The Fall of America...

...is inversely proportional the the rise of atheism. Or should I say the suppression of Christianity from everyday life.

The officially atheist Chinese government is surprisingly open to Christianity, at least partially, because it sees a link between the faith and economic success. China believes that Christianity is responsible for much of the historic success of Western Europe and the United States, said Dr. William Jeynes, senior fellow of The Witherspoon Institute in Princeton, N.J.

The scholar, who has multiple degrees and graduated first in his class at Harvard University, recalled an incident that confirms that China believes Christianity is responsible for the U.S.’s economic prosperity. At a Harvard Business conference years ago, Jeynes recalled top Chinese CEOs one after another asking Harvard scholars not about their talking points but about the relationship between Christianity and the U.S.’s economic prosperity.

The Harvard scholars, Jeynes noted, were baffled and did not know how to respond.

China, however, is not the first to make a connection between the Christian faith and economic prosperity. German sociologist and political economist Max Weber wrote the book The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism in which he argued that ascetic Protestantism was a major reason behind the rise of capitalism and the economic success of the Western world.

Weber observed that Christianity produces good work ethic and subsequently economic prosperity because it instills a sense of calling and people are more determined and more passionate about their work. The German economist also contended that Christianity promotes honesty, which is necessary to build trust that is essential in economic transactions; encourages people to be their best and be concerned about their neighbors’ standard of living; and discourages materialism.

But while the Chinese government is open to Christianity, it also “wants to control Christianity.” Those in authority are very much aware of the Church’s role in bringing down the Berlin wall and advancing democracy in the Soviet bloc.

“They view Christianity as a belief system that if not controlled will potentially overthrow the government,” said Jeynes. “But on the other, they see that if you try to oppress Christians that it could lead to this explosion as it did in Eastern Europe and [they could] lose control that way.

“So they want Christianity for the benefits but they want to control it, and that is the balance they are currently trying to achieve.”

Other world religions do not promote economic prosperity like Christianity.

Hinduism believes Hindus are born and not made so there is a large degree of passivity in the religion, Weber observed. Also, the Hindu caste system is not conducive to instilling a work ethic where people push themselves harder with the hope that they can rise above their current situation.

In Buddhism, which shares many similarities with Hinduism, followers are taught the importance of respect and deference to the point that they support the status quo instead of change. Buddhism also defines “desire” as fundamentally wrong, whereas in Christianity there is distinction between the desire to glorify God and love people versus selfish and evil desires.

Meanwhile, Confucianism, dominant in East Asia, leaves less room for social mobility than Christianity because it emphasizes hierarchy. It also is more supportive of dominating forms of government than Christianity, Weber noted.

And with Islam, the hierarchy value is even more emphasized than in Confucianism. Islam emphasizes compliance rather than freedom of grace that Jesus brings. Christianity’s teaching of God’s love encourages followers to help raise the living standards of others, the economist also observed.

As Weber, other scholars, and now the Chinese government observe, where Christianity is dominant there is economic prosperity.

(This next sentence is especially for you LE)

American Orthodox Rabbi Daniel Lapin, who is a political commentator, noted that 90 percent of scientific discoveries over the last 1,000 years were in nations in which Christianity was dominant.

“The Chinese believe that if the level of immorality that exists today, sexual immorality especially, persists, then the economic strength of the country cannot continue,” said Jeynes. “So they very quickly want to teach morality, especially to the young before their economy might indeed collapse.”

“It is not that they embrace Christianity with the most pure motive,” Jeynes noted. “A lot of their motive is it is good for our country, the morality of the country, and if we want economic prosperity to continue we need to have a more invitational approach to those who are Christian.”

There are an estimated 100 million Christians in China, about 75 million in the “underground” church, said Jeynes, and the number of believers is growing by six to seven million a year.

SOURCE

55 comments:

Reconciled1 said...

Psalms 33:12-blessed is the nation who's God is the Lord

Anonymous said...

R1

amen

RightCoast said...

True . true. Thanks for posting this TS.

Anonymous said...

People who don't believe that a woman made from a rib was conned into eating a piece of fruit because a talking snake told her to are the cause of our nation's problems?

You people are crazy.

Two Sentz said...

OK 11:13, you got a better explanation of the origin of humanity and the root of America's problems other than calling people crazy, well, let's hear it.

RightCoast said...

It was a money bomb by the Greek Gods. The created this black hole explosion and wala here we are all confused about the plot of our lives.

Liberal Elite said...

"…is inversely proportional the the rise of atheism. Or should I say the suppression of Christianity from everyday life."

As I see it, we've suffered from 2000 years of Christianity. The sooner we shed that yoke, the better off we'll all be.

Scientific progress is promoted by religious freedom and education. Economic progress follows scientific progress coupled with ample natural resources.
The only reason that Christianity has done well here is due to the tolerance of atheism, and Christianity gets precious little credit for that.

It's not the rise of atheism that is the problem… just the opposite. The most backward parts of our country are the most religious.


"The officially atheist Chinese government is surprisingly open to Christianity,…"

The only reason that the Communist Party in China would care about religion is to use it as a tool to control people better. If you can pacify the masses with less effort, so much the better. The problem is that they haven't been able to control the church leaders, and that's why the cathedrals all over China have broken stain glass windows. The Chinese leadership will not be embracing Christianity any time soon. No way.

"The Harvard scholars, Jeynes noted, were baffled and did not know how to respond."

Because the Chinese were so obviously wrong. No, actually, I cannot believe this even happened.

"…he argued that ascetic Protestantism was a major reason behind the rise of capitalism and the economic success of the Western world."

Uhh. No it was our ample natural resources, and our personal freedoms that allowed us to make the most of them.

"Weber observed that Christianity produces good work ethic and subsequently economic prosperity because it instills a sense of calling and people are more determined and more passionate about their work. The German economist also contended that Christianity promotes honesty, which is necessary to build trust that is essential in economic transactions; encourages people to be their best and be concerned about their neighbors’ standard of living; and discourages materialism."

Not buying it. There are several nations of non-Christians that work harder (on average) than us. Work ethics are better elsewhere (Korea, Japan,…). Christians are NOT more honest. Christians can be highly materialistic.

"Other world religions do not promote economic prosperity like Christianity."

Not buying it. For 1400 years, all Christians seemed to have accomplished was to let the Roman Empire get destroyed. The Dark Ages were a time of poverty and ignorance. Meanwhile the Seven Pillars of Wisdom were shining beacons of humanity. The renaissance only happen after the library at Alhambra was hauled off to Italy after the city was destroyed by Christian barbarians. Christianity itself gets no credit for anything good here.

"As Weber, other scholars, and now the Chinese government observe, where Christianity is dominant there is economic prosperity."

Like Portugal, Greece, Ireland,…. Yep. Some real prosperity there.. Well at least they're really really Christian.
Did it occur to you that places with more religious freedom do even better?

Liberal Elite said...

continued.

"(This next sentence is especially for you LE)

American Orthodox Rabbi Daniel Lapin, who is a political commentator, noted that 90 percent of scientific discoveries over the last 1,000 years were in nations in which Christianity was dominant."

Thanks TS. But you do realize that scientific progress is mainly achieved by atheists. Since the renaissance, thousands of scientists have been killed for discovering what the Christian Church did not want to be discovered. Even Galileo is said to have muttered "And yet it moves" after professing Christianity and refuting his life's work (to save himself from death). All the church managed to do was to create fake Christians.

Oh.. And 90% of the scientific discoveries over the last 1000 years were done in the last 25 years.
There are no scientists in Biology who don't believe in evolution. There is no "other side" in scientific circles.

Scientific progress is promoted by religious freedom… pure and simple. Economic progress follows.

“The Chinese believe that if the level of immorality that exists today, sexual immorality especially, persists, then the economic strength of the country cannot continue,” said Jeynes. “So they very quickly want to teach morality, especially to the young before their economy might indeed collapse.”

What a load of crap. Does anyone buy this nonsense??

“It is not that they embrace Christianity with the most pure motive,” Jeynes noted. “A lot of their motive is it is good for our country, the morality of the country, and if we want economic prosperity to continue we need to have a more invitational approach to those who are Christian.”

More crap. There is no way that the Chinese leadership is promoting this. It's far more likely that they will clamp down on it hard.

"There are an estimated 100 million Christians in China, about 75 million in the “underground” church, said Jeynes, and the number of believers is growing by six to seven million a year."

Yea. Right. Who did the survey? I thought surveys put Christians in China at about 3%. But believers may be growing, but not Christians, rather the Falun Gong.

In all, I see this is nothing more than a rank Christian propaganda piece.

Two Sentz said...

How did I just know LE would launch into one of his double comment tirades? Here's my response, and I'm quoting you on this LE, "what a load of crap!"

Liberal Elite said...

Nah.. It's actually pretty good. Here are the best quotes that get to the core of the issue:

"Scientific progress is promoted by religious freedom and education. Economic progress follows scientific progress coupled with ample natural resources."

(it has nothing whatsoever to do with Christianity)

"For 1400 years, all Christians seemed to have accomplished was to let the Roman Empire get destroyed. The Dark Ages were a time of poverty and ignorance. Meanwhile the Seven Pillars of Wisdom were shining beacons of humanity."

(pointing out that Christianity alone is worthless in promoting economic prosperity.. I've got 1400 years of good evidence for that claim).

"Did it occur to you that places with more religious freedom do even better?"

(do better financially, in contrast to places where Christianity dominates overwhelmingly)

Refute those if you can, TS.

Two Sentz said...

Due to your fundamental disconnect with the meaning and purpose of religion, namely Christianity, I'll stand by my previous comment.

Liberal Elite said...

You claimed that Christianity is highly correlated with economic prosperity to the degree that there is a cause and effect. That is a very specific claim that can be investigated without knowing anything about the meaning or purpose or religion or the meaning and purpose of prosperity.

It is fairly easy to learn that the specific claim is total BS. It simply does not hold up to any form of real and honest scrutiny.

The "you don't get it" argument simply fails.

Two Sentz said...

Then I would assume it could be investigated without the constant and continual insults and put-downs of the religion and those who follow it. Frankly I'm getting sick of it and I'm sure others (whom you know God their religion dear) are too. You're becoming the BL of anything religion and that ain't good. Ive tried to be patient with your condescension, but Matthew 7:6 NIV says:

"Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you to pieces."

I'm tired of throwing my pearls to pigs. And I doubt you have any concern for my best interest, only your own.

Liberal Elite said...

And this was your initial post: "The fall of America is inversely proportional the the rise of atheism."

What followed was a "constant and continual insults and put-downs of the (lack of) religion and those who follow it." You know full well that atheists read this blog.

Anyway, that's how I saw it, and thought my points were well made and with relatively modest and restrained return insults.

BILL LIVINGSTON said...

Don't bring my name into this TS. You seen to have appointed YOURSELF a messiah of what is published. in this case you are dissing LE's perspective, and have allowed many insults against him, too. Maybe you should check your own judgmental mirror lately.

BILL LIVINGSTON said...

'Throwing my pearls to pigs.' Which one of us is truly delusional?

Two Sentz said...

Yeah, I appointed my self publishing messiah the day I started this blog. Pearls to pigs, it's called an analogy brother.

BILL LIVINGSTON said...

It is called uppity nonsense in certain circles "TS." This country has freedom of religion-it also offers freedom to be burdened by another's religion. It is why the Lord's Prayer was correctly removed from your city council meetings. It isn't a shot against your perceived god/religion, but it is consistent with everyone's liberty rights. Sometimes you guys need to put down the bible, and pick up a history book.

BILL LIVINGSTON said...

BTW, "TS", I would love for you to thrall us with your acumen regarding the Christian-endorsed sect's end of the world tomorrow??

First, do you believe it? Second, do you believe it even within a million miles of sane? Third, if you answered 'yes' to any of these-does the church not owe royalties to REM for trampling upon the content of "End Of The World As We Know It"?

I don't know about you, but I am still buying green bananas for the weekend. And I feeee-eeel Fine!!

Anonymous said...

TS allowed too many insults against LE?????? Well would'nt you know..... You need to get some real help Livingston. You have some big time mental problems.

BILL LIVINGSTON said...

Yeah. I didn't leave the comment at 11:13, but who is zooming who, anonymous person? At least LE is willing to man up and put a real face behind his opinion. What is your excuse?

Two Sentz said...

No I don't believe it at all. The Bible clearly says no one knows the date or the hour of the end, not even Jesus or the angels (or Harold Camping or the Mayans), only God the father. It says the end will come like a "thief in the night." It also says of someone claims to be a prophet, 100% of what they say will come true and if it doesn't then we should forget about them. Well, he also predicted the end in 1994. How'd that turn out? Personally I think the fact he even predicted it in Pacific time is another give away of the ridiculous. And the fact they are still accepting donations on their website tells me they don't really believe it either.

But on the other hand, living like Jesus is returning tomorrow isn't a bad thing. But that doesn't necessarily mean selling everything and sitting in a field looking towards the sky.

Anonymous said...

Yea I saw what you did to somebody who didn't even do anything to you. You are a psycho and I'm worried you are going to harm somebody real soon, that is my "excuse".

BILL LIVINGSTON said...

I didn't even know about the on-line collection plate. Now THAT is funny. BTW-"TS" in case you didn't know, I was raised catholic. I've seen the show before. I go with the asian medidation/spiritual teachings, and cling tightly to my 'death-bed conversion mulligan.'

I have a hard enough time keeping up with current gas/milk prices, rather than worrying about if I am going to spend fiery eternity at an eternal Celine Dion concert with my eternal date Kathy Griffin {this is my loose definition of Hell, though..I think there are also a lot of mosquitos there}

BILL LIVINGSTON said...

11:46. Here is a flower and a John Mayer CD to improve your karma. Have I gotten in your wittle head??

Two Sentz said...

I was raised Catholic too. More of an evangelical Protestant these days.

Free Tacos said...

Anybody got 200 bucks?

BILL LIVINGSTON said...

Great. You went from anonymous, to only slightly less anonymous. And if I donate the money to the ACLU as you said-doesn't that mean we get to take God off our currency, and the pledge out of the schools. I am tingly with excitement. I think you may be the one with some ego problems, soft shell.

Anonymous said...

Now don't hold back jabroni, you know who everybody is. I am duckie right? Or am I chuckie? What about the black guy at your shootout? I could be Joe Alebro too.

Liberal Elite said...

@11:35 "TS allowed too many insults against LE??????"

You know.. I'm fairly immune to insults. Really. I may shovel it back, but I've never flown off the handle from an insult (hint to BL).

But what bothers me is the expectation of a non-symmetric relationship: You can criticize my (non)religion, but I cannot criticize yours (even in defending mine).

It's an attitude many religious people have,
especially Muslims (I think that Danish cartoonist still has a bounty on his head, so does Salman Rushdie), but it's seems to be an indefensible position.

TS: Do you think that your religion is fragile and mine is not? Can you explain your non-symmetric desire in other ways? It's a real question.

Two Sentz said...

"but I cannot criticize yours"

You can and you have, over and over and over again. I'm simply letting you know that I am tired of it and I don't feel the need to constantly defend myself to you anymore.

What you always seem to do when attacking is that you use example after example of how people claiming to be Christian have acted in the past in a deplorable manner but never actually investigate whether or not they were following Christian principles while doing so. Just because maybe they did something in the name of God, do you ever take the time to see what God would have said or commanded them to do in that situation and see if, according to your own best judgment, they were actually following Godly principles? No. You cherry pick situations simply to suit your needs of an argument. You vilify a huge portion of the population based on the actions of imposters. You take something at face value simply because it works for you at the time, which as I scientist and critical thinker, I would consider beneath you.

On another note, you also claim secular humanists/atheists are good for the sake of being good. Does that include being nice for the sake of being nice? In other words, not hurling insults because of their hurtful nature?

Finally, I would challenge you (I know I haven't responded to many of your challenges so I get it if you blow me off) to investigate with an open mind (seriously, I know from all your comments that you are extremely prejudiced towards religion) who Lee Strobel is and where he has come from and the several books he has written. I think you might actually find him and his work fascinating and challenging.

BILL LIVINGSTON said...

You could be a man/woman instead of a perpetual coward and give your real name. But that isn't you style, is it? BTW-you didn't say thank you for the flower and CD-that is just rude.

Anonymous said...

Silly Livingstoned, you get more loveable with every comment. You are like the Salisbury blogs little pet mascot. Hey it's crazy Bill.. Maybe this is the day he will snap and kill somebody..

BILL LIVINGSTON said...

If you want a restraining order-get it. It will have to be in your own name. Aren't you guys down there tired of being silly little children??

Free Tacos said...

Anybody got 200 bucks?

BILL LIVINGSTON said...

We've covered this. I encourage you to get a life.

Anonymous said...

Maybe you got brought in/up but you certainly didn't disappoint did you?

Liberal Elite said...

OK TS. Which Lee Strobel book do you recommend? There are several. I haven't read any of them.

But I think you're mistaken if you think that I haven't done a lot of reading to date and that I haven't engaged in "investigate with an open mind". I also took a heck of a lot of philosophy courses... virtually everything MIT offered. I don't have any liberal arts degrees, but I took that part of my education seriously (or at least as seriously as MIT did).

@TS "Does that include being nice for the sake of being nice?"

Each blog site seems to have its own tone. I don't think I'm out of the norm here (especially if you factor in BL and his anonymous trolls). But if you say so, I will tone it down and focus more on content (but sometimes it's a lot easier to simply call BS BS).

Anonymous said...

Somebody trolls easy.

Two Sentz said...

Which ever one strikes you fancy. Perhaps "The Case for Creation" because it seems to be the most scientifically based which seems like it might interest you the most? That is just my guess though.

Liberal Elite said...

OK.. Do you want me to blog my responses? My expectations are rather low. Most books promoting religion that I have read look more like the post you made starting this thread (faulty premises or cherry picking scientific evidence leading to faulty conclusions. Also broad sweeping statements that simply cannot hold up to scrutiny).

I have the pro-religion book "SHOW ME GOD" by Fred Heeren by my side as I write this. My daughter gave this to me as a birthday gift a few years ago. It is also steeped in science and philosophy. I am guessing that this book is far better than any Lee Strobel book, but that's just a guess. Have you read?

BILL LIVINGSTON said...

Dire Straits defense. If two {or more} say they are Jesus/Muhammed/Abraham/Gary Busey {at least} one of them must be wrong. One love, bitches!!

Two Sentz said...

I haven't read it, I just did google it and read a lengthy review. Personally I don't see why God couldn't have initiated the big bang if that's what he is saying. And people always love to trip up on the timeline thing but my understanding is that God is timeless and eternal, the beginning and the end, He is and always has been, meaning time is not linear for Him like it is for us.

As for Strobel, I thought that maybe since he was an atheist for many years that might intrigue you. Also being an investigative journalist in the area of science as well might give his writing and approach more relevance to you personally.

Maybe it's dumbed down by your standards, I don't know. Blog or not, it's up to you. A simple like or dislike would be fine. Or just a "yeah I read it" works too. Whatever you feel.

Two Sentz said...

Ok, nevermind, don't read it, you won't like it. I just googled some atheists reviews of it and...well...it gets trashed up and down, left and right. If you think anything like these websites (which I'm pretty sure you do), you'll probably draw the same conclusions.

Anonymous said...

I proposed a solution before to disagreements between the height challenged and bellicose Mr. Ablero and the lovely blonde over at Right Coast. I provided this solution out of the fairness of my heart but the concerned parties upon hearing of it sweated and shook in fright, watered their undergarments, and scurried off. Mr. Billy, could this same solution be offered to you and your troll? Of course, the choice of weapons would have to be modified somewhat. The following was the proposed solution:

“Will the Coat of Roast and Mr. Albero just have at each other in a no rules fight to a tap out or getting knocked unconscious?

Choice of weapons prior to the melee will include:

1. Bottle of Bleach

2. Digital Camera w/strap

3. A Mauled Duck

4. A Specialty Lightbulb

5. Food Lion coupon circular

6. Bag of Mikeyjuana

7. A Ringmaster’s Hoop

8. Box of Adult Diapers

9. Plaque of AFP donors

10. Full Leg Zip Easy Off Pants

Fighters will be allowed to choose one weapon prior to a 5 minute round of 5, the first chooser to be determined by coin toss.

A different weapon may be chosen for the beginning of each round.

A draw will be announced if at the end of 5 rounds neither fighter is knocked out or taps.

GA Harrison and Free Taco will referee at the same time.

Alcohol and drug tests will be performed on judges and participants as an informative procedure only and will not disqualify any of the parties mentioned, unless they are found to be under the influence. In such case disqualification shall be the immediate result.”

The last portion might disqualify Bill Libingston because he appears to be very fond of the "sauce".

Liberal Elite said...

@TS

Just curious. Do those websites give SHOW ME GOD any more respect?

Two Sentz said...

They were different website and I just linked straight from google to the specific reviews so I don't know if they even cover the other book.

Liberal Elite said...

Here is the 1st google-hit review of SHOW ME GOD by a Christian.

http://katsyfga.wordpress.com/2008/02/09/show-me-god-by-fred-heeren-a-review/

"I just finished reading Show Me God and must say that I’m a little disappointed in it. As a Bible-believing Christian, I assumed that this book confirmed the Bible. And it does….except for the literal Creation story in Genesis. If you don’t believe the Bible is literal and accurate, then you won’t have a problem with this book. ..."

It seems she has a problem with this pro-Christianity book. It's rather ironic that the only pro-Chistianity book that I have any respect for is disdained by Christians. We really are from different worlds.

Here is a more balanced and detailed review:
http://www.doesgodexist.org/JulAug96/ShowMeGod.html

"... We recommend this book highly. It is not a creationist writing in the tradition of millennial creationist groups, and in fact, Heeren does not endorse a young earth. It is a factual, up-to-date, positive persuasive book to promote belief in God and in the Bible and, while it may be considered pushy by some, it is hard to ignore its message."

Liberal Elite said...

@TS "I haven't read it" (referring to SHOW ME GOD)

OK. If you want to take the religious discussion here to a higher level, why don't you read that...

Anonymous said...

What I find interesting is that LE read the article, refuted every single last point within it, using facts, and TS is ignoring that.

Why did you post this, TS, if you're unwilling to back it up, or engage with LE, where he points out the flaws of the post?

Two Sentz said...

I didn't see where he actually refuted anything. He made parallel arguments (like science was the reason instead of Christianity) and he made secondary arguments (like freedom was the reason, though our forefathers thought freedom was our God given right, again Christianity) or personal freedoms (ie human rights which have their origin in the Bible) was the reason and he also presented his opinion which you may have interpreted as fact. But refute with facts, I didn't see that.

Anonymous said...

@2:10 "What I find interesting..."

Thanks for noticing.

@TS "I didn't see where he actually refuted anything."

I replace uninformed opinion with informed opinion. The original piece was simply a propaganda piece full of bad generalizations and slander against atheism.

@TS "...human rights which have their origin in the Bible"

The bible was not the origin. Freedom was well discussed and observed in ancient Greece (and even before).

And the bible certainly does not promote religious freedom. The only reason the Christians in America supported the 1st amendment when it was proposed was fear that their particular sect would become outlawed (as happened to many in England). It was self preservation, not altruism.

@TS "But refute with facts, I didn't see that."

No, but I made the challenge. I claimed that prosperity was more correlated with religious freedom than with Christianity. It's easy enough to demonstrate.

Let me demonstrate with "facts" (from Wikipedia).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_by_country

Look at the 34 most Christian nations in the world (more than 90% Christian with a population of at least 1 million) ... It's an economic disaster (Argentina, Ireland, Portugal, Greece,...). It's bankruptcy central!! Only one of the 34 is in the G8. Most are poor as sh...

Now let's look at religious freedom and the G8:

Canada
France
Germany
Italy
Japan
Russia
United Kingdom
United States of America

All have extensive religious freedom except for Russia (the weakest member) which only has partial freedom.

LE

Liberal Elite said...

Oh and just to be clear, I don't claim that Christianity promotes poverty, but when it recruits where poverty is, the poverty doesn't seem to go away.

The correlation does not show cause and effect, but it does well dispute the original claim (Christianity promotes prosperity)... and that's a fact.

Two Sentz said...

1. The post is about America, not entire world.
2. The post is about the fall, not the current state. Go back between 50-100 years (before atheism was what it is today and before everything had to be PC) and America was the undisputed strongest, wealthiest, with largest # of Christians. Now, you'll point to other factors as for the fall, and some may be right and some may be wrong. But either way, in the last century, as we've seen a decline in America's stature, we've also seen a correlated decline in emphasis on Christian principles.
Btw, sorry but I am having difficulty approving comments from the phone. I'll have to try when I get home.

Liberal Elite said...

@TS "I am having difficulty approving comments"

And I'm having difficulty posting. Something amess with the software.

@TS "1. The post is about America, not entire world."

I tend to take a more global view of things. I'm off to Liverpool tomorrow...

There's a lot of talk of China, Hindus, Buddhism, Islam, Confusism,... in the original posting. Also talk of the last 1,000 years. How was I to know it was just about America?

@TS "2. The post is about the fall, not the current state. Go back between 50-100 years"

Virtually EVERYTHING in America is better now than it was 50 or 100 years ago. We have moved forward in so many rather important ways. Yes, some people will be fond of the old ways, but for the most part that should be "shamefully fond".

If we've had any real fall, it's been since the Bush years. Yes. We still suffer from the Bush years, and we need to dig our way out of that.

In 1910, we were an emerging superpower, but much was wrong at home. Women couldn't vote, ol people begged and starved in the streets,... In 1960 we lived in a plastic and repressed society. Racism was rampant and civil rights were a future dream.

We're much better today...