israel are "Mizrahi" or Oriental Jews, meaning they come from North Africa or Asia. 31.8% are Ashkenazi or European Jews. Many descend from survivors of the Holocaust (originally, most of the founders and settlers of Israel were Ashkenazi). 12.4% came from Soviet Russia or one of the Soviet Bloc nations. 3% are "Beta" Jews from Ethiopia (meaning they're also racially black Africans). Finally, about 7.9% are a mix.

About 21% of Israel's population is Arab. Most are Sunni Muslim, although there are some affiliated with the Shiite "Alawites". 18% are either Druze or Christian Arabs. Palestinians account for about 20% of Israel's population. It should be pointed out that the Palestinians in the West Bank also operate their own government (the same government had been ousted by Hamas in Gaza).

As an aside, while the overall population of Jews are shrinking in Israel, the population of Muslims are growing and will likely outnumber Jews within the next few generations. In addition, Israel is home to Christian Copts, Assyrian Christians, nomadic Bedouins, Samaritans, Armenians, and Circassians.

So, in looking at the demographics as noted above, it would appear these college protesters would have a hard time trying to justify their claim that Israel is actually a apartheid state in the sense that there are many diverse populations living in this small nation. 

I would be amiss in pointing out that Israel has repeatedly given up land in exchange for peace, ranging from the Sinai to the West Bank to parts of southern Lebanon and Western Syria.  In practically every occasion, the peace has been broken (and not by Israel), leaving the region in much the same position as it had been.

However, I don't want to make it appear that Israel has entirely clean hands and everything is the fault of the Palestinians, which is hardly the case. Israel's greatest flaw in dealing with the Palestinians has to do with the small but extremely influential Jewish hardliners. One such group is the "Temple Mount and Land of Israel Faithful Movement". 

Their notoriety stems from their occupation of the Temple Mount in East Jerusalem and demands to allow Jews to pray at the Al-Aqsa Mosque (the third holiest mosque in Islam). Of course, behind their "demands" is a deep seated belief that the Temple Mount is historically theirs and the mosque needs to be removed so that a Third Temple can be built there. 

It's worth noting that there are many fundamentalist Christians who believe the same thing, albeit for slightly different reasons. They believe that the Third Temple was be built on the Temple Mount in order to facilitate the Second Coming of Jesus. 

Obviously, that doesn't set well with either Palestinians, moderate Jews., or with Muslims everywhere. Nevertheless, while it seems that all sides are aware of what would likely happen should anything happened to the mosque, the hard core extremists don't seem to care since, from their perspective, God will intervene on their behalf.

Groups like the "Temple Mount and Land of Israel Faithful" believe in the old boundaries of the Jewish Kingdom which allegedly stretched from Egypt's border to the Euphrates River in Iran and encompassing parts of Syria and Lebanon. They also believe that only Jews should live in Israel. That means forcing out anyone who doesn't belong there, especially the Palestinians.

As a result, these ultra conservative groups regularly establish illegal settlements (some seem to rise literally overnight). Often they force Palestinians out of their homes overnight, barely giving them time to pack. They routinely defy police and even the military sent in to stop them. While these Palestinians can and do file complaints with the Israeli government or try to resist, the government is typically reluctant to do anything. and the settlers usually prevail.

Currently there are over 279 illegal settlements, comprised of  around 3500 housing units in the West Bank which include approximately 700,000 settlers living there. There are around 200,000 illegal settlers living in East Jerusalem.  

But while these extreme Orthodox settlers are responsible for much of the land grab of Palestinian land, they aren't the only ones. The Israeli government is known to show up occasionally (complete with bulldozers) and just announce they are taking possession of the land.

In March of 2024, the government under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, announced they were seizing some 2000 acres in the Palestinian West Bank, which is suppose to belong solely to the Palestinian people and the Palestinian government. 

The ultra conservative finance minister, Bezalel Smotrich, who lives in an illegal settlement, said there was "no room for half measures" and added that Israel has a historical right to Judea and Samaria (modern West Bank). U.N Human Rights Chief, Volker Turk called the move a "international war crime".  

So, what does all this tell us about the college protesters and their demands? Colleges aren't going to disinvest their interests in defense industry stocks any more than they're going to turn down multimillion dollar research contracts from the DoD or military contractors. It just ain't going to happen. Israel was the one who was brutally attacked on October 7th, but then too, they had been under regular missile attacks by Hamas. The October 7th attack (massacre would be a more accurate term) begged for a quick and severe response, which Israel delivered.

It's true that the situation in Gaza is beyond critical. It is quickly approaching a human catastrophe on an epic scale, yet Israel is prepared to render immediate aid. Nevertheless, Hamas continues to see the people of Gaza only as pawns and human shields. What happens to them matters less than making Israel look bad in the world's eyes, which it has done.

Hamas has the added advantage of winning the propaganda war with American college students who have swallowed Hama's "BS" hook, line, and sinker. As an aside, it also shows how little American college students know about the Middle East and how lazy they've become in doing their due diligence when it comes to proper research before staging protests.  

Lastly, Israel is not technically an apartheid state. It has a wide and diverse population with the largest minority---the Arabs---likely to dominate the nation within the next 100 years if not sooner. However, where the students are correct is the treatment of Palestinians.

Despite the Israeli government's rhetoric about equality, it's clear that the Palestinians are treated no better than second class citizens...at best. They remind me of Native Americans during the "Great Westward Migration". Any lie and by any means will do as long as they're gone. Somehow, the people of Israel must do what the government is to afraid to do, and that's to say "no" to the extremist.

One more thing about the protestors. Something has been happening on these college and university campuses which I didn't think was possible in America. It's not the brazen defying of administration (that's pretty cool actually) although there will be consequences. No, what we've started seeing is the rise of anti-Semitism among some of the students and its tolerance by others. Anti-Semitism is an evil as vile as any. It should be snuffed out wherever it's found.

The Israeli people must link arms with the Palestinians. They must see and accept them as neighbors. Israelis need to remember Rabbi Hillel's famous quote "what is hateful to you do not do to your neighbor". Until this happens, the situation will continue to worsen until something unforgivable happens. When that occurs there will be no more Palestinians and no more Israel. Only tears.

 

If you enjoyed the article, please consider passing it along to others and don't forget to subscribe. It's free! Lastly please be sure to "like" us on whatever platform you use to read anotheropinionblog.com. It helps beat the algorithms and keeps our articles in circulation. Thank you!

 

Israel Policy Forum: West Bank Settlements

Who are the Israeli settlers and why do they live onPalestinian lands?

The hardline Israelis stoking violence in East Jerusalem

Demographics of Israel

Uyghur Genocide: Why Most Muslim Countries Remain Silent

 

A Race Based National Anthem? Gay Beer? Injecting politics into Sports and the Perils of Corporate Marketing in a 'Woke' Society

 

It used to be that the world tuned into the Super Bowl as much for the commercials and performances (especially during Half Time) as they did the games. Sadly, Sunday's showing proved that the NFL's entertainment drought continues, leaving viewers parched for some quality performers.

Of course, there's no shortage of performances to pick from, be it Janet Jackson's infamous "Wardrobe Malfunction", the Who's tone deaf performance, or this year's offering from Usher. However, there have also been some pretty spectacular shows too over the years such as the legendary Paul McCarthy and Prince performances.

One of the key problems is that in times past, there was a general equality of respect in the various musical genres, ranging from rock, to Motown, Pop, and Country. Nowadays, it seems that just one market segment is even considered. But like many others facing this country, there is a divide which seem ever more insurmountable. 

The NFL's selection of a very narrow band of performers does not appeal to the majority of fans, especially those who are willing to plop down the big dollars, either in the form of season tickets or one of the numerous viewing methods. If it wasn't for those fans, the NFL would quickly find itself  unable to keep paying out those multi-million dollars salaries to players, coaches. and administrative staff.  

One seriously problem is the apparent growing willingness of the NFL to allow a measure of racism which it wouldn't tolerate from any other group. It originally began with a few players deciding to "take a knee" rather than stand for the playing of our National Anthem (the players claim it was a protest against racial injustice).

This relatively small clique, which revolved by then San Francisco quarterback Colin Kaepernick, had decided to interject their race based political beliefs into a sporting event.  The practice quickly spread into other sports venues, and down to high school and Pop Warner leagues (further proof that children and young adults often emulate what they see more so as a form of "hero worship than an understanding of issues).

The clap back  came swift and hard from the fan base. Fans made it clear that they were there to watch a sporting event, not attend a political event. This was particularly among law enforcement and veteran associations despite denials from the NFL to the contrary.  The general consensus was that if players want to make political statements, they should do it on their own time, not on that of the fans.  

The NFL lost nearly 1/3 of its viewership and took a hit of $8.1 billion dollars in revenue. Other sport leagues and associations face similar drops in the revenue. I imagine that whoever in NFL management who opted to do nothing about the kneel downs found themselves with a pink slip in hand fairly quick. No one take hits in the billions without heads rolling.

While the issue of "taking a knee" during the playing of our National Anthem, has largely faded from the public's mind along those responsible for triggering the movement, but it didn't end there. Not by a long shot.

Today we face another attempt to politicize  sports through the playing of the so-called "Black National Anthem" as the song, "Lift Every Voice and Sing" has been coined.  It's being performed increasingly at various professional sporting events around country, and as with the copycat kneeling, has begun to spread into colleges and Pop Warner games. More so, the media is often encouraging attendees to afford the same level of respect as the actual National Anthem.

The song, "Lift Every Voice and Sing" was a hymn written by NAACP leader James Weldon Johnson around 1900 and set to music by his brother, J. Rosmond Johnson. James Johnson, who was Chair of the Florida Baptist Academy, penned the hymn in honor of Lincoln's birthday. 

The hymn was written from the perspective of late 19th Century Black Americans as a form of thanksgiving and evokes imagery commonly found in Black Liberation theology of the Biblical Exodus story from enslavement to freedom.

It was pointed out that during the last Super Bowl game, attendees were urged to stand for the Black National Anthem, but not for the American National Anthem. Was that a one off mistake or was that intentional?  Later, leading Democrats were critical of the crowd for not standing enmasse.

As an aside, when Andra Day sung the Black National Anthem, she was roundly booed by the audience which was audibly suppressed and downplayed by the media commentators while praising the NFL's openness.  Meanwhile, country music star Reba McEntire received a rousing round of cheers and applause in response to her rendition of the National Anthem (am I the only who thinks Reba looks like a caricature of a poor country mouse?)/

While the sentiment of the song is noteworthy, the question of whether a country can or should have two national anthems, especially one seen as promoting a certain racial segment of its society needs serious debate. It's not as if this is a choice between "America the Beautiful" and "If I had a Hammer".  This is especially true given how deeply divided America has become across political, gender, economic class, educational, and racial lines.

According to several surveys and polls conducted by Pew and Gallup, America has never been this deeply or widely split over  even basic issues since the decade preceding the America's bloodiest war, the Civil War. That war resulted in deaths of over 620,000 mostly young men. That's more than the Revolutionary War, War of 1812, the Mexican-American War, the Spanish American War, WWI, WWII, Korea, or Vietnam...combined!

Lately the public has shown a willingness to use economic and social media pressure to respond to bad corporate decisions. As mentioned earlier, the Kaepernick Fiasco resulted in the loss of $8.1 billion dollars in revenue not to mention ending a number of professional sport related careers.  

When Budweiser began its promotion of "transgender influencer" and TikTok personality, Dylan Mulvaney in 2022, "Bud" had long reigned as America's top selling beer and was especially popular at sporting events. It was even referred to as "blue collar beer". Anheuser-Busch, the maker of Budweiser, reported a quick kick in its most tender spot---its bottom line.

During the second quarter, from April to June 2023, its revenue dropped a numbing 10.5%, especially sales of Bud Lite. That reflected a loss of $395 million in North America sales.  Stores couldn't get rid of the stuff no matter how low it cut prices. Drinkers of the stuff saw Bud's promotion of the transgender activist as a not-so-subtle promotion of LGBQT values, and in particular, those revolving around transgenderism, which highly unpopular among conservatives.

Boycotters made it a point to frame their protests as a personal violation of their trust to their long standing brand loyalty. "Bud" had long been associated with conservative ideals . The fall out later spread to include Target and country singers Garth Brooks, Kid Rock and several others. But how different is this than the attempted boycott over Chic-fil-a's refusal to be opened on Sunday?  

Conservative musical performers, athletes, and event promoters dropped Budweiser product from the lineup (some of largest consumers of Bud also happen to be NFL fans). As a result, after being America's top selling brand for over 20 years, it was toppled by a Mexican lager, Modelo Especial, which is owned by the Belgium company ABInBev.  Think about that. A beer which had been accepted as the essential working class American beer being replaced by a Mexican brew! Meanwhile, Anheuser-Busch reported that two of their top marketing executives were place on a leave of absence.

Three current examples, which by themselves and perhaps at some other time would have captured nothing but dead air time. But other examples exist such as alleged "cultural appropriation" of hairstyles, types of jewelry, and clothing styles. Even the use of certain phrases can serve as a trigger event!  But, given America's deep division and hypersensitivity over nearly everything, should any of this  be considered a proper venue for corporate social responsibility?

Even after a year since the "brew off", profits and market shares at Budweiser remain down. Despite Wall Street's never ending chase for more market share and more profits at any cost, shouldn't we address whether boards of directors be giving the green light to delve into socially sensitive issues? Are they showing due diligence to their stake and share holders? 

On the other hand, there are those who believe that corporations have a unique "moral responsibility" when it comes to the environment and society. Does the ruling oligarchy still retain a sense of "noblesse oblige" to society? 

After all, there are corporations out here who have greater revenues than some countries, and thus greater resources for social change. Corporations are commonly typically more influential than any NGO. The top ten richest companies, if combined, would be the third largest financial entity behind the U.S. and China. Saudi Aramco generates more wealth than Italy, Brazil, Canada, and Russia. Apple's market capital is the size of Australia's GDP.

America, as most of its citizens have come to accept, is a neo-fascist corporatocracy managed by a relatively small handful of super rich oligarchs.  Corporate media serves as its mouth piece in ensure a continuous and unrelenting stream of propaganda promoting one agenda or another. But does Wall Street want to get into the "social reimaging" game?  The public has demonstrated that it can and will respond to the wrong message  just as quickly as to the proper one.

So, if we're to have a "Black National Anthem" being promoted as a substitute to our collective national anthem, will Corporate America give equal thrift to a "Hispanic National Anthem"? What about a Asian-American National Anthem or a Native American National Anthem? Then too (I have to ask), what about a European-American National Anthem? Maybe we should adopt corporate anthems like in the 1975 dystopian movie "Rollerball" (a similar theme was played out in the 1986 film "Rollerblade".

How will they respond to the growing population of Muslims without offending other religions or victims of Islam such as the Kurds or Coptic Christians? What about commercials which promote legitimate Muslim traditions or values but which also comes in conflict with Western values such as the role of women?

We saw the public's reaction over LGBQT when it came to a beer. What about race based holidays which have been adopted by government organizations and corporations? How should they be promoted going forward? Can some holidays be celebrated and not others? Many regional holidays pertaining to the Confederacy have already been forcefully dropped, not to mention the removal of statutes.  

Hispanics already represent the largest national minority and growing. Some studies indicate that American will skip pass racial parity with white Europeans and go straight into a Hispanic majority within the next two decades. How will Wall Street handle that transition without disrespecting other racial groups?

Corporations have worked long and hard to achieve control of our political system. Now it's going to have to face up to some of the same issues our Republic struggled with. The chief difference is that the public will have more arrows in quiver. Not only through boycotts, social media "shaming", internal protests, and challenges via stockholder meetings. Corporate America many caught itself in a trap of its own making in its quest for profit and control.

 

  If you enjoyed the article, please consider passing it along to others and don't forget to subscribe. It's free! Lastly please be sure to "like" us on whatever platform you use to read anotheropinionblog.com. It helps beat the algorithms and keeps our articles in circulation. Thank you!

 

Lift Every Voice and Sing

Democrats criticizes Super Bowl Crowd for not standingduring Black National Anthem

 

The Companies More Profitable Than Countries

Bud Lite boycott takes fizz out of brewer's earning

Behind the Backlash Against Bud Light

Garth Brooks' Bud Lite scandal takes to new turn

 

The Thinning Blue Line: The Growing Exodus of Police Officers

The Louisville Metro Police Department (LMPD) is down by 300 officers. With an authorized force of 1,328, it now has just 1,038. At the end of July this year, another 95 officers---sergeants, lieutenants, and administrative staff have the option to hang it up.  Why are so many experienced  police officers leaving?

The Louisville Metro Police Department has faced decades of mistrust from officers and the community going back to the city/county merger 2002 when dozens of county officers decided to leave rather than to be part of the newly created metro police department (which was, in fact, merely an expanded city police department). In many ways, the seeds of public distrust were planted in 1975/76 when officers were required to maintain order during the deeply opposed court ordered forced school busing.

However, it was the deaths of Breonna Taylor and David McAtee which ignited the exodus. Breonna Taylor was shot in May 2020 and killed in a botched police drug raid while Mr. McAtte, the owner of a popular BBQ restaurant in Louisville's predominately black West End, was killed in June by the Kentucky National Guard amid protests following Taylor's death (then police chief Robert White was fired shortly thereafter over the shootings, allegations of a cover-up, and concerns relating to unapproved overtime).        

To offset the shortages of officers, the city's Democrat mayor, Greg Fischer, and the Democrat dominated Metro Council authorized $218 million for the 2023 LMPD budget; $25 million more than it currently receives. This represents nearly 1/3 of the city's general fund. Nevertheless, shortages continue amid a complete distrust of top management, including the newly appointed Police Chief Erika Shields (she was the police chief, albeit an unpopular one, from Atlanta Georgia).

As an aside, the distrust and distain also extends to the current mayor, Greg Fischer as well. Fischer has been mayor since 2010 and has continued to earn poor marks in the city's low and middle class areas such as Okolona, Fern Creek, Valley Station, and Pleasure Ridge Park. His popularity among minorities as well as the police department and Metro Council (which has its own popularity problems) remain low.

LMPD has been looking for minority candidates to fill its depleted roll. It has dropped height, education, and test score requirements to make that happen, but with the shortages, almost anyone without a criminal record and in decent health will do (and even that's kinda sketchy). A new requirement say you can't "have used, possessed or sold a narcotic in the last six years"!  Like other police departments, the LMPD is trying to steal replacements wherever it can by offering lateral transfers higher salaries and improved benefit packages (fully funded pensions remain a ongoing problem)

June of 2022 had its largest new police class in three years---31 applicants, but that's far short of its previous class sizes of 48. Recently that number has been around 18 to 19 seats filled, making the 31 recruits appear increasingly more like an aberration rather than a correction.

The department remains predominately white and male (current recruitment is 71% white and male).  Females make up just under 14% of the force while men are over 86%. Whites in general (men and women) are almost 81% of the force. Blacks of both genders comprise 13.87% while 3.32% are Hispanic. Asians comprise 1.46% and Native Americans are just 0.20%.  The largest age "bubble" is between 26 and 45 years old.  

As stated above,  the money situation has improved.  The average salary after two years is now $71k plus benefits, which is a significant improvement, but the long hours, lousy shifts, and high stress environment of police life remain. LMPD Union President Ryan Nichols calls the retention situation  "dire" and added that at the present rate, the matter could become catastrophic in short order.

Minneapolis was the epicenter of the police protests. It's where George Floyd was killed in May 2020 by Officer Derek Chauvin, one of four officers called to investigate a possible counterfeit $20 dollar bill by a store clerk.  Floyd was subsequently detained (Chauvin knelt on Floyd's neck for 9 minutes and 29 seconds) and died shortly afterwards (an autopsy found drugs in his system which were likely strong contributing factors to his death). Since the incident which captured the world's attention. Minneapolis has lost well over 300 of its officers.

Police retirements have jumped by 45% and resignations have increased 18%. The western Minneapolis community of Morris will disband its police force after 140 years of service by the end of the year. The reason? Not enough officers. The 5,200 strong community will use the Stevens County Police Department for its law enforcement needs.

With the decline in officers, amid demands to "defund the police" and "community monitoring", crime has skyrocketed across Minneapolis. Last year there was a record number of murders---62.  As of this March, there were 55. Carjackings for 2021 totaled 2,423. In the first third of 2022 there had already been over 3,000! 4,969 assaults were reported in 2021. By the end of the first quarter, there were already 5,573 with no relief in sight.

Back in Louisville, the situation isn't any better.  Louisville is ranked as one of the most dangerous cities in the country (in one report where "100" was the safest and "0" was basically a Dodge City, Louisville was ranked "5"). Another national site rated Louisville an "F" when it came to crime (along with its school system). Louisville's murder rate is more than double the national average and exceeds much larger cities like Chicago, Philadelphia, and Atlanta.

Violent assaults in Metro Louisville are also double the national average as are carjackings. Rapes, thankfully, are well below the national average while armed robberies, burglaries and thefts are all about 25% higher than average.

In Asheville North Carolina, more than 1/3 of the police force has quit, resigned, or retired. In New York City, one of the largest police departments in the nation, 2,600 officers called it quits in 2020. In Seattle, resignations and retirements more than tripled, 219 compared to 77. In Philadelphia, which has been racked by an increase in crime, has seen over 79 officers take early retirement thus far this year.

Chicago, a city notorious  for its crime and corruption, has been hemorrhaging police officers and civilian staff. As of April 2022, 300 officers had left. In March there were 11,669 men and women in blue. In 2021 there were 12,739, down 560 from the year before, which was further down 749 from 2019!  For 30 years, the city has never had less than 12,000 officers on duty. Chicago Police Superintendent David Brown called the exodus "generational", meaning it wasn't just the rookies leaving or the "old timers". It's across the board with newbies and experienced officers turning in their badges, along with staffers.

The reason for the mass departure of officers stems from several factors, but most notably from Mayor Lori Lightfoot's edict that everyone had to be vaccinated against Covid-19 whether they wanted to be or not. In addition, the department has seen its budget repeatedly sliced amid calls to "defund" the police (in 2020 the budget was cut by $59 million), along with an increase of assaults, mandatory overtime and a reduction in compensation.

San Francisco is facing a massive exit of police officers. San Francisco Police Chief Bill Scott said that he's worry that nearly a quarter of the departments staff will walk out as their early retirement dates near.  Thus far, the city is already down by 600 officers with more expected to leave, and it gets worse.

According to Chief Scott, for every 50 officers leaving, only about eight to ten recruits are taking their place (on average, about 25 apply with roughly half being cut for one reason or another before graduating). Like most other cities, San Francisco is trying to lure officers from elsewhere with offers of more money and benefits thanks to an increased budget.

However, as Chief Scott admits, he's competing with nearly every other police department in the nation. He's also faced with the fact that San Francisco is one of the most expensive place in the country to live, especially if you're coming from out of state. As an aside, in a recent poll, 65% of residents in the Bay Area said that fear of crime was what kept them from coming to downtown San Francisco

According to the Police Executive Research Forum, a Washington DC based policy institute, a study of 200 departments nationwide showed retirements (regular and early) were up 45% while resignations rose by 18% over the period from April 2020 to April 2021. In departments with more than 500 officers, the retirement rate was over 30% while new recruitments were under 5%. Those are unsustainable numbers.

Cities like Louisville and Minneapolis weren't the only ones with out of control crime in the face of fewer officers. According to the Police Executive Research Forum, most communities were experiencing a sudden increase in violent crimes like murder, shootings, and carjackings, as well as thefts after the mandatory Covid quarantines were lifted. Large cities have had a 24% increase in killings thus far in 2022, which followed a 30% increase in 2021. By the way, don't think for a moment that criminals aren't paying attention to and targeting these areas where officer shortages are occurring. 

Yes, it's true that the police are increasingly militarized, but they face criminals and gangs with the firepower of professional militias.  According to the FBI, in 2021 129 officers died. Of those, 73 were killed in the line of duty (23 of those were unprovoked attacks while 8 were ambushed). 56 died in accidents (17 of those were pursuits or  were responding to a crime in progress). This total represents 27 more deaths in the line of duty than in 2021.

In today's two tier judicial system, too often the testimony of someone is devalued or their guilt is determined based on the perceived income level, origin, or color of their skin while an officer, politician, or judge walks despite evidence of their guilt. Meanwhile, the wealthy and powerful don't even come close to facing the same "justice" ordinary citizens deal with and even fewer face the true consequences of their actions. 

Unfortunately, there are no easy solutions. The deaths of Breonna Taylor, George Floyd, David McAtee, Eric Garner, Michael Brown, or Tamir Rice and others are more than regrettable. They are a national tragedy, as is every lost life due to a crime. Many were, for the most part, avoidable.  However, not all the blame belongs on the shoulders of the police. 

First and foremost is restoring discipline and respect for authority at home and in the schools. There's a direct correlation between doing what a teacher tells you and what a police officer tells you. However, the repercussions can be much worse.  When a cop tells you to do something, stop what you're doing, don't mouth off, and do what you're told. You keep your hands where they can be clearly seen. Don't make sudden moves, and you sure as heck don't run! I can guarantee that you're not faster than a 9mm and you're sure as hell not bulletproof. This isn't about race, gender, religion, or anything else. It's about keeping everyone safe.

 In most cases you'll get a warning or ticket and sent on your way. Get cocky, you may get a free ride downtown. If you do something stupid, you may get a trip to the hospital or morgue. If there's a problem with the stop, go see a lawyer as soon as you can and let them handle it. Otherwise chalk it up to experience. It's better to be a live plaintiff than a dead victim.

Yes, police officers and first responders need more diverse hires along with diversity training. In fact, I think everyone needs diversity training. Perhaps it should be a mandatory class in high school alongside ethics and civics. Everyone is deserving of respect and even some empathy, but not due to some misplaced sense of entitlement or self importance. But because it's the right thing to do as a human being. However, respect and empathy are a two way street. If you want it, you have to give it.

Police officers are resigning or retiring enmasse because to significant degree the public has turned against them, thanks in large part to the media. They have lost the public's respect.  Calls to defund the police force has resulted in a decrease in their ability to do their job, which is to keep the public safe and maintain order. They also must deal every day with people under the worse of circumstances. That's where the empathy comes in.

 

If you want to know more, please take a look at the links below. If you enjoyed the article, please consider passing it along to others and don't forget to subscribe. It's free! Lastly please be sure to "like" us on whatever platform you use to read A/O. It helps with the algorithms and keeps our articles in circulation. Thank you!  

 

LMPD ramps up recruitment in face of shortage

'We're at a dire level': Nearly 100 LMPD officers eligible to retire as staffing shortages continue

LMPD Demographics August 2022

 

Why Police Have Been Quitting in Droves in the Last Year

 

Minneapolis Police Department Down 300 Officers from spring2020

Minneapolis DataSource: Crime Dashboard

AreaVibes: Louisville, KY Crime

Chicago Police Staffing hits new low...

SFPD chief worries about loss of hundreds of officers amidstaffing shortages

Red (White and Blue) Baiting

It appears the new tag word these days is "racist". If you don't agree with the official line, you're a racist. If you question what you're being told, then you're a racist.   If you're white (or Asian for that matter) and haven't publicly acknowledged and apologized your racial "privilege", then you're not just a racist, but one who supports a hidden racist system which has held others back while giving you all the breaks.

If you're white or Asian, did well in school, stayed out of trouble, and were generally successful in life, it was because of your racist privilege within a systematically racist system. Your success was the result of someone else being held down. It had nothing to do with your hard work in school or getting a job.

If you happen to be Hispanic or black, and you worked hard, overcame any of life's obstacles, got a good job (or even better, started your own business), then you betrayed your race. If you studied hard and did well in school, then you're guilty of "acting white". You did all this by adopting the mentality of the "oppressor class" (ie: whites or successful Asians). You were a "Uncle Tom" or whatever. 

 It had nothing to do with your desire to better your life, and by extension, your family's or even your community's. It had nothing to do with your determination, just as it had nothing to do with all those hours spent studying, working part time jobs, and effort to put yourself through college. Therefore, you have a obligation to renounce your success and use your influence and wealth to support those who wish to bring down the inherent racist system of the oppressors which made all your accomplishments possible.

Now, we have athletes refusing to stand for the national anthem. Instead, they turn their back or take a knee (long symbolic of submission). They make a fist and thrust it into the air as a sign of rebellion. We have Olympic hopefuls tell us they aren't interested in going to Tokyo to represent America, but, instead, to represent the all the "oppressed" of this nation because they "overcame" oppression. What has this nation done for them after all except send them to the Olympics?

 It seems to me that the very fact they were willing to put in the work that was required for their sport and now have the opportunity (and financial sponsorship) with the potential of making millions more through endorsements kinda defeats their argument don't you think?

No one is giving these athletes anything but the opportunity to prove themselves, and with effort and dedication, some made it. Yet, some of these sports entertainers (which, in truth, is what they are), who make millions, choose to kneel in disrespect during the playing of the National Anthem or turn their back on the flag and then complain when they are booed. Seems like they're talking out of both sides of their piggy bank. Poor me with all the endorsements, but it gets better.

Now we are starting to see individuals and a few groups like Black Lives Matter, calling for our flag to be changed. They claim that, somehow, the design and colors are "racist" (there's that button they keep pushing again). The flag, they maintain, represents white superiority.  According to the American Legion, the colors were chosen based on heraldic symbolism. The white stands for purity while the red represents hardiness and valor. The blue represents justice.

The 13 stripes stand for the original 13 colonies, while the stars represent each state. Officially, when the flag and its colors were adopted by the Marine Committee of the Second Continental Congress in Philadelphia back on July 4, 1776 and adopted in 1777, the colors had no specific meaning. I guess they just liked the way it looked. But, as I said earlier, that's not all.

In addition to changing the flag for (as Coke executives infamously said) being "too white", the same folks want to change the National Anthem for the same reasons. In fact, some sporting venues have started playing "Lift Every Voice", which is the so-called "Black National Anthem" in lieu of the National Anthem. So, we're now expected to stand for this new "anthem" while taking a knee or turning our backs for our official National Anthem?  Not gonna happen as far as I'm concerned.  

There's nothing "racist" about the "Star-Spangled Banner", which was written by Francis Scott Key during the siege of Fort McHenry and the Battle of Baltimore, which was part of the War of 1812. In fact, if you read the lyrics, there's about our willingness to stand and fight for freedom; to defend, what was then a new nation. While the National Anthem is admittedly a difficult song to sing, and that may be reason enough to change it, there isn't anything "racist" about it.

Finally, to make matters worse, we are starting to see attempts to introduce something called "Critical Race Theory" (aka "CRT") which is supposed to replace the current academic curriculum  (which should be changed thanks to years of "dumbing down") and replace it with lessons allegedly designed to allegedly promote diversity, be it racial, religious, or gender, but at the expense of others.

 In short, CRT, which began as a academic theory about 40 years ago, claims that race and racism is part of an implied social contract which is biased towards whites (and Christians), and thus shapes not just the academics (especially in grades K-12), but also shapes the public's perception and conversation. As a result, non-whites are left out of the discussion.

The problem with CRT is that its sole purpose appears to be creating a false or distorted image of whites, society and, ultimately, the nation. However, this nation was created with the help of people from nearly every race, creed, religion, and gender on this planet. The building of America was, in the truest sense, a collaborative undertaking, and it still is.  We are still growing and evolving as a nation and society. That's something CRT and those who promote it fail to take into account.

Balance in academia, as in everything, is important. CRT does not offer balance. It lays out the same type of foundation that the Nazis and other authoritarian systems created in order to persecute a segment of the population. It reinforces the same mentality which alleges  "white superiority" and demands the need for whites to publicly acknowledge their "white guilt". And while you're at it, go ahead and denounce everything America has ever done and stood for. Being anti-American seems to be popular these days. 

There is no "white guilt" to acknowledge, just as there is no "white superiority". Each individual needs to take advantage of the opportunities available to them.  Slavery ended close to 200 years ago. Although Jim Crow laws (where they existed) ended in 1964, people of color managed to succeed before then, and they more than succeed nowadays. Look at any industry as proof.

The only racism I've seen of late has come from those accusing others of being racist. We see it in their message and by their actions, including defacing and destroying historical statues. Unfortunately, this form of racism also happens in schools as mentioned above, in the workplace, and now in politics. The media promotes it, albeit subtlety, and so do some churches or other organizations in high minority neighborhoods.

But that doesn't excuse the Tamir Rice or Andre Hill's of America. Their deaths (and those like them) are totally inexcusable. However, it wasn't racism which was at fault. It was poor policing skills and perhaps even incompetence. The same could be said of George Floyd. He was no saint and certainly not someone deserving a statue or mural, but that doesn't excuse his death. Breaona Taylor is in a similar boat. She didn't deserve to die, but she wasn't an innocent bystander either.

Bad behavior has results. Ignoring or not following instructions by a police officer is never a good idea, neither is running from them or thinking you're big and bad enough to take them on. Claims that fearing or refusing to do what an authority figure tells you is not a part of someone's "racial culture". That's an excuse, and a bad one at that.  Teach your children to respect authority figures at least enough to do as they're told. They might have a better outcome and live longer.

When it comes to sexual orientation, I don't think anyone really cares, especially people who are straight. The only ones who seem to have a chip on their shoulder are in the LGBQT community. From those I've spoken with, the only issue straights have is someone trying to make their orientation a big deal and wave it in everyone's face. I doubt anyone really cares. Just do your own thing and leave everyone else alone. 

America doesn't need more division. It needs to acknowledge the worth of each individual based on their actions and contribution to society. By the same token, society doesn't owe you anything because of any other factor than your willingness to work for what you want. Everyone should have the same opportunity, but no one should be guaranteed of the same outcome. There are those who are trying to divide America in as many ways as possible. A divided nation is a nation which is easy to manipulate and control.

Of course, America isn't perfect. We've faced some very serious issues in the past, but for the most part we've overcome most of them by working together. We still have some very serious problems, but many of those problems stem from the very people trying to divide us.  We have more in common than not. Where there are differences, we need to find ways to bridge them. Lastly, we need to restore America's Republic, and that means ending the Corporatocracy created by the Oligarchs. 

 

What is critical race theory?

Now is the time to stop playing the national anthem atsporting events

Macy Gray defends call for new flag: 'I love my country'

 

The Babyboomers and Millennials: The Generational and Religious Divide

Last week, I wrote about the decline of organized religion in the U.S.. In addition last week's article looked at how Babyboomers, Millennials, and Gen Z, have influenced this decline which began in the 1960's. This week, we'll get a more specific, starting with the Babyboomers and continuing with the Millennials.

Babyboomers (1946 - 1964) were the product of a society which experienced, on the one hand, one of the most prosperous economies in the country's history, and on the other hand, perhaps America's most violable period.  It was a traditional childhood and youth in one sense but would ultimately led to violent rejection of traditional values, anti-war protests, clashes over race relations and civil rights, which, between 1955 and 1975 took the nation from one which trusted the government to one which had utter contempt for the government.

It was during the 1960's and early 1970's that many Boomers turned their back on organized religion, although there was a brief and intense resurgence as noted by the popularity of musicals like "Godspell" and "Jesus Christ Superstar" which attempted to find a new relevance and interpretation in religion. At the same time, "Fiddler on the Roof" attempted to revive Judaism's historic belief in its traditions and values while plays, like "Hair" and  "Oh! Calcutta!" explored society's changing morality, especially its sexual morals.

The same, or similar expression of disconnect found expression in music, art, and even TV shows like "All in the Family", "The Smother Brothers Comedy Hour", and Rowan and Martin's "Laugh In".  Even network comedies like "Get Smart", "Love American Style", and others carried a anti-establishment undertone. It's not surprising then to expect that religion too would be affected.

Rock groups like The Beatles, The Rolling Stones, among others  had a profound effect on that generation's view of organized religion (in a sense, their "message" came to replace that of the pulpit's).  Groups like these introduced society to the Eastern philosophies, mysticism, yoga, acupuncture, mantras, meditation, holistic and herbal medicine, and Swami whose names we couldn't pronounce.

In addition, first cohort Boomers (1946 - 1954), were largely Left leaning politically. They promoted an idealistic vision of socialism, and began viewing the Cold War as nothing more than propaganda war by Wall Street over who controlled what natural resources and allowed military bases. 

By the late 60's, Boomers started moving to communes as a socialistic experiment and to "get back to nature". They joined small collectives, growing their own food, sharing chores, making their own clothes. Those who, for whatever reason, weren't able to join in, however, started forming neighborhood associations and block watches to take care of their piece of the New American Dream

They also started petition drives and formed boycotts against "unfriendly" or "anti-nature" corporations which wanted to pave over the "bunny fields". From thus the concept of the "NIMBY"---Not In My Backyard was born and remains very much alive today. It was also the birth of consumer advocacy,citizen lobbyists, grassroots environmentalism, and community activism.

The Boomers involvement with protecting the environment, especially air and water, ultimately resulted in the passage of the Clean Air and Water Act and creation of the EPA (1970) just as they had done earlier with the passage of the Civil Rights Act in 1964, which was later expanded in Title VII to include other categories such as gender and age discrimination.

Meanwhile, the second cohort of Babyboomers (1955 - 1964), which embraced many of the same ideals as their older siblings, tended to be less optimistic. They had been more deeply affected by the outcome of the Vietnam War (in part, due to the nightly "body count" on the evening news) and America's failure to secure victory after a nearly 20 year war and the loss of almost 60,000  (mostly young) men and women amid a mountain of lies by the military, Congress, and the Presidency which just seem to grow.

Lies, such as Watergate, caused  Boomers, along with much of America, not just lost its faith in the government and it's institutions, but even its religion was affected as we headed into the 1980's thanks to the rise of the "Televangelist" and the political activism of the "Moral Majority". Sadly, we've never recovered and as I wrote last week, the trend has turned into a death spiral. 

Babyboomers, who rejected materialism in the 1960's went on to be the wealthiest generation up to date, giving us the "Go Go 80's", shopping malls, timeshares, and modern day "greed is good" robber barons like Carl Icahn, T. Boone Pickens, and Ivan Boesky.  Boomers have been behind trends such as healthy eating and fitness craze, disco and mullets (my apologies), McMansions, wine clubs, along with countless others. 

As they age, many of the things Boomers have clung on to will begin to fade (and not just vinyl records or eight tracks). We're talking about traditional brick and mortar businesses (even banks, schools, especially universities are at risk), cable only TV, home ownership, big cars, professional football and, perhaps, boxing (due to head injuries) along with baseball (which is cited by Millennials as "too slow"), and  organized religion just to name a few.

A study by the University of California at Santa Barbara's sociology department indicated that around 42% of Boomers dropped out of organized religion all together, yet 33% never dropped out. Those individuals tended to be conservative, fundamentalist, and were Reagan supporters. However, 25% are slowly returning. Of those, the majority are leaning to liberal and less traditional churches or religious institutions. Their biggest hang-ups? The need for less formality, pro-choice, and LGBT acceptance.

Today, about 88% of Babyboomers describe themselves as "believing in God" or being "pretty sure" God exists (God or some sort of "higher power"). 83% said that religion still had a positive impact on their life. The survey didn't define "religion" as being formal or the same as a less structured "faith system".

When it came to attending some sort of religious service during the year, 71% said they did (but only 38% was weekly). However, when asked if they attended some other religious program (such as bible study or prayer group), 57% said no. When asked if they prayed, 77% said they did; 61% daily and 16% weekly. When asked if they meditated, 56% said they did. Of that, 45% was weekly, while 42% didn't ("prayer" and "meditation" were viewed as being separate from each other)

The same poll asked Babyboomers if they felt a sense of inner peace or spiritual well being. Only 14% said no. 84% did, at least some of the time.  44% also said they didn't read religious scripture of any sort. Just 38% did so weekly while 17% did so occasionally. Of those who did, 35% thought it was literal word of God. 29% said it could be...maybe...or shouldn't take literally. 29% said it wasn't the literal word.

When asked about Heaven and Hell,  74% thought that Heaven existed in some form. 26% didn't think it existed or weren't convinced. As for Hell, 59% believed it existed. 41% didn't think there was a Hell or wasn't sure.  So, how does this compare to the Millennials?

Millennials (1980 - 1996) are, for the most part, the grandchildren of the Babyboomers. They seem to have inherited much of their grandparent's distrust of the government, institutions, and organized religion. However, Millennials are also more dismissive of Boomers (the common Millennial phrase "Ok Boomer" is usually intended to be a polite dismissal of something a Boomer has said or done). 

Many believe that the current social and financial hardships they face as a generation are the direct result of Babyboomers, which they view as greedy and inconsiderate (typical of the "Me Generation). Millennials are the first generation whose quality of life didn't meet or exceed their parents.

Boomers  benefited from their parent's level "living wage" jobs, lifelong employment, employer provided healthcare and retirement (which was often the result of unionization). While Boomers attended college at higher numbers than any previous generation, their debt level was relatively low, especially compared to Millennials, due to many programs which have since been discontinued, including the original GI Bill.

 Millennials are, as we all know, more diverse than Boomers, especially along race, sexual orientation, and ethnic lines, not just as a group, but among their personal relationships. As a group, they tend to have far fewer friends than their grandparents at the same age. They're also more likely to have more health issues like high blood pressure, diabetes, Crohn's, and depression. They are also more likely to have an addiction problems. Millennials are more likely to marry later in life and have fewer children whereas Boomers had more children. Boomers also tend to divorce more often, even as they age.

When it comes to the importance of religion, just 38% of Millennials said it's very important. 29% said it was only "somewhat" important while 33% wasn't impressed with it. 28% attend religious services regularly. 38% did so just a few times a year and 34% said they never do.

Asked about prayer, 36% said no thank you. 39% said they prayed daily while 35% did so occasionally. By contrast, 42% meditated (though only 27% did regularly) while 58% didn't.  When asked if they participated in some sort of religious activity, a whopping 62% said no. Only 18% did on a weekly basis. The remaining 20% was a "hit or miss". 

When asked if they read religious scripture, 53% said no. Only 25% did so weekly. When it came to believing what they read, it didn't fare much better. 20% thought it was the literal word of God while the remaining 80% weren't so sure, which included 44% who said it wasn't. Heaven and Hell? 68% believe in a Heaven; 32% not so much. As for Hell, 56% said yes but the rest didn't think so.

The downward trend of religion seems to have begun in the 1960's, although the seeds were certainly planted much earlier; likely the outgrowth of the private hell brought home by the veterans of WWII and Korea. Babyboomers were said to have been the most spoiled group in recent history; totally devoted to materialism in their childhood yet by their 20's embracing a idealistic form of socialism, and again returning to "conspicuous consumption" and corporate greed by their 30's. Now, once more, returning to the nomadic spiritualism of their youth as they enter their senior years.  

Perhaps it was an attempt by their elders to buy them things they themselves couldn't afford during the Great Depression or during the war years. A vain attempt to buy happiness which left a spiritual void in their children. Maybe the same could be said of the Millennials. They too were spoilt by their parents and grandparents, only to be left feeling hollow inside.  

Millennials have a sense of anger at what they see as misused consumption by their elders, leaving them in no mood to be lectured by a generation which seemed to have had it all and blew it. Now they find themselves adrift financially, politically, and spiritually.  However, with no societal anchor to be found with their parents, grandparents, or great grandparents, the deciding fate of organized religion and perhaps society itself lays with the Gen Z, the new kids on the generational block.

 

Religious composition of Baby Boomers

Generational cohort by religious group

Why Millennials distaste for Babyboomers is justified

Religious composition of younger Millennials