90 SECONDS TO MIDNIGHT (=Doomsday)!

A week ago (on Jan. 23), the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists announced the setting of what they call the Doomsday Clock. Contrary to my expectation, the clock was set the same as last year: 90 seconds to midnight (with midnight representing “doomsday”).

For 75 years now, the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists has been announcing the setting of the Doomsday Clock. That nonprofit organization was founded in 1945 by Albert Einstein and former Manhattan Project scientists. They introduced the Doomsday Clock two years later.

The first setting of the Clock was seven minutes to midnight. In 1949, with the explosion of a nuclear device by the Soviet Union and the beginning of the arms race, it was reset to three minutes before midnight.

The testing of the hydrogen bomb in 1952 led to resetting the Clock in the following January to just two minutes before doomsday. Relations between the U.S. and the USSR improved over the next few years, though, and in 1960 the hands on the Clock were moved back to seven minutes.

Over the next decades, the Doomsday Clock kept going up and down, reaching the farthest from midnight, 17 minutes, in 1991. But in 2002 it was back to seven minutes and has never been further since. In 2015 it was back down to three minutes where it started in 1947.

In January last year, the Clock was set at 90 seconds. the closest to midnight it had ever been, and it was kept at that setting last week. I expected it to be set even closer to “doomsday” because of the threat of expanding, and perhaps nuclear, war in the Levant.*

The threat of nuclear war was the main basis for setting the Doomsday Clock for the first 60 years. In 2007, however, climate change was added to the prospect of nuclear annihilation as another portentous threat to humankind, and the hands on the Clock were set at five minutes to midnight.

The announcement regarding this year’s setting of the Clock stated that there were four main considerations for determining that setting: 1) the many dimensions of nuclear threat, 2) an ominous climate change outlook, 3) evolving biological threats, and 4) the dangers of AI.**

How should we respond to the current setting of the Doomsday Clock? This question surely demands our thoughtful attention. Let me suggest three things:

1) Don’t ignore the Doomsday Clock. It would be easy to shrug off the Clock’s warning because of denial, indifference, or the unwillingness to face seriously the present predicament the world is in—or even just due to the pressure of meeting the demands of our everyday lives.

2) Don’t let the Doomsday Clock get you down. Depression, of course, is the result of feeling “down” for whatever reason. Too much attention to the Clock can certainly cause depression. Just as we shouldn’t ignore the clock, neither should we think about it “all the time.”

3) Work actively to elect candidates of the better political party, that is, the party working more consistently to deal with the dire problems besetting the whole world.

On the website linked to in the second footnote, we are told that the threats the world is currently facing “are of such a character and magnitude that no one nation or leader can bring them under control.”

They go on to state that “three of the world’s leading powers—the United States, China, and Russia—should commence serious dialogue about each of the global threats.”

Further, they contend that those three countries “need to take responsibility for the existential danger the world now faces. They have the capacity to pull the world back from the brink of catastrophe. They should do so, with clarity and courage, and without delay.”

I am not at all optimistic, though, that the three countries mentioned will even begin to do most of what is necessary to move the hands on the Doomsday Clock farther from midnight.

But I am quite sure there is much more possibility of that being done under the Democratic Party in the U.S. rather than by the MAGA party, which includes so many xenophobic people who, among other things, are also global warming and pandemic deniers--as well as deniers of the clear results of the 2020 presidential election. 

_____

  * I previously wrote about the Doomsday Clock in August 2020 (see here) and mentioned it briefly (here) in March 2018. Some things now are much the same, but there are some distinct differences also.

Note too that the Doomsday Clock elicits attention from around the world. See, for example, this Jan. 17 article from the Hindustan Times, an Indian English-language daily newspaper based in Delhi.

** See here for the official “2024 Doomsday Day Clock Statement” and related information. 

The Challenge of the Golden Rule

The Golden Rule is something “everyone” knows but hardly anyone follows to a significant degree. In this post, I want to think with you about the meaning and practice (or lack thereof) of the Golden Rule and the challenge it presents in one concrete problem facing USAmerican society today. 

The Golden Rule in Christianity and Other Religions

“Do unto others as you would have others do unto you” (Matt. 7:12), words of Jesus in his Sermon on the Mount, have been referred to as the Golden Rule since the 17^th century. Similar words, though, were said/written in other religious traditions before and after Jesus.*¹

Of special interest is the statement of Hillel, the esteemed Jewish rabbi who died about 10 years after Jesus’ birth. He reportedly said, “What is hateful to yourself, do to no other.”

This negative version of the Golden Rule, sometimes called the Silver Rule, is often expressed, “What you do not wish done to you, do not do to others.” Similar words are found in ancient Hindu and Buddhist texts, as seen in this image: 

It is interesting that the words of the five major religions seen here, the Muslim words are closest to the words of Jesus. One source states, “According to Anas ibn Mālik (d. 712), the Prophet [Mohammed] said: “None of you has faith until he loves for his brother what he loves for himself’.”

What about the Platinum Rule?

Some people are critical of the Golden Rule and say it should be replaced by what they call the Platinum Rule: “Treat others the way they would like to be treated.” This shifts the focus from what you want to what others want.

Jennifer Furlong, a motivational speaker and advocate for personal growth gave a TEDx talk titled “The Golden Rule Not so Much, Platinum Rule Rocks.” In that talk, she declares that the Golden Rule is terrible relationship advice and urges people to use the Platinum Rule instead. *²

There is certainly merit in this emphasis on the (poorly named?) Platinum Rule. Thinking about what others want or need and seeking to respond to those wants/needs is a worthy challenge for us all. But so many people don’t even come close to meeting the challenge of the Golden Rule.

Let me illustrate this with one contemporary issue.  

The Golden Rule and the Current Immigration Crisis

The number of immigrants crossing the southern border of the U.S. is one of the most contentious issues facing our nation at present, and it raises a lot of red flags for many. A shutdown of the government almost happened because of the strong disagreement between the pro- and anti-immigration legislators.

Further, before long the Republican House of Representatives will likely impeach Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas. Republicans have repeatedly accused Mayorkas of failing to enforce the nation's laws as a record number of migrants arrived at, and crossed, the U.S.-Mexico border.

The clamor to “close the border” is actively supported by many conservative White evangelicals. But how does one obey the Golden Rule and turn away people, including families, fleeing violence and starvation?

One tragic example is that of a Mexican woman and two of her children who drowned last week seeking to cross the Rio Grande at Eagle Pass, Texas. Mexican authorities requested help from the U.S. Border Patrol, but they were denied access to the area by the Texas State Police and National Guard.

So, if you were there in the place of that mother, what would you want others to do to/for you? Of course, you would want them to do all they could to rescue you and your children.

How could people claim to follow the Golden Rule but do nothing to help those seeking refuge from violence and extreme economic hardship?

Some have claimed that we are human beings, not human doings. That may be true, but be sure to note that the first word of the Golden Rule is do.

_____

*¹ The Wikipedia article gives a helpful summary of the variety of ways the Golden Rule has been expressed by numerous religious leaders and secular scholars. 

*² That 2017 talk was loaded on YouTube, and to date it has had around 12,000 views. It is a bit ironic, though, that in contrast to what once was usually the case, gold is now worth considerably more than platinum. Even at the end of 2017 an ounce of gold was worth $1,300 but an ounce of platinum was worth only $940.

*³ See this article posted on January 16. Although it is about a bridge some 300 miles southeast of Eagle Pass, I also suggest you read this Jan. 17 article titled “Fellowship Southwest joins bridge walk to draw attention to broken asylum system.”

P.S.: Here is a 1967 Wizard of Id comic strip by Johnny Hart: 

Looking Back, Looking Ahead

In her December 31 sermon, my pastor told us about Sankofa, a concept/symbol that comes from the Akan people who live mainly in Ghana. I had not previously heard of Sankofa, but Pastor Ruth’s use of that idea on Dec. 31 was surely appropriate.

Sankofa is also appropriate for us to think about now in this second week of the new year. 

Sankofa is often illustrated as a beautiful bird with its head turned backward taking an egg off its back. It symbolizes the West African proverb about the importance of reaching back to the past, learning from it, and using that knowledge to create a more desirable future.

According to what ChatGPT told me, “The Sankofa is deeply rooted in African philosophy and is often used to emphasize the significance of cultural heritage, knowledge and the interconnectedness of past, present, and future.”

As Pastor Ruth showed us in her sermon, this symbol is at the very top of the new (2019) Sankofa Peace Window at the New Mount Pilgrim Missionary Baptist Church in Chicago. (Click here to see a picture of that impressive window.)**

It is certainly appropriate for African American people to use the Sankofa symbol as they seek to acknowledge their past heritage in endeavoring to create a better future for themselves in this country.

That same emphasis, though, is something we all, regardless of race or nationality, can borrow and apply to our lives with considerable benefit at the beginning of this new year.

Sankofa can be linked to the ancient Roman god Janus, the god with two faces, one looking forward and the other one backward. The English word January, as you probably know, is named after Janus. 

Both Sankofa and Janus symbolize a dual-faced looking backward and forward, but Sankofa is more noteworthy. Janus was primarily the god of beginnings and transitions, associated with the passage of time and the start of a new phase.

Sankofa is more meaningful, though, because it places a significant emphasis on learning from the past for the benefit of the future.

Utilizing the Sankofa concept in this critical year of 2024 is of great importance. We need to learn from the past year, or past few years, to help us make wise decisions in this new year.

Many things might be considered in this regard, and I encourage each of you to consider what you can learn from your own past experiences to forge a better future for yourself and your loved ones in the year ahead.

Here, however, I want primarily to think with you about the debacle that took place three years ago on January 6 in our nation’s Capitol.

At a news conference last Thursday (Jan. 4), Matthew Graves, U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, said,

On January 6, 2021, the United States lost control of the grounds around its Capitol and most of the Capitol itself. Thousands of people descended on the Capitol, and hundreds of people within the mob used force and violence to overwhelm the vastly outnumbered law enforcement officers protecting the building and those who work within it.

Then on January 5, President Biden made an important speech in Pennsylvania, not far from Valley Forge, where General George Washington quartered his troops from December 1777 to June 1778 during the Revolutionary War.

That war, the President said, was about “Freedom, liberty, democracy.” “Valley Forge,” he emphasized, “tells the story of the pain and the suffering and the true patriotism it took to make America.” But three years ago, when insurrectionists tried to stop the peaceful transfer of power on January 6, 2021, “we nearly…lost it all.”

When all the facts are examined, it seems undeniable that by his words and actions, the 45^th President of the U.S. was the one who instigated the violence of that unruly mob.

For the sake of preserving the democracy that has been at the heart of this nation from the beginning, it is imperative that we look back and properly assess the events of Jan. 6, 2021, and look ahead to November with the resolve to do all we can to keep Donald Trump from becoming the 47^th POTUS.

_____

** This is the third remarkable stained-glass window installed in that church since the MAAFA Remembrance Window was unveiled in 2000. The term “maafa” is a Swahili word that means “great disaster” or “great tragedy.” It is often used to refer to the African Holocaust or the transatlantic slave trade, during which millions of Africans were captured, enslaved, and transported to the Americas and other parts of the world (ChatGPT). The window pictures a representation of Christ whose torso contains a schematic of a slave ship.

Note: Last week I discovered that a novel titled Sankofa was published in 2021, and I am reading it now and finding it quite interesting. It is by Chibundu Onuzo, a woman born in Nigeria in 1991 and who has lived in England since 2005. It was Reese Witherspoon’s book club “pick” for Oct. 2021. 

In This New Year, Let’s Respect the Humanity of Everyone

In December, I finished (slightly) revising and updating the 2020 book I wrote primarily for my children and grandchildren, the subtitle of which now is The Story of My Life from My Birth to My 85^th Birthday (1938~2023). My daughter Kathy (who lives nearby) helped in several ways, including doing some proofreading. 

A few times in my book, I used the word Black(s) to refer to African American people. Kathy, who is a teacher of gifted students in the local public school system, said that that terminology should be changed, and referred to the current recommendations of the APA in that regard.

In their style guide for writing, the American Psychological Association (APA) lists some “general principles for reducing bias,” one of which is “be sensitive to labels.” In that regard is this directive: “Acknowledge people’s humanity.” They went on to say,

Choose labels with sensitivity, ensuring that the individuality and humanity of people are respected. Avoid using adjectives as nouns to label people…or labels that equate people with their condition.

Although there are some descendants of enslaved people in this country who reportedly prefer to term Black to African American, I soon agreed with the APA’s guidelines, and with my insightful daughter.

This insight is something I heard more than 60 years ago from Wayne Oates, the professor of my seminary course in Pastoral Counseling.* I have not, though, sufficiently or consistently put that perspective into practice.

I still remember Dr. Oates telling us “preacher boys” (and I don’t remember even one female student in that course I took in 1961 or ’62) that in our work as pastors, we shouldn’t say things like we’re going to visit the sick or the elderly. Rather, we should always refer to them as sick or elderly people.

Oates, who had a Ph.D. in religious psychology, was emphasizing then what the APA is still stressing now: adjectives should not be used as nouns to label people. The humanity of all people should always be recognized.

Even the humanity of our enemies must be affirmed. That is one thing that impressed me when I read the Sojourners article that introduced and included an interview with Ali Abu Awwad, the Palestinian pacifist I wrote about in my previous blog post.** That article begins with these words:

A core principle of nonviolence is recognizing the humanity of your opponent.

Considerable progress has been made in this regard in recent years. In the public media, “slaves” are now usually referred to as enslaved people. Such language choice separates people's identity from their circumstance.

And just the other day, I was surprised to hear a newscaster on the radio refer to “people experiencing homelessness” rather than “the homeless.” That was another example of people’s humanity being emphasized over their current condition.

But what about Awwad’s emphasis on recognizing the humanity of one’s opponents or enemies? It is certainly commendable that as a Palestinian man he can see the humanity of the Israelis who incarcerated him.

Can Israelis or even us in this in country, though, recognize the humanity of Palestinians affiliated with Hamas? It is certainly easier to demonize such people—and the enemy in every war is demonized. That makes it much easier to kill them.

As an advocate of nonviolence, I agree with Awwad’s recognition of the humanity of all people, including enemies. After all, Jesus said to his followers, “…love your enemies and pray for those who harass you” (Matt. 5:44, CEB).

The Hamas fighters are usually called terrorists, and not without reason. But if we follow the guidelines given above, perhaps they should be called “desperate people engaging in terrorism [=the use of intentional violence and fear to achieve political or ideological aims].”

I do not in any way condone the 10/7 violent attacks on Israel. But I do want to affirm their humanity, and that affirmation comes partly from recognizing their legitimate grievances at the way Palestinians have been treated since 1948.  

There is no telling what may happen, in the Levant or the world as a whole, in this new year of 2024. But among other things, let us always endeavor to respect the humanity of all people.

_____

  * In my 10/20/14 blog post I wrote that Wayne Oates was “probably the wisest teacher I ever sat under.”

** Only after making my previous blog post did I learn that Awwad was one of two men awarded this year’s Indira Gandhi Prize for Peace, Disarmament and Development in December. That award was bestowed on Awwad for his “efforts towards a non-violent resolution of the Israel-Palestine conflict.” That prestigious Peace Prize has been awarded annually since its establishment in 1986. Jimmy Carter was the recipient of it in 1997.