Christian ethics

Our Precious Sticks—From a Child’s Hand to a Community’s Legacy

Standard

My little daughter loves to clutch small objects she finds while meandering in the yard or park. A googly eye, a washer, a stone, small flowers, or just a stick on the path that caught her attention. This behavior—part of childhood development—could be about security and comfort, a sense of ownership, establishing independence, or simply having something to hold onto in an otherwise overwhelming world.

Now I suppose I could pry these silly objects out of her tiny hand, break them or throw them aside, and make her cry.  And yet why would any decent person ever intentionally destroy what someone else cherishes? No, even if we don’t personally understand the need for something, only an awful monster destroys what others love simply because they can. It’s vindictive and cruel.

House Upon the Hill

Taken on May 19, 2020.  My caption then read it was a museum.  I had not realized they had quietly shut down the museum.

A few years back, on a walk around the long block, I took this picture. This house, with its Italianate Victorian charm and surrounded by trees, was absolutely a postcard picture—despite the ugly senior care facility built to the right. It was also a familiar landmark and a place I had gone as a child on a school trip. I remember the high ceilings, floor-to-ceiling windows, and wide wraparound porch. On private land, it served as a community site: a place of births, and a few weddings, and a memorial garden where ashes of the deceased were spread.

This was a symbol. A waypoint. A place for people to reflect on where we came from to know where we are going. On that day, with my pace broken for a moment, I thought the legacy was secure. It was well-built in 1861, and still in great condition (better than my own house), certainly far too important to the local lore to be at risk. It was like a grandparent, an elderly voice, a legacy of a time past that deserved the respect we gave it for the role it served in the community. This wasn’t just a house—it was our heritage.

We need these landmarks—especially in the age of Walmartization where everything is cheaply made and disposable.

I remember when Walmart first came, how exciting it was, but now it’s sad to go to a completely new town, have all of the same corporate brands, and only an illusion of variety or choice.

In the Bible they would use a pile of stones as a marker to memorialize important events. I do believe common physical spaces, the locations connecting past with present, are as important today as ever in this age of endless abstraction. Sacredness is imbued on a site by the work and attention spanning time, creating a location for moments of grounding in a world that seems to be spinning out of control.

The old house built of stuccoed brick stood as a silent witness to a changing world. That tower overlooking River Road. For over a century and a half it endured seasons coming and going, lasted through decades of conflict and uncertainty, and watched over the flood waters that rose and fell. It was a guardian of the Susquehanna River, even on the day the body of a young drowning victim—the daughter of a close friend—took her final journey on the waters. Civil War reenactments were held on the grounds.

So, one may say it was just an arrangement of sticks, stones, and glass.  But it was built with human hands and human creativity, and thus carries a shadow of the human souls that built and carefully preserved it.

A Microcosm of Corporate America

The Slifer House, an immaculately preserved example of Samuel Sloan architecture and personal residence of Colonel Eli Slifer—a significant local businessman and Civil War figure (recalled as “one of the few unobtrusively great men of Pennsylvania” in the Philadelphia Times)—later used as an orphanage, the original home of Evangelical Community Hospital, then a museum, and listed on the National Register of Historic Places—has become a victim of cultural vandalism and corruption.

Through a combination of corporate greed and local government apathy—namely Asbury Riverwoods and Kelly Township—a treasured landmark is now a pile of rubble.Decades of effort. The equivalent of three hundred thousand dollars in today’s money raised in 1975 to keep the house in perpetuity—a past generation’s gift to us—has been forever destroyed. Why? Asbury, an out-of-state “non-profit” with a CEO Doug Leidig paid $1.4 million, seems to exist mainly to extract value from the elderly. A museum simply wasn’t going to produce the cheddar. The move likely came down to balance sheets or bonus structures—all while claiming the desecration of history was on behalf of their elderly residents.  Sure.  They destroy our inheritance and don’t even have the decency to admit the enterprise is motivated completely by their own exploitative machinations.

Maybe there was one miserable old coot who had wanted it gone and a dozen others fooled by their claims it was on the verge of collapse.

As touched on in my last post, our property rights are not absolute. Biblical law went as far as to mandate leaving crops in the field for the poor to glean—a Year of Jubilee when all land would be returned to the ancestors of the original owners. This recognized that economic outcomes aren’t all a matter of merit or morality. The authentic Christian tradition has always taught that our individual success is always a gift from God—thus we cannot be inconsiderate of others and should be open-handed.

The Slifer House could have been transferred to those interested in preservation. If the true reason was cost to residents, this would have been the obvious solution. Sadly, it wasn’t about the residents. The current regime prefers profits for the few over preservation for all. It gives priority to faceless corporations led by men who mimic human empathy as part of their manipulations, over community and genuine connectedness. It is not illegal for Asbury’s executives to have a historic treasure smashed and the site desecrated—but there is certainly a question of morality and ethics.

Those who have done this to the Christian village of Yaroun will also claim it is justified—maybe invisible terrorist tunnels?

Those who ruthlessly climb the ranks pride themselves on being forward-thinking and making the hard choices. But in these cases it is only ambition without reflection. They are calloused and unappreciative people who only care about money. That’s why the country is spinning out of balance. The “finders keepers, losers weepers” mindset—where merely having the legal basis to do something is enough—goes against good morality and enables elites to loot this country. When corporations think only of shareholders or those being compensated, the common good is sacrificed.

Capitalism only worked as part of a nation where Christian ethics provided restraint. When ownership is concentrated in the heartless machinery of distant corporations rather than distributed to actual people who live locally, we are dismantling the heart of the Constitutional Republic. We’ve reached a critical point: AI is unprecedented in power and this technology already concentrated in a few hands of men who aren’t even stakeholders in the nation—let alone local character. Small men, bound by convention that has outlasted design, will enable those who will steer us into the abyss.

Valuing Humanity Above ‘Progress‘

The sticks in the hand of a toddler seem useless to some, yet they serve a purpose. It is what the psychologist Donald Winnicott described as “transitional objects” (blankets, toys, sticks, stones) and they are a bridge that helps children move from total dependence to independence. Familiar objects provide comfort, security, and a sense of control in an overwhelming world. One may say they are points of orientation. And deliberately destroying or dismissing them disrupts this process and causes real distress.

Adults have similar needs, most especially in a world of rapid change and reminders to “touch grass” as the way to cope with the disconnect from reality that grows given an increasingly artificial environment.

Slifer House was a place solace to many—a small refuge where things didn’t change. The old rose bush that bloomed magnificently, the memorial garden, the tower overlooking, a hospital where people were born, and a final resting place where their ashes were spread. The desecration of this site deserves far more attention and beyond just Asbury Riverwoods earning the new lower star rating on Google.

We need a conversation like what is taking place in Albania. There are mass protests over an island compound for elites that has been legally approved and yet is now being challenged with chants of “Albania is not for sale” and “cancel the project.” Sadly, in the corporate U.S., we’ve been so conditioned to believe all that matters is money and even our cherished cultural heritage must give way to new development if that’s what the wealthy (and the corporations they control) want for themselves. It is Capitalism without any of the moral restraint the founders viewed as being mandatory:

The spirit of commerce…is incompatible with that purity of heart, and greatness of soul which is necessary for a happy Republic.

John Adams, Letter to Mercy Otis Warren, 1776

Unfortunately our government prefers those exempted from taxes and foreign interests over the good of taxpayers. My home could be seized if I was delinquent in paying local dues, but not those granted their non-profit status while no longer providing anything of a public good. No, Asbury Riverwoods does not technically profit from destruction of property at our expense—but those who hide behind this legal structure most certainly do. Kelly Township’s fault is not having a framework established, the initially flippant attitude elected supervisors had towards those of us who were concerned. They failed at vision, to care enough to have legal protection in place and their negligence will now cost every generation that follows.

What I could sense in the eye rolls at public meetings, sighs in the CC I wasn’t supposed to see, was just a passive-aggressive nasty streak under a plastic smile. The problem with evil in our time is that it conceals under layers of PR, manufactured consent, and insincere “I feel your pain” politicking. Yes, you’ll catch those glimpses of the truth and you know when someone is just going through the motions, but they are just so slippery and hard to pin down. P. Diddy soaked in baby oil is more easily held accountable.  And I do wish for the villains who would openly reveal themselves and just admit they just love breaking another child’s toys for sadistic pleasure.

Like the Dr. Seuss classic Horton Hears a Who!—where a stubborn elephant fights to save a dust speck as others conspire to boil it, what other people cherish should be protected and collective desire to preservation even be treated as being as valuable as a deed. Even if we can’t hear the little voices ourselves or can simply dismiss it as silly sentimentality, this basic lack of hidden value felt in human hearts is currently undermining the pillars of humanity itself—and at this moment when we need respect for feelings the most: As we blaze forward in our mindless commerce, and enter this new age of super intelligent machines without consciousness, will there be a rational reason for these decision makers to keep us?

What will ever stop the elites from bulldozing or boiling us when they find a ‘better’ use of world resources?

At this pivotal time, we need a generation of Eli Slifers to rebuild what was lost and to build the new foundation of morality and ethics.  Trust in institutions like corporations or government will not be sufficient.  If anything the powers that be are in cahoots as they divide us up and pawn us off like the artifacts of Slifer House.  No, we need to rise up like the people of Albania, and reassert ourselves, or  humanity will die with a wimper as the machine of indifferent ‘progress’ pulverizes everything in it’s path.

The Fragile Overlay: Morality, Rationality, and Human Need

Standard

Language isn’t reality. Morality likewise is an overlay. Even rationality itself does not arise from the substrate. Mathematics is probably our best 1:1 analog to something objectively real, and even that breaks down at the edges of reality.  It is important we work through until we find the substance of what matters.

We all have our reasons for what we do. It is often good from our perspective. But we have a perspective limited by our ability to accurately model the world based on what we know and extrapolate from that. Faulty information and assumptions will lead to bad reasoning and the suboptimal outcomes we wish to avoid.  That’s what this essay is about—explanation of what is truly moral and sustainable.

Moral reasoning is about human desire. It is an extension of our biology and part of an effort to survive—even thrive—in the environment we’re in. Morality is about a set of rules, and a good rule is one that produces optimal results. In the words of Anton Chigurh—a sort of force of nature and psychopathic antagonist featured in No Country for Old Men—mocking Carson Wells: “If the rule you followed brought you to this, of what use was the rule?”

Morality doesn’t exist “out there” separated from human need. It is negotiated between us, like language, where we all have a say (to a point), along with culture and tradition (essentially our moral programming), in setting the standard. The “Golden Rule” works as a code because most people have the same natural aims that we do. Morality is about mutual benefit or the win-win situation. And this can break down at the edges, in zero-sum games or times when one believes they can get away with harming another and lacks a true conscience to stop them.

Disproportionate power and differences of language are fracture zones. Reciprocity, as a rule, generally only works with those who are at the same economic level or have a voice. The reason we don’t care about the Armenian genocide of 1915 to 1923 is that we were never told to care. Our morality only applies when we can identify with the other person and see them as an equal. Conflicts arise when we don’t consider what is good from the perspective of another person and they lack the means to stop us.

What is the reason for morality?

To protect ourselves by respecting the right of others to exist as we want to exist.

What causes violence?

  • Low intelligence: If you don’t understand cause and effect or how what goes around comes around, then you’re more likely to do ‘bad’ things without ever fully considering the consequences. You want X, he stands in the way, so you murder him because you are strong enough to do it. This is the law of the jungle.
  • Low exposure: It’s hard to fool me into thinking that other races are subhuman. I have met them in real life. People living around the world may see the U.S. as a nation of school shooters and OnlyFans girls based on what they know of us. But the reality is we’re just a nation obsessed with violence and immoral sexuality. And yet, seriously, ignorance isn’t bliss—it is a propagandist’s haven and what allows them to convince otherwise good people to kill people who don’t look exactly like them or speak their language.
  • Low empathy: Some intelligent people are just psychopaths. They are part of the social contract (although they will pretend to be) and see their own needs as the only ones that are important. They can’t “walk a mile in another man’s shoes” without some innate ability to feel what other people feel and imagine their pain. Empathy is natural and also taught. Yet not all have the same capacity to show empathy or care. If you see other people the same as you do a fly, you won’t hesitate to exploit or kill them if there’s a low risk of consequences.
  • Low trust: We can recognize that others are human, no different from us, and yet still choose to kill them. Why? Well, if there is a fear that others will do violence to us, there’s an option of preemption. It’s also why men kill the guy in the opposite trench in a war—it is me or him. If we see another person as a potential threat, there’s a primitive impulse to eliminate the other before they act. This is how war is sold to the masses: violence as an answer for uncertainty and anxiety over not knowing what they may do.

The problem with violence is that it creates a cycle of violence. And if it doesn’t do that, it still comes at a cost. To prevent this, we must get ahead of the causes. Education, diplomacy, and building relationships are an ounce of prevention worth a pound of cure. Sure, violence can be a winning strategy in the game. However, violence turns what is possibly a win-win scenario into a zero-sum game with unpredictable outcomes. It may be possible to exploit trust and murder your way to the top, yet eventually it catches up to you—eventually someone bigger, smarter, and nastier comes along.

The highest form of morality must therefore serve the ultimate good. A tribal morality, or one where only people like you gain, is risky. It means chaos and conflict. Whereas with a universal morality that serves all, there is a possibility of peace, harmony, or stability. This is why consistent non-violence is the intelligent option. Innocent people are hurt in war. Violence begets violence. So if we want to maximize our own chances or those of our loved ones, then we must respect the rights of all others. Apathy and indifference are not a choice either—we must be united in opposition to violence and abuse of others if we want others to care when it is our turn to face down true evil.

Only in the most extreme circumstances is it moral to use force. Self-defense, or one of the very narrow circumstances where there is no other reasonable option, is a possibly justified exception. Of course, not a “right to defend” that tramples the rights of other people.  Unfortunately, we live in a world of propaganda where the most aggressive and disproportionate acts of revenge can be construed as defense—where unwanted words can be called violence. A clear standard can very soon be rationalized away to the point where defenders are made the aggressors while actually being the victims who are attacked.

This is the problem with any moral system we create. The overlay can be shifted, the language manipulated, and soon we end up back at square one fighting tribal wars over irrational fear of the other. This is why we cannot ever assume that our ideal is being transmitted perfectly in words. This is also the risk of making any exceptions.

Moral conscience must be built and passed on. We need to address the ignorance and show people how history is full of examples of unintended consequences. A war rarely goes as planned. We need to minimize the fear of the ‘other’ by encouraging positive interactions. Humanization is a natural byproduct of good relationships. It is past time to stop putting psychopaths in positions of power. We must resist those who manipulate us to fight wars for their financial or political gain.

We also need to equalize power so that all are represented and all are accountable. If we make some kings and others pawns—some “more equal” like the pigs in Animal Farm—it leads to endless conflict. Wealth inequality is a problem when it means that a few can buy their way out of morality. The Epstein-class—those who believe the law doesn’t apply to them as special people—will come to us in many forms when we let financial or political power concentrate into fewer hands. Morality is all about identifying with the other, and it is only possible when we are all at a similar level of status.

This is a Christian moral teaching:

Our desire is not that others might be relieved while you are hard pressed, but that there might be equality. At the present time your plenty will supply what they need, so that in turn their plenty will supply what you need. The goal is equality, as it is written: ‘The one who gathered much did not have too much, and the one who gathered little did not have too little.’

(2 Corinthians 8:13-15 NIV)

Morality is about considering others to be equal in value to ourselves. And that is easier when they basically are equal in terms of their social status and power. This is why the writers of the New Testament put so much emphasis on the elimination of special social status or favoritism. We are supposed to “submit to one another” rather than enforce our own advantage. We’re told God is impartial. We are told the greater should serve the lesser, to share “all in common” so none are ever in need. The Great Leveler (Galatians 3:28) is a confrontation of identity politics and only fighting for those like us.

It’s interesting how many people want the U.S. to be a Christian nation when it comes to their own sexual mores or religious customs, and yet don’t want to treat the foreigner as the native born (Leviticus 19:33-34) or love their ‘neighbor’ as Christ defined the term. They seek to accumulate power for themselves and impose rather than serve. This is false morality; it is just legalism and hypocrisy—forcing others to apply a morality we do not fully live out ourselves. Being truly moral is about what we consistently live, not merely what we claim about ourselves.

Which brings us to the final point. Morality needs to be consistent in logic and application. We can’t carve out exemptions or have double standards because it destabilizes the entire structure we’re standing on. Moral integrity is about rooting out our contradictions and being the same person in all circumstances. If you lie in one context, for example, eventually this habit is bound to bleed over into another. And if we enable our leaders to violate others, who (or what) will stop them from violating us? This is why we must battle against expediency math that violates consistent application of a moral rule. It is better to take the cost of maintaining these critical principles upon ourselves than risk their end.

Morality is an abstraction. A construct. But it is a very important one to get right.  Good morality is about aim more than it is about perfection.  And like driving when you look where you wish to go rather than at the edges.