Problem 1: Religious Zealotry
I use the term "zealotry" to make a distinction. Some of my good friends are religious and reasonable people who understand that bigotry and stupidity is not how personal religion should affect the believer. For example, none of my friends believes we should discriminate against people with different sexual orientations because a passage in an old book can be interpreted to suggest that their deity thinks men shouldn't have sex with men. My friends seem to take the notion that their religion calls for treating everyone well to heart, instead of trying to use it as justification for hateful acts. I like my friends. I like religious people who think like them and are generally good people. So, when I call Religion our first problem in the United States, I'm not talking about people who have their personal religion and generally leave other people alone about it. I'm talking about people who blindly believe in their religion, and that have gotten to the point where they don't understand that they're doing or saying something horrifically inhumane and offensive. Also... frequently specifically false.
The basic argument that I see repeatedly is that our "freedom of religion" should mean that Christianity has a place of honor and favor in our government. This is of course flat out incorrect from the original constitutional intent to modern reasons of fairness. Freedom of Religion means the government can't tell us what religion to follow, and can't use religious tenets to lead and rule us with. The government cannot favor a religion over others. Because the government is supposed to treat us equally. I am an atheist who believes it is wrong to tell LGBTQ folks that they don't have access to the same rights I have. I'm allowed to get married to my wife, and we now have certain legal differences from people who are not married, including certain tax differences, and the right to make medical decisions for each other if one of us should be unconscious. I'm sure there are more... but marriage is not a religious institution. It has long been part of human history, and was not always religious. And in the modern day, it does exist as a legal contract. Denying anyone the same rights as others because of sexual orientation is by itself unconstitutional. I'm really tired of hearing of religious zealots arguing that it is a moral and virtuous thing to discriminate against people.
Anyway, religious freedom saves us all here because the government is not allowed to make a law based on a religious idea. It is unconstitutional for any laws to discriminate that way based on the Christian idea that men shouldn't have sex with men. Thank "God" our founders had the foresight to enshrine in our constitution that religion is not the guide for fairness to be used in government. Actually, I feel dirty even putting that thanks in quotes. I actually thank our founding fathers for being smart and for doing the right thing.
But now we're left with this problem. We have a lot of people in this country that believe strongly enough in their religion, that they don't even understand that their bigotry is bigotry. They THINK they're being good people and they THINK they're holding up some ideal of "good". And when you argue with a person who has that level of faith, you are going to get frustrated. The stubborn faithful folks are suffering from something all of us suffer from. We as humans have a tendency to get defensive when our beliefs are challenged, instead of considering new information, weighing it against evidence, and possibly changing our minds. No one likes to find out that they're wrong. Except people who think with the scientific method. Learning something new that is better information than you had before is exciting. It's just difficult to consciously overcome the natural instinct to defend your beliefs and truly consider new ones. So, we have a huge group of people/voters who are making their voices heard enough that some states have tried passing laws to force marriage into being a union of a man and a woman, excluding many people who don't deserve to be excluded.
Religion is also a problem in this country because religious organizations already get special treatment. Churches and other religious institutions are tax exempt. They don't have to pay taxes. Why? Why do they get to operate without contributing? And by them being tax exempt, government programs that benefit all of us have to be paid for with taxes they get from the rest of us. As an atheist, I'm shouldering some of the burden that religious institutions should be shouldering. We're all paying more to the government than we would have to otherwise because religious institutions don't have to.
Here's a great article about this very topic: http://bigthink.com/21st-century-spirituality/how-to-make-71-billion-a-year-tax-the-churches
The article points out too that their charitable donations seem to pale in comparison to the money they spend on furthering political goals like trying to make abortion illegal. But it doesn't end there. Religion is the disease that just keeps attacking.
Religion in education is a problem. There are people believe that Intelligent Design deserves the same consideration as the Big Bang, Abiogenesis, and Evolution to explain reality. And in Texas, where apparently lots of the educations system materials are published, this level of religious stupidity is allowed to have sway over education. If we teach a kid that the Bible says that God created the universe and everything in it, and we know this because the Bible says so, and we must have faith in the Bible... we are teaching our kids to believe things they are told by authority figures without actually verifying anything. And we are teaching them to believe in something in direct opposition to all the evidence we have. We're teaching our kids to accept what they're told instead of teaching them to be curious and inquisitive. I HATE Intelligent Design and the efforts being made to push it in schools. It is a direct effort to ruin our children and destroy any lead the United States has over the world in education. Instead of a kid growing up thinking "I have a really good idea for how to cure cancer", we'll have a kid growing up thinking "God wouldn't kill children by inflicting them with cancer. They must not be praying hard enough for forgiveness.". You can find news stories of families that refused to bring their children to a hospital because their religion forbids medicine. Adults choosing for their children that they should die of curable problems. It's appalling to me that those parents are stupid enough to think that praying can cure their child and that medicine is a sin. Those kids shouldn't have their fates decided by people like that. It's just awful. Sorry... I'm meandering a bit on this aspect of the topic.
Religion is a problem for the United States. Its influence is destructive. And there's not really anything we can do about the adults brainwashed enough to think that critical thinking is wrong. Education is the answer... but that takes time, and we have the further problem that at the time of writing this, we have an ultra religious moron for a Secretary of Education. She's trying to spread the disease. And the arguments I've heard for "putting God back into schools" is that bad things would stop happening. It hurts my heart that people think that brainwashing and the destruction of curiosity is the answer to societal problems. And people in authority can tell these people whatever they want, and get support. Okay... I'll leave it there and move on to the next problem...
Problem 2: The Super Rich
I'm taking a big deep breath as I write this because I'm drawing my own conclusions from information that really should be verified more carefully with a funded scientific study. So, I'm warning that a lot of this one is opinion that I think will line up with reality. I'm pretty confident that the wealth gap in our country is a cause of many of our severe problems in this country, either directly or through a chain of cause and effect. There's a lot to cover. And I'm just as angry about the super rich as I am about religious zealots who think religion is a solution to our problems.
I could get right to the point. Okay... fine. I'll start with the conclusion, and then talk about why I think that. The big problem with the super rich is that this country is no on longer a country of, by, and for the people. This country is what is technically called a Plutocracy. If you don't feel like reading the wiki article I linked, it basically means that the minority of people with the most money control the government. And that's what's happening. Between individuals and organizations donating money, politicians no longer represent us... the people they're supposed to represent. I believe this is the norm, and not the exception. I think most politicians now vote and support efforts that are aligned with where they get the most money from. On topics like religion, gun control (more importantly: research on violence), health care, college funding, foreign affairs (like in business, trade, and armed conflicts), the country's energy sources, and so on. Our individual votes and opinions don't matter as much as the opinions of people and organizations that can provide lots of money. I assert that this country is run by the rich, and the rest of us suffer for it.
Think about the idea of Human Influenced Climate Change. It's a fact that humans are affecting the climate in a negative way that is dangerous to us even today, and will be more so as time goes on. Anyone who suggests it's not a fact, or that it isn't real, is suffering from the propaganda of Big-Oil. Think about it for a minute. Who stands to gain from HICC being real? I'd say energy companies that are trying to find us alternative power sources to replace fossil fuels. But they don't have money yet... they can't afford to create a huge conspiracy to scare us. Who stands to gain if people believe HICC is untrue? Big-Oil, and anyone depending on fossil fuel for money. Those companies have been around a long time, and they don't seem to want to change. They COULD accept that what they're doing is destructive to the world and will result in millions or billions of deaths and much suffering. They COULD ask the government for a subsidy to research alternatives, and I'd even be happy for my tax money to go there. They COULD lead the way to a clean future, but instead, they are paying politicians to fight like crazy against the idea of Human Influenced Climate Change... so they can keep making money in piles. They're profiting from making the world worse. It's like cigarette companies trying to claim their products don't harm people. For a long time they managed to keep the truth at bay so they could keep making money from the suffering and death of people using their product.
Now think about Gun Violence in our country. This is a really tricky one, because I personally think the solution is not in new legislation, but in the fixing of programs that exist and in improving our ability to enforce existing laws... but also in treating the root cause of the violence. Gun Violence is actually a topic that fits two aspects of my complaint with the super rich. The NRA is a very wealthy organization that can pump a lot of money into politics to keep gun laws from happening. And they go much too far in their efforts. I actually appreciate them for keeping one of our rights safe. I'm a supporter of gun rights. But how we get to the point of our freedom being protected is something I take exception with. The NRA is a lobby group. It influences politics beyond voting. They are an example of a "thing" with lots of money controlling government. They are part of the reason this country is a plutocracy instead of a democracy. The founding fathers would be aghast. But the NRA isn't a cause of gun violence. I'm going back to blaming the super rich for that one, and that will take me some effort in following paragraphs. One last thing I'll mention that the NRA is doing wrong: They're blocking research into gun violence. We need information to figure out how to act appropriately. And I think that research would likely tell us that the problem is societal pressure.
Every one of the people who I'm aware of that hurt and killed people with guns is a mentally unstable white guy. They all seem to be loner types. They all seem to be the type where acquaintances would describe them as "maybe a little off, but nice enough". They all SEEM to be people who live on the outskirts of social contact. They seem to not feel like they belong. And they seem to be lashing out by scaring, hurting, and killing people. I'm not a psychologist, and I imagine that each case is more complicated than what I just described, but I get the feeling that social cliques and levels are to blame. We all find our groups of friends... people we spend time with. We find groups to belong to, that exclude other people. We do it by hobby, profession, religion, appearance, manners, intelligence, and wealth. The wealth one is the one I want to focus on as (in my opinion) the biggest problem.
The super rich seem to be doing everything in their power to pay employees as little as possible, and everything in their power to avoid paying taxes. And they seem to believe they deserve it. And they seem to not understand how inhumane they're being. A number I've seen in a few different places, but I'll link an article that agrees with the number I've seen. Do you're own research of course, but the average CEO is paid about 350 times what their employees are paid on average. Here's the Washington Post article. The article I linked is 3 years old, so maybe things are different, but I doubt it's different in our favor. If the average salary in the country is 40,000 dollars, that means the average CEO makes 14,000,000 dollars a year. That's... infuriating. Yes. Infuriating is the right word. What does anyone need with fourteen million dollars a year? Really? I mean I get that winning the lottery would be awesome. You pay off your mortgage, or buy a slightly bigger house. You help our your family and friends. And then make sure your kids are set up to not have to worry about food or shelter while they figure out how to make their way in life. But really, there's an early point where the money becomes ridiculously excessive. I don't need 14 million dollars a year, and if I took that much money while the people working for me were making forty thousand dollars a year, I'd feel extreme guilt. I'd know that I'm an awful human being.
Imagine if that CEO took 500,000 dollars a year in pay instead. That's plenty. Really, I could live a great life and more with that money. Now imagine that CEO has 500 employees making 40,000 dollars a year. They could take the 13.5 million left over, and maybe put some of it into savings for the company so make sure it stays solvent and to make sure it can survive depressions. But they could also split a bunch of it and help those employees to live better lives. For 10 million of that, they could give all of the employees a 20,000 dollar per year raise. That's 500 people with a much better amount of money to live on. People with lives, families, dreams... they should have the power to find happiness too.
But instead of generous humane people leading our companies, we have selfish ignorant ones. And as a result, we have millions of people in the country struggling to have food, shelter, and hope. We have millions of people going through every day full of stress and worry. We have millions of people being exposed to pressure and fear that might make us the least happy first or second world country in the world. And the nastiest trick they pulled off is making those millions of people blame almost anything else. Those nasty people from the other political party who are stupidly voting for policies you think won't work? Yeah... blame other people in the same boat as you. That makes sense. Right now, we have a selfish greedy asshole for a president. He's among the super rich. And his supporters think his tax bills will help them. His supporters are ignoring the ridiculous amount of wealth that Trump wants to give back to people who already have ridiculous amounts of wealth. His supporters are ignoring that programs those taxes pay for, are programs that poor and middle class people depend on. Of course getting rid of government funded health care will help cut taxes. But now when we need health care, we have to pay more. A lot more. And when a poor child needs heart surgery, they either can't get it, or they'll be in debt for the rest of their lives. For heart surgery. Are the super rich really stupid or callous enough to think that getting tax money back is worth ruining lives... or people dying? Of course I'm infuriated at the super rich.
I think I could rant about the super rich for a long time. A very long time. But I'll try to reign myself back in, and focus on my point. I'm trying to suggest that the wealth gap is part of the problem that leads to violence. I believe that when a person is under great pressure; is feeling great stress; is feeling anxiety about being able to pay for food and shelter; and is feeling like other people around you are the reason you're not doing better... that you're not happier... I'm not surprised there are people lashing out. I'm not surprised some men are awful enough to abuse their families. I'm not surprised by violent protests. I'm not surprised that sometimes a person will give up, and accept the idea that killing others is the only way forward for them. I don't approve of it... but I'm not surprised. And I believe the super rich controlling our government, and being so selfish, is a huge part of the suffering our country faces.
Problem 3: People believe that socialist ideas are automatically bad
Not all people of course. But it's common enough that politicians can run on platforms opposing socialism and win. So lets talk about this. What makes an idea socialist? My understanding is that the basic idea of socialism is when we as a people contribute to the well being of all people. It is not specifically like the idea of taking all wealth and distributing it evenly. I agree that doing so would cause other problems. But, a police force is a socialist construct. Think about it. Our tax money goes to pay for the police, and their job is to serve and protect us. They are something we all contribute to, that is meant to benefit all of us. The military is a socialist program. Fire departments are socialist programs. Upkeep of the roads in terms of creation, maintenance, and care during bad weather... it's a socialist program too. Public school is a socialist idea too. A way for any citizen to have access to education, and having an educated population definitely benefits us all. Even if you're no longer in school, and don't have kids in school... you are still benefiting from your fellow citizens being educated.
Universal healthcare is complained about by the rich and the healthy. The rich think they're contributing more than they should, and the healthy think they shouldn't have to pay into a system that they aren't using. But I'll point back to the the example I used earlier. What happens to the poor kid that can't afford heart surgery? He either dies, or goes into debt he'll never recover from. I'm not super rich. I'll admit my household income is higher than average, but I'm not anywhere near super rich. And we have debt to pay back too. But I'd be happy to know that my higher contribution helps that kid who needs heart surgery. I'd be happy to know that my taxes go to help people deal with the worst struggles of their lives. I'm happy to contribute more to a program that will ensure that no one has to deal with financial worries when they are most in need of help. I like the idea of helping. And I'm not selfish or greedy enough to choose money over human life and well-being. The fact that universal health care is described as a socialist idea, doesn't make it a bad idea. And I'd hope that people in this country can start to see things they way I do. The only people that would lose in this scenario are the CEOs of those huge health insurance companies. You know... the same ones that want to deny coverage at every chance they get, and who pay their executives millions of dollars per year.
Another one I think is a good idea that is socialist: tax funded education all the way through doctoral education. Right now, any kind that wants to get more education after high school has to pay a huge sum of money that they likely have to borrow to get a degree. These are kids that are going to be our engineers, our scientists, our doctors, care givers, and who are looking to perform a task that is beyond what high school can prepare them for. Don't misunderstand. Jobs that can be done without a college education are important. Our world moves forward and keeps going because of all the people doing jobs... college educated or not. But for some reason right now, we penalize the ones that need college education by making them start their adult lives in debt. Especially medical professionals that need 8 years or more of paid for education. Why are we making the people who want to help us stay healthy start out in crazy debt? Why are we putting obstacles in the way of people who want to help us? Who want to contribute to society? There are our children. And the current system is unfair to the poor out of proportion to fairness again. If a poor kid wants to become a doctor, and works their butt off in public school, only to find they can't afford to continue their education... we're losing a good doctor because rich people don't want to pay taxes. Shouldn't it be that merit decides where people find themselves in life? Shouldn't we encourage people to flourish? Doesn't that benefit all of us if even people who start with financial disadvantage can rise and live a great life? It's definitely a socialist idea... but we desperately need to change the thinking of people who vote against using tax money for education instead of making our kids start out in debt. Bernie Sanders was absolutely correct on this one.
I guess this should be expanded to say that we shouldn't judge an idea based on its label. Socialism isn't a way the whole government and country should be run, but a socialist idea should be considered based on its merit. A conservative idea should be considered based on merit. A liberal idea should be considered based on merit. We all need to be better about considering things by merit instead of the feelings we have about the source.
Problem 4: Conceptual Divisions
Building on the end of that last one... and an idea mentioned in an earlier section... we need to stop fighting against each other. These days, I'm not a big fan of Republicans. But that's a terrible way to think about it. It's just convenient. A person who is a Republican (and not also super rich), probably wants good things for people in general. I don't think that a person is a bad person just because they identify as a republican. My opinion of a person depends on lots more. Do they accept that Human Influenced Climate Change is real and is a problem? If not, I start to think less of them. If they don't accept it, is it just because they weren't informed? Are they willing to change their mind? Or are they just clinging to the blind faith in Trump and Pruitt who are just trying to save the profits of the big oil companies? Are they unwilling to consider that they might be wrong? I'll think less of them for that. But I think the divisions that exist in society like political party, religious affiliation, skin color, profession, and so on... are dangerous for us to accept. When we decide that we won't talk to a Republican because Republicans are all morons who supported Trump, we put an end to the possibility of communication. We're making things worse. We change whatever probability there is of reaching understanding together to zero.
Alright, I don't feel as much anger about this topic. I don't have as much to say. But I do think we need to find ways to talk to each other. Even the groups of people I'm most furious with right now: the super rich, and the powerful who use religion to sway people to their own way of thinking. Those people need to know what they're doing, and how they're hurting humanity as a whole. And I need to listen to their point of view to see if maybe I'm mistaken in some way. If I stubbornly refuse to listen, I'm part of the problem too.
Problem 5: Bad Drivers
Okay... this is meant to be lighthearted, but it does make me angry on an almost daily basis. If you're reading this far and willing to listen... Please drive 5 to 10 miles per hour above the speed limit on the highway (or more in 55mph zones... that speed is just ridiculously low); please stay out of the left lane unless you're actively passing someone else, and pass at a speed that doesn't take three minutes to complete; use your turn signal when you change lanes (and don't bother when you're in a turning only lane); and when you're first at a red light, pay attention and go fast through the intersection when it turns green so as many people behind you can get through too.
Closing
Thank you for reading this beast of an essay. I hope it was interesting. And I'll look forward to polite argument in the comments.
