A House Divided: an Interesting Talk
This morning, I was reading Mark 3:24-25, “A house divided against itself cannot stand.” I remembered history and Abraham Lincoln quoting that. However, I did not remember the context in which he said it. Curious, I visited the Web. There I found my answer in the Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln, edited by Roy P. Basler et al. I thought about Lincoln’s reckoning the true depth of the division in America in 1858. I then ask myself, are we again a divided nation? It seems we are. I share my thoughts on how divided we are and how we got here.
The following quote comes directly from that same web site as above. “On June 16, 1858, more than 1,000 delegates met in the Springfield, Illinois, statehouse for the Republican State Convention. At 5:00 p.m., they chose Abraham Lincoln as their candidate for the U.S. Senate; he was to run against Democrat Stephen A. Douglas. At 8:00 p.m., Lincoln was to delivered an address to his Republican colleagues in the Hall of Representatives.
“Even Lincoln's friends regarded the speech as too radical for the occasion. His law partner, William H. Herndon, considered Lincoln as morally courageous but politically incorrect. Lincoln read the speech to him before delivering it, referring to the ‘house divided’ language this way: ‘The proposition is indisputably true ... and I will deliver it as written. I want to use some universally known figure, expressed in simple language as universally known, that it may strike home to the minds of men in order to rouse them to the peril of the times.’
“The speech created many repercussions, giving Lincoln's political opponent fresh ammunition. Herndon remarked, ‘when I saw Senator Douglas making such headway against Mr. Lincoln's house divided speech I was nettled & irritable, and said to Mr. Lincoln one day this – “Mr. Lincoln -- why in the world do you not say to Mr. Douglas, when he is making capitol out of your speech, -- “Douglas why whine and complain to me because of that speech. I am not the author of it. God is. Go and whine and complain to Him for its revelation, and utterance.' Mr. Lincoln looked at me one short quizzical moment, and replied 'I can't.’”
The opening paragraph of Mister Lincoln’s speech follows “Mr. President and Gentlemen of the Convention. If we could first know where we are, and whither we are tending, we could then better judge what to do, and how to do it. We are now far into the fifth year, since a policy was initiated, with the avowed object, and confident promise, of putting an end to slavery agitation. Under the operation of that policy, that agitation has not only, not ceased, but has constantly augmented. In my opinion, it will not cease, until a crisis shall have been reached, and passed. ‘A house divided against itself cannot stand.’ I believe this government cannot endure permanently half slave and half free. I do not expect the Union to be dissolved -- I do not expect the house to fall -- but I do expect it will cease to be divided. It will become all one thing or all the other. ….’”
Every member of the of Lincoln’s audience was familiar with Mark 3:24-25, “If a kingdom is divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand. If a house is divided against itself, that house cannot stand.” Are not we, the people of the United States of America, again divided? Are not politicians sounding the alarm that this next election may well end in bloodshed? We, the Church, need to understand where we are and what got us to this point if we are to have any hope of replacing animosity with friendliness.
One of the reasons given by many people for this division is the news media. So, let us look at that. In the middle of the 20th century, television networks believed that providing news was a responsibility, a public service, and a not a moneymaking part of the television business. ABC, CBS and NBC built high-quality news divisions. CBS’s Walter Cronkite, “the most trusted man in America” ended his broadcasts with “And that’s the way it is.” In 1986, Loews Corporation purchased CBS. Loews, a mainly hotel and movie theater company, expected CBS to make as much money as its entertainment divisions, that meant improvements in profitability were necessary. Therefore, cost cutting began with slashing the size of foreign bureaus, far fewer documentaries and less people in the newsrooms. At the same time, market segmentation was on the increase.
Advertisers began to analyze large amounts of demographic data and targeting their products’ advertising more precisely. National audience were sliced and diced. Advertiser aimed at audiences that were likely interested in a particular product. Nearly simultaneously, cable television began. Unlike ABC, CBS and NBC, cable television targets narrow niche audiences. Instead of spending big money to reach mass audiences, advertisers could spend less money and reach the narrow demographics that they were seeking. Cable brought another change to television, the 24-hour news cycle.
The 24-hour cycle meant that cable newsrooms did not have the longer period to analyze what was happening that the major networks had. The major newsrooms had time to prepare content, check it, edit it, vet it and then present it. Unfortunately, preparing, checking, editing, and vetting fell by the wayside as cable reporters had to go immediately on the air with any event that appeared to be of interest to their particular audience. Speed superseded accuracy and mistakes occur daily. Cable news presents instant opinions from “experts” that may be acting out instinct rather than information. That is why cable news is so susceptible to error: misinformation. The results, fully half of Americans no longer trust the news.
Further, if you use a computer, its search engines know you. Super high-speed computers and now Artificial Intelligence use algorithms to track your internet activity identifying what you like and do not like. Advertisers now know your individual tastes, interests, hobbies and consumption patterns. They also know what to avoid, what turns you off. This has resulted in news echo chambers; you hear only the news that appeals to you. Traditional news media continues to miss ad dollars for advertisers are unable to target their audiences as precisely as cable news. Cable advertisers know which news outlet is slanted the way you like and mix their advertisements in with the news that you watch. Appeal rather than facts are for sell. You now listen only to the news that caters to your likes.
The results of this catering: We, the citizens of America, no longer hear all of the truth. No net work can now calm that its anchor is “the most trusted man in America.” No network can end its broadcasts with “And that’s the way it is.” Our ideals and principles are more and more diverse as we grow further and further apart. We no longer share the same standards, morals and ethics. Fewer and fewer of us accept the traditions that once held our Nation together. It is scary isn’t it? We are a divided Nation.
There is another component of the growing division in America: That is the use of our media by our Nation’s institutions to manipulate us citizens. That some in our government were doing that became very apparent during our Covid pandemic. Information that was counter to what our government was saying was squashed, information that later turned out to be true, information that could have changed the direction of treatment particularly of our children. Our government suppressed free speech. I think most now agree that that was a mistake. Soon, we may get a Supreme Court ruling on that practice.
In Murthy versus Missouri, Murphy posed this question to the court: Can the government officials encourage social media companies to moderate certain content that they deem harmful. The Supreme Court has not yet ruled on that. However, Mark Joseph Stern, who covers court cases for the online magazine Slate, believes that The First Amendment certainly does not gag public officials from using the media to inform or persuade. However, previous rulings affecting The First Amendment do bar censorship by government officials. However, we will have to wait on the Supreme Court’s ruling on our government’s use of misinformation and fabrications. Stern says likely the answer will be no change to current practices. The First Amendment, sacred as it is, does permit politicians to lie. There are those that argue that lying may be necessary in national security situations for example, troop movements. So, how are we to prevent the kind of censorship that occurred during the COVID-19? We will have to wait on the Court’s decision. However, I do hope the next time this kind of situation comes along, government official will remember their mistake and not interfere with differences of opinion. Good laws and principles depend on understanding all aspects of a problem.
We must remember that our founders drafted The First Amendment to defend dissent and foster debate. Debate is the system of governance upon which we define our problems, build our laws and solve our tribulations. In honest debate, everyone presents his or her points in an organized way generating critical thinking on the problem. That allows the development of sound logical arguments and usually consensus. We must go back to debating issues and stop letting political ideologies write our laws rather than fact and reason. We must stop ramming thousand-page laws through congress in hours giving little time for debate and consensus.
Our debates must be honest. The Ninth Commandment, Exodus 20:16, “Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.” What is wrong with a politician lying, it is legal? When one person bears false witness to another, he or she misleads that person. He or she is attaching the recipient’s ability to make a sound decision. I will admit that some politicians have so poorly represented us that they feel like the only alternative to the truth is to lie. However, they are not only misleading us and thus maybe causing us to make bad decisions; they are attacking our system of representative government; they are dividing us.
Many misquote this commandment and say, “thou shalt not lie,” but “thou shalt not bear false witness” is far more encompassing than simply lying. Truthfulness must be moral. It ceases to be truthfulness and becomes an abominable form of lying when used as a tool of revenge, or spite. God will not have us use truth maliciously to ruin another person or put someone to open shame. The Bible sees a talebearer as equal to a murderer since lies destroy one of life’s most precious possessions, a person’s reputation. “A truth told with bad intent beats all the lies one can invent.” Yet many politicians speak only with bad intend when attacking an opponent’s proposals. They all too often attack another’s character rather than debate an issue fairly. Unfortunate, few of us expect Congress to change.
There is another scripture necessary for a fair hearing of any serious subject: Ephesians 4:29, “Do not let any unwholesome talk come out of your mouths, but only what is helpful for building others up according to their needs, that it may benefit those who listen.” False rumors, politely referred to as spin, legalese, and fluff are gossip. To prevent bearing false witnessing it is necessary to avoid not only local gossip but also the national gossip that is on many commentary news programs. If you cannot say something good about another person, do not say anything at all. That would be not only a pleasant change; it would end in more problems solving.
I know that in the many years that I was a professional manager, I often heard someone convincingly accuse another person only to find upon further investigation that the talebearer was wrong or had an ulterior motive. I learned to handle such information carefully. American politics has the same problem today. Much of what politicians and television news report is malicious and not verified. What does this all of this mean? It means that we have not become the nation we should be, “One Nation, indivisible with Liberty and Justice for all.”
We must remember that our Nation is a grand experiment. The founders of our experiment had words of warning. Listen to their wisdom:
George Washington, “It is the duty of all Nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey his will, to be grateful for his benefits, and humbly to implore his protection and favors.” Do we acknowledge and obey God’s will or is religion dying?
John Adams, "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” Are we a moral people?
John Hancock, “Resistance to tyranny becomes the Christian and social duty of each individual … Continue steadfast and, with a proper sense of your dependence on God, nobly defend those rights which heaven gave, and no man ought to take from us.” Are we nobly defending the rights that Heaven gave us, or do we deserve God’s wrath?
James Madison “I believe there are more instances of the abridgement [loss] of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments by those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations.” Is our freedom slipping away?
Going back to the man with whose quote I began this talk: Abraham Lincoln said that we are the masters of our fate, “We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.” Do some people pervert Congress and promote runaway courts?
We must seriously take the advice of our founders for we are divided. Our Nation’s divisions are so serious that the world sees them. Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government fears that United States ideological divisions, democratic erosion, and domestic unrest could escalate plunging us into civil war. His government is setting plans for that event. Russia’s President Vladimir Putin suggests that America civil war would be good for the world. Fomenting such a war is in the interest of our cold-blooded enemies. An American civil war would be a green light for Putin’s Russia, Xi’s China and the Ayatollah’s Iran to seize world power. Then there is the treat of domestic terrorist. As an old soldier with war experience, I fear any war especially a civil war. We must avoid it.
I remember what another great American said, Doctor Martin Luther King junior, "We may have all come on different ships, but we're in the same boat now." We are all created in God’s image. That means that we are all equal under God and equal under our Constitution. We, the people of The United States of America, must again recognize each person is welcome to his or her opinion and has a right to express that opinion without fear of reprisal. It is the melding together of different opinions that produces government of the people, for the people and by the people: “E pluribus unum”--”Out of many one.” For one person or one group or one party to want to rule over us is the worst treason. If America’s segmentation does not change, America will fail. To correct the divide in our Nation, we must get back to our most basic and founding principle, “In God we trust.”
