pexels-photo-3902881

Is COVID-19 Shifting the Faultlines in America?

It’s hard to say anything good about COVID’s impact. But I’m about to try.

It’s not an exaggeration to say that throughout history the relative peace and prosperity of the human family has been largely determined by who gets to make the rules that govern politics, economics, and social norms—all of which is informed, of course, by what moral principles are used to guide the making of those rules. 

The United States of America was revolutionary in changing the rulemaking process—the founding era changed the political rulemaking process forever. With its strong Judeo-Christian tradition, the founding era attached a well-known moral principle to the rulemaking process: The Golden Rule. It had been around for thousands of years but it was rarely practiced as the standard for rulemaking. A common rendition of the Golden Rule states “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” 

The founding therefore pushed other nations to see themselves as either Golden Rule states or states rooted in something else–nationalism, survivalism, supremacy, etc.

There is also an alternative to the Golden Rule, what I call the Proud Rule, that goes something like this: “He who has the gold makes the rules.” 

The Golden Rule has some corollaries such as turn the other cheek, go the extra mile, love your enemies, and lay up your treasures in heaven. The Proud Rule also has some corollaries, such as do unto others before they do unto you, greed is good, good guys finish last, and he who dies with the most toys wins. The first promotes peace and stable prosperity while the second promotes contention and destructive competition. 

With few exceptions, rulemaking throughout human history has been dominated by the Proud Rule. Over time, this created grave injustices and inequality, while inhibiting prosperity and growth. But governments leaning toward the Humble Rule—believing in freedom and that all are created equal—have through great effort and sacrifice been able to mitigate or change many of these negatives and improve the condition of humankind. 

This process continues even today. 

It’s fair to say that societies that live by and are governed by the Golden Rule, or what I call the Humble Rule, create a very different foundation for civil society than those governed by the Proud Rule. If people are not inclined to injure or take advantage of one another, they can be policed less than people who become more inclined to injure and take advantage of one another. 

The Humble Rule is winning the multi-generational battle.

Among the many unheralded (and heartening) changes taking place around the world right now, one of the most significant for the human experience may be a quiet movement among more and more people toward the Humble Rule. Yes, there are plenty moving in the opposite direction, but around the world, the Humble Rule is winning the multi-generational battle. And, perhaps counterintuitively, amidst all its painful and deadly effects, the COVID pandemic and the social upheaval around us may actually accelerate some elements of this development.

It’s a truism now to say that the COVID-19 pandemic is disruptive. And we still don’t know its full long-term effects, but it’s already creating entirely new fault lines in the shifting contours of the human experience. Social fault lines have often run along the political left and the political right; or the economically privileged and the disadvantaged; or among different issues around social justice, gender equality, sexual orientation, race, religion, or national origin. 

As evident on every issue, there is enormous conflict and competition around the question of who gets to make the rules regarding these points of conflict. This competition; this winner-take-all mentality is the Proud Rule at work. 

The expectation in the United States, for example, seems to be that whichever political party wins control of the White House in November will impose their will on the other party with impunity. The contention is escalating to a level where some wonder if the very fabric of civil society could be irreparably damaged. Even so, strangely, the disruption that COVID has imposed on our economics, politics, and social norms is simultaneously bringing together a new group of those who seek the Humble Rule.

In terms of economics and health, COVID is forcing us to see our collective dependence on one another. Whether it’s supply chain disruption or the speed at which our own choices impact the choices of others, the virus forces us to acknowledge our dependence on one another and our need to cooperate and mutually support each other to survive.

Some may strain to imagine a world where the traditional fault lines and fierce competition around economics, politics, or social issues might change or shift. But COVID is teaching a different lesson–it is causing more to bow before the Humble Rule. 

We are seeing businesses not as a means to eliminate or destroy industry competitors or to build fortunes at the expense of others but as means to supply basic stability, opportunity, and services; politics isn’t about imposing one will over another but could be about facilitating mutual cooperation, order, and reciprocal pluralism. 

COVID has already created this unimaginable reality in professional and especially collegiate level sports. Rivals are less worried about petty slights and competitive grudges and more concerned about preserving the existence of the sport as a human good. Thus, COVID presses us toward more fundamental questions and prompts a humbler approach.

Is the current pattern of bitter verbal and emotional warfare the best way to enhance the human experience, or is there a better way? Although you won’t hear it celebrated in the news, more and more people across the political spectrum seem to be turned off by all the vitriol—and yearning for a better way. 

Of course, at the same time all this positive movement happens, there is much of the opposite; increased anger and bitterness, rejecting new kinds of relationships and opportunities for bias-challenging engagement, and focusing on positions that divide more than what can unite. 

This is the Proud Rule, and, inevitably, it will increase conflict over time.  

We would expect to see both of the Humble and Proud rules to naturally continue into the future. And, predictably, those fighting for the Proud Rule will seek to make the Humble Rule compete. In other words, the followers of the Proud Rule will try to pit themselves against those who seek the Humble Rule, using enmity and competition. 

The Humble Rule, and those that follow it, however, set up a different code. Indeed, in this emerging world across new fault lines, we might anticipate the Humble group to increase in mutual understanding and unity despite differences even as the followers of the Proud Rule are ever more divided along traditional faultlines. 

The Humble Rule will persuade others to their cause not by war or contention, but by demonstrating a different, cooperative way forward. This will, in turn, lead them to increased peace and prosperity. By contrast, it’s not hard to imagine the Proud group increasing in contention and conflict more and more because of their differences. This will, in turn, lead them to greater violence and decline.

It may be that what ultimately has changed is the creation of a sustainable and self-selecting separation between those who are genuinely inclined toward peace—the peacemakers—and those who are genuinely inclined toward conflict—the warriors. 

The social disruption we see around us is sharpening this divide. 

Meanwhile the collective response to COVID has thrust a large percentage of society into a new and unfamiliar “virtual” reality. This is based on breakthroughs in video conferencing and high-speed internet technologies that were only dreamed of a few years ago. Our networks and virtual “neighborhoods” have been changed along with our social interactions and our sources of instruction and entertainment. We are no longer tightly constrained by our immediate environment with its limitations and expectations.

This would bring together people on both the left and right who are seeking to cultivate conditions of lasting and legitimate peace.

COVID may turn out to be what shifts the fault lines away from ideological differences about politics or economics toward new fault lines between those who choose to believe and practice the Humble Rule and those who choose to believe and practice the Proud Rule. If so, those who embrace the Humble Rule would span race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, and socio-economic differences. Rather than left vs. right, this would bring together people on both the left and right who are seeking to cultivate conditions of lasting and legitimate peace. Whatever other trenchant differences continue to exist among these groups would be superseded by a naturally aligning force that is increasingly strong and powerful. That force would be more centrally focused on the underlying principles necessary for healthy pluralism and community rather than particular policy positions that had divided us in the past.

Of course, the jury is still out on whether the fault lines will shift in this way. But COVID is revealing a different kind of divide that’s not economic or political per se, but is between those who are committed to “walk the talk” of the Humble Rule and those who are not. Whether these like-minded, but remarkably diverse individuals, can now scale their numbers and influence to a critical mass able to truly transform the future is yet to be seen. 

About the author

Lynn Chapman

Lynn Chapman is the president of NVS, LLC, and President of the McCune Institute. He has worked as an interim editor for Deseret News and served on the MWAA board in Washington, D.C. He has a Public Policy Ph.D. from George Mason.
On Key

You Might Also Like

The Room Next Door Review

“The Room Next Door” is the latest example of arthouse social engineering.  The film is about a troubled woman, Martha, who in the midst of cancer treatments decides to commit suicide. If this bothers you, the film implies, it is because there is something wrong with you. This is all the more troubling, because the film, in many ways, is beautiful. It is directed by Pedro Almodóvar, one of the most acclaimed living film directors, in his first full-length film in English. And you can’t help but be taken by the beauty of it all. The film is suffused with the soft colors of the woods. Despite being an entire screenplay full of little except two friends talking, the camera work keeps the film alive and moving. And Julianne Moore and Tilda Swinton who play Ingrid and Martha once again give impeccable, engaging performances, that you can’t help but admire.  But all the beauty in this film is in service of a story that is decidedly ugly—but not self-awarely so. Our two main characters are old friends who met as young writers. Ingrid has published a best seller recently, where she writes about how she can’t accept death. On her publicity tour, she learns that Martha is in the hospital with cancer. She goes to visit her and reignite their friendship. We learn through the conversations that these characters aren’t bad people, necessarily, they just struggle to see a world outside of their own desires and consciousness. They have repeatedly avoided building relationships or having families. Martha does have a daughter. But she chased her father away, then lied to her about who he was her whole life, and then proceeded to be an absent mother so she could chase the romanticism of being a war correspondent.  Now that she is sick and dying, she notices that she has no one in her life. The movie comments on this like an unusual quirk, rather than the inevitable result of a life of bad decisions. We learn early on that cancer treatment can be a roller coaster with euphoric peaks, and miserable nadirs. During one such rut, Martha purchases a suicide pill, and decides she will kill herself. She reaches out to Ingrid and asks her to come on vacation with her, so that she will have someone in the house when she does it.  Ingrid agrees. And although she early on expresses some discomfort, she quickly respects Martha’s wishes to largely pretend nothing is happening. They have a lovely vacation in upstate New York watching old movies and reading books. While they are there, Ingrid reconnects with Damien (John Turturo) an ex-boyfriend of both hers and Martha’s. He is horrified at the state of the world, and seems to only live for sex (or to constantly talk about sex.) Damien is not a sympathetic character, and perhaps the audience is supposed to read that his unpleasant and helpless politics are akin to Martha’s helpless approach to life. If so the audience hardly has time to ponder it under a heavy heaping of affirmations about the power to choose, and the dignity to die.  Eventually, Martha does exactly what she promised to do. There is a brief police investigation where the officer (Alessandro Nivola) expresses concern that Ingrid would have knowingly not gotten help for her friend. A lawyer comes and helpfully tells the audience we can ignore that concern because he is a religious fanatic. This is the kind of movie that alludes to James Joyce not just once but three times. It is so pleased with just how artsy it is. And for a film with a message like “life isn’t worth fighting for,” the best comfort is that it’s so artsy not a lot of people will watch it.  The only people I would recommend watching this film is for those studying how society has devalued human life, and how good tools can be misused to harm people. The film is rated PG-13. It includes several normalized same-sex relationships, and some joking about polyamorous relationships. But obviously the biggest warning is the way it normalizes and glamorizes suicide. If you watch it with older teenagers, I would focus on questions about the choice that Martha made, and how family and relationships could have helped her make better choices. I might ask about how Ingrid could have been a better or more caring friend. One out of five stars. “The Room Next Door” will be released in theaters nationwide January 17, 2025.

Remembering Coach Joe Lordan

Our communities are built on individual men and women who take a moment to look outward and ask what can I do to make things better

Subscribe To Our Weekly Newsletter

Stay up to date on the intersection of faith in the public square.

You have Successfully Subscribed!

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This