Speaking Truth to Red and Blue

While Curtis is still on sabbatical, David talks to Justin Giboney, co-founder of the AND ...

By

While Curtis is still on sabbatical, David talks to Justin Giboney, co-founder of the AND Campaign, about racial justice, political tribalism, and the “God gap” in the Democratic Party. They discuss the problems with left and right as they grapple with extremism, and they talk about Justin’s experiences talking about hot-button topics from a politically heterodox (but theologically orthodox) point of view.

Show Notes:

–Good Faith Debates: How Should the Church Address Racial Injustice?

–AND Campaign

Start a Free Trial
Get every newsletter and all of The Dispatch. Support quality, fact-based journalism. Get Started ALREADY HAVE AN ACCOUNT? SIGN IN
By
Comments (79)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Avatar photo
    Bel

    Just getting around to listening to this episode. Everyone should listen to it. Christian or not, religious or not, whatever political stripe. Everyone.

    Collapse
  2. Daniel Ritchie

    Sorry to be late to the party, but I too have questions about the typical approach taken by the reparations movement. My underlying concerns are these: first, most reparations discussions assume that we can buy people out of poverty. Their adherents would not put it in that simplistic way, but scratch the surface and it's there. Second, (as others on this thread have noted), we've had over 5 decades of affirmative action and Great Society programs. If these haven't worked satisfactorily, perhaps we need to look elsewhere for ongoing structural injustice. E.g., (1) Simone de Beauvoir named marriage as the greatest hindrance to a truly liberated life, and welcomed marriage as as a merely provisional state, separated from sexual activity and child-bearing. I can bear witness to the nearly saintly status that such ideology has in academic life -- and hence in the cultural institutions that shape this country. (2) Public service unions -- teachers and police -- have strong motivations to protect their own, often at the expense of the people they are sworn to serve. If I look at the structural injustices that have persisted -- and grown -- during the decades of affirmative action and Great Society programs, these seem salient. To me, Christian individuals, institutions, and movements that ameliorate their effects and strike at their sources of institutional and intellectual power are surely worthwhile ways to repair ongoing injustice.

    Collapse
  3. Mark

    Fascinating conversation. A few observations (and for the record, I am a paying Dispatch subscriber and cannot stand Donald Trump):

    1. The "And Campaign" is hardly a politically neutral organization. Their policy positions will be largely Democrat/Progressive aside from Biblical sexual ethic, abortion, and religious freedom. I have no problem with this, but this group is hardly politically neutral.

    2. Regarding the racial reconciliation discussion, there was an example shared about a church that started in a storefront in 2011 and was not around for slavery and Jim Crow. Justin stated that there is a responsibility for white people who have benefitted from the structures in place to try to make things right (I may not have heard that correctly).

    Where I struggle with that comment: what if you were born in the north, your entire family is from the north, you do not come from wealth, etc.? To add to that, you are married with a bunch of young kids, you volunteer at your church and in the community, you work hard to provide for your family, you get maybe 5 hours of sleep per night and you have little to no available time because of the blessed tasks above. According to Justin's command, what is that person supposed to be doing in addition to all of their existing obligations.

    3. I appreciated David asking Justin at the end if he can accept people who agree with him and the And Campaign on the problems, but would disagree on the policy approaches. I think many Christians have greatly hurt their public witness through devotion to Donald Trump, and stating that Christians have an obligation to vote Trump/Republican.

    On the flip side, many Christians who are left-leaning in their politics believe that if you are serious about "justice," you will support big government programs as the remedy for society's ills. One example would be a government-run health care system, which is only "just" in the sense that all citizens (except for the political class) would have the same terrible healthcare.

    All in all, a very interesting discussion.

    Collapse
    1. Adam Shields

      I think our political biases influence our understanding of justice quite a bit as illustrated by your comment.

      I am not going to claim that universal health care is perfectly just or perfect. But the US is the anomaly in the large economies. We pay more for our health care system per capita and have results that are lower than average for other similarly placed counties.

      So I think starting with that statement I think it is important to think through what political justice looks like. Largely the And Campaign is in line with Catholic social teaching that has well rooted Christian background.

      I don’t want to make a long comment. But I think that one disconnect is what you are responding to is that your number 2 comment is individualistic in approach. That one person is not by themselves the key to solving anything. Justin is not attacking you or any other person as individuals for a lack of understanding or work on race or other issue but addressing the ways that we resist working on the systems that influence poverty and racism and health care or voting rights.

      Collapse
  4. BMW

    Justin really lost me on this podcast. At the end he was talking about how he believes that voting rights is a big problem right now, and he's willing to consider alternate ways of addressing it, but you have to think it's important. I don't think voting rights in the US is a big problem that needs to be addressed now, and he seemed pretty dismissive of that viewpoint. Maybe I'm misunderstanding his views, but he seemed dismissive of pretty typical conservative views of social/racial justice.

    Collapse
    1. Mark

      Yes -- Justin has mentioned voting rights on Twitter as well, but hasn't offered any evidence.

      Collapse
  5. Avatar photo
    W James Anderson

    David... you mentioned leaving the Republican Party after 2016. I may do the same if Trump runs in 2024. I appreciated this podcast and will like to look into Justin Giboney’s ‘And’ thing he mentioned. Thanks again for another great show💀’s and🌈’s

    Collapse
  6. Acre00

    What does reparations look like to Justin? I'm not opposed to reparations per se, but I am skeptical of the schemes I've seen proposed. I was hoping that he would put forth his vision of what restorative justice is and how it can be achieved. He doesn't seem like the type for whom a cash payout would be sufficient

    The biblical argument is interesting, for a couple of reasons. First, I don't recall the Israelites seeking reparations from the Egyptians, even though their bondage was as bad and longer lasting than the African bondage in the US. Second, when the Israelites entered the Holy Land, they seized(stole) the land from the inhabitants already there with no reparations mentioned. Third, the Israelites also owned slaves. Granted, it was not the same kind of slavery we had in the States, but it was slavery and it was tacitly endorsed by the biblical leaders.

    Collapse
    1. Adam Shields

      The exodus story speaks about the wealth that was given to the Hebrew slaves as they left the country. It is part of that wealth that is used to build the tabernacle. It is in the text.

      Justin is referencing a book on Reparations that details a number of ideas.

      Things like memorialization to slavery and education so that people can understand the reality of the wrong. Chicago has a reparations program that was approved a few years ago in regard to Chicago's long history of police brutality. Something that was bad enough that the UN wrote a human rights report about the violations. The Chicago reparations program includes fund for payments to people that were directly impacted by police brutality. But also an education requirement that all students in Chicago schools have to learn about. And a memorial to victims of police brutality.

      Reparations are not only financial, although I think they should also include financial components. There are books and articles about suggestions as well as economic impacts, etc. It just requires looking for them to understand what has been proposed and the pros and cons of different proposals.

      Collapse
      1. Acre00

        Thank you for the correction about Egypt. I didn't recall it, and I'm at work and don't have time to read the books. I'll be sure to find the relevant passages when I get off.

        That's the thing, I wanted *him* to tell me what *he* thought reparations meant. There's a lot of different ways that have been brought up, and I wanted to know what he thought needed to be done since he was so strongly urging that. Especially with regard to the Church. Cash payments from churches doesn't make any sense for most of them, and the kind of memorials and education feels like an odd fit. Charity, maybe? Most of them are doing that anyway - I'm not sure how much more is supposed to be done.

        Side note, I hate the police more than most people, and fully believe everything that's been said about Chicago's police. That having been said, the UN writing a report about it is completely irrelevant to me. The UN writes thousands of reports a year about all sorts of BS topics, 90% of which are politically motivated. I try to ignore the organization as much as humanly possible.

        Collapse
  7. Susan

    The question that I came out of this podcast with is not one about race (I'm largely on the same page as both David and Justin) but about what a "conservative" sexual ethic looks like in today's church. I am part of a small church where I worship alongside a same-sex married couple who love Jesus, are involved in building the church, serving others, and pointing others toward a lifetime relationship with Jesus. I'm wondering if the church needs to start defining sexual ethics more in response to sins like pornography, rape, casual and destructive promiscuity, and coercive and violent sexual relationships in marriage, and the sexual exploitation of children. I'm wondering if the Holy Spirit is nudging us toward a move away from the same sex=bad and heterosexual=good dichotomy. Can we define healthy sexuality as a something that builds communities and families and stable life-long relationships? I haven't seen any discussion of what a "conservative" ethic for same-sex relationships would look like and I think that there are some churches where this is the next conversation we need to have. Perhaps I need to start that conversation in more progressive church circles but the kind of middle space that the Dispatch is creating is hard to find.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Sarah D.

      I absolutely agree. I struggle so much with the very real negative impact on Christian LGBTQ people that results from enforcing a “traditional Christian sexual ethic”. I read Bridget Eileen Rivera’s book “Heavy Burdens” earlier this year and since have recommended it to so many people. There is so much good information in there, including what exactly has been considered a “traditional
      Christian sexual ethic” over the centuries, and how we give grace in so many areas (including those that have literally been cause for starting wars in the past, like infant vs believers baptism) but won’t give grace to Christian LGBTQ brothers and sisters.

      Collapse
    2. Avatar photo
      Witt Case

      I'm happy I'm not the only one that went here.

      I struggle to see how codifying same-sex marriage rights is a problem in the biblical sense. Or in the human rights standpoint.

      Collapse
  8. Adam Shields

    One of the frustrating realities of many areas, but especially of race, is the lack of willingness to do basic work to understand.

    Justin referenced the book Reparations by Kwon and Thompson. It lays out clearly in a long form why the authors think that the best way to think about the impact of slavery, segregation and the ongoing reality of racism is as a form of theft. Then they walk through why they think that churches in particular not just were complicit in that theft but contributed to the theft historically and on an ongoing basis.

    And then the authors walk through the biblical justification for why they think that the response to that theft needs to be acknowledgement of the history and then reparations to repair the ongoing impact of the theft.

    And then the authors talk about some examples of what they mean when they suggest that churches should be involved in reparations. (They never advocate for a national federalized program that simply writes a check).

    A significant part of the problem of race in the US is a lack of shared understanding of history. Many people simply do not know the reality of racism, segregation and slavery. And they assume that what is being talked about it is ancient. It is not.

    I am not that old, younger than David and Curtis. I have a 7 and 8 year old. My mother was born three weeks after Ruby Bridges. Ruby Bridges integrated her school in 1st grade. The school my mother was in 1st grade for did not integrate until the school year I was born in. My paternal grandfather was 13 months old when Harriet Tubman passed away. I have a picture with five generations on my maternal side from a few months after I was born. My great great grandmother was holding me. She was born in 1880. That was only 37 years after slavery was abolished in Pennsylvania where the picture was taken and where my great great grandmother spent her life. She was prevented from voting until she was 41. When my great grandfather was born, Native Americans were not considered citizens of the US. The Voting Rights Act was not passed until my mother was 11.

    It was not until 1968 that it was illegal to discriminate for housing (although a recent study I saw suggested that as many as a quarter of all African American citizens in the US have been discriminated against at some point in their housing.) Housing is the largest method of generational wealth acquisition and transfer. But up until 1968 housing discrimination was legal. And up until 1948 it was legal to require in the deed that homes could not be sold to racial minorities. And from 1948 until 1968, even if those deed convents were not enforceable, it was legal for real estate agents to refuse to not show homes to racial minorities in the US. And starting in the 1930s the FHA required racial deed covenants in order to qualify for developer loans, which means the US government required segregated housing as a prerequisite for getting a developer loans to build housing.

    I, of course, could keep going on. But the point is that when Justin (and Kwon and Thompson) are talking about reparations, they are not simply talking about ancient history. They are also talking about events that people that are alive today are still impacted by.

    I finished reading At the Dark End of the Street yesterday. It is about the role of rape and sexual violence in the civil rights movement. One of the cases it talks about is Recy Taylor. A young wife and mother who was kidnapped and gang raped on her way home from church in 1944. The court system refused to prosecute the men, even though they admitted the crime and Taylor twice testified in grand juries. But the grand juries would not allow charges to be brought against the men. Recy Taylor did not pass away until five years ago. She lived within a couple miles of the men until they all passed away. This case is fairly well known because Rosa Parks was one of the NAACP investigators in 1944, more than 10 years before her arrest prompted the Montgomery Bus Boycott. Again, racial history and harm is not some long history, but recent and still impacting lives today.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Alex

      Thank you for sharing the injustices that have happened. I agree that these are all perversions of justice, many perpetrated by our families, neighbors, institutions and government. In 2022 all of the acts you listed are now against the law of the land and unfortunately many of the people involved are no longer with us. I am sorry that we can not repair those people.

      Jesus will return to make all things new, wipe away every tear and execute perfect justice. He has already come once, to offer forgiveness to sinners like me and you. We are given free choice, repent of our personal sin and accept Christ's perfect and complete payment at the cross. Or continue on, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience.

      With repentance comes forgiveness. Once we truly grasp our desperate need for forgiveness, that supernatural forgiveness will overflow out of us and into the lives of those sinners around us. We will be able to forgive the injustices perpetrated against us by other sinners. This, on it's face, seems unjust. Letting others get away with harming me, or my parents, or my parent's parents...

      Reconciliation will never come by extracting an eye for an eye. We will end up with a land of blind people. Jesus expects His sheep to forgive as we have been forgiven. This is a non-negotiable part of the gospel.

      Don't underestimate the power of forgiveness. The people of Emmanuel AME Church are a stunning example of this.

      https://abcnews.go.com/US/charleston-victims-mother-tells-dylann-roof-forgive/story?id=44704096

      They fought hate, RACIAL hatred, with love. Personal hatred unto death against them and the ones closest to them. What is most stunning to a sinner like me is that they are only following Christ's teaching to forgive as they have been forgiven. Basic Christian doctrine. Something that is impossible to do by human will. But what is impossible with man is possible with God. They are unworthy servants simply doing what Christ expects of those who have received His amazing grace, as seen in Luke 17:7-10:

      "Will any one of you who has a servant plowing or keeping sheep say to him when he has come in from the field, ‘Come at once and recline at table’? Will he not rather say to him, ‘Prepare supper for me, and dress properly, and serve me while I eat and drink, and afterward you will eat and drink’? Does he thank the servant because he did what was commanded? So you also, when you have done all that you were commanded, say, ‘We are unworthy servants; we have only done what was our duty.’”


      We can comb our hearts or the writing of anti-racist leaders to find out what is the correct amount of reparations owed by each individual American, each church and our government to bring racial reconciliation to fruition. But when has more stuff of this world ever solved the problems of this world? Each and every one of us has access to perfect forgiveness of our own sins, paid in full at the cross. Which then gives us the power to drop our weapons with which we desire to personally extract vengance upon those whom we feel are responsible for harm to ouselves or others. There is only one Savior and it is not me and it is not you.

      For the Christian a posture of forgiveness towards those who have done us harm will go a lot further to reconcile us with other Americans than will the expectation of being made whole by those who have harmed us. But I suspect offering forgiveness is too high of a price to pay for many, even those within the church.

      Justin did not give a practical answer to David's earnest question about how non-denominational Christians in their storefront churches can reconcile with those harmed in generations past. To my ears he sounded like a lawyer, the one found in Luke 11:37 -52. But Christ, even in His confrontation with the lawyer, offered him grace.

      "Give as alms those things that are within and behold, everything is clean for you."

      Those outside the church will continue to fight about reconciliation until Jesus returns. Those inside the church will win by surrender and forgiveness. May the Holy Spirit work on each and every one of our hearts. ❤️

      Collapse
      1. Adam Shields

        The Emanuel AME story is an important one. But again, forgiveness and reconciliation are not the same.

        And things being illegal does not mean that they don't currently happen.

        School segregation is illegal. But my kids go to a school that is 90% minority ((59% Black, 21% Hispanic, 5% two or races, 5% Asian, Native American or other and just under 10% White) and 67% low income. Less than 1/2 miles away is another school in the same district. The next, again the closest school, same district, is 55% White, 27% Asian, 6% Hispanic, 6% Black and 5% two or more races or other, and 7% low income.

        We are not starting with the same basic facts, which makes conversation hard.

        Collapse
        1. Avatar photo
          Alex

          I was talking about reconciliation within the church.

          If I understand you, your children are feeling the echoes of racisim by being segregated by school from other races? Would school choice help alleviate this? Let the school budget we pay through our taxes follow the student to whatever school their parents wish to send the student, even if one of the parents chooses to be a home school teacher to their child? This would have been great during the pandemic when we were paying for schools that were closed AND having to figure out how to supervise and teach our kids at home while giving up one income. It seems like it would give you the opportunity to send your kids to a better nearby school?

          Would that kind of school choice be a step in the direction of racial reconciliation for your family?

          Collapse
          1. Adam Shields

            I am not entirely opposed to school choice, but it doesn't actually solve the problem of school segregation because historically what has happened is that it has been used to keep school segregated. And even in public schools where there is a theoretical requirement for integration, is that the reality of historic residential segregation is often used to perpetuate church and school segregation.

            And just to be clear, my family is white. We have chosen to go to a school that is predominately minority using our school districts choice system. But generally white families, even those that speak about the theoretically good of racial reconciliation, make choices that keep their families in spaces that are either segregated, or at least in spaces that are significantly majority white.

            If Christians were really interested in racial reconciliation, white families, almost anywhere in the US could choose to go to churches and schools that are predominately non-white. What is much more common among white Christians that are interested in racial reconciliation is for them to want to invite racial minorities into predominately white spaces, keeping them culturally white oranizations.

            Collapse
    2. Avatar photo
      Scarlette Tarte

      Many white Americans are simply being deliberately obtuse. They don't WANT to learn the history.

      They now don't even want it taught in schools.

      It is pathetic how very much they wish to remain ignorant.

      White supremacy lives on.

      Collapse
  9. Robert Gribben

    There were some high level ideas and high minded principles that are hard to disagree with here. There is no disputing most of the facts that were laid out by the guest. The problem I see is in any implementation of payment or recompense for the wrong doing.

    If I got a bill for “x” amount and it was supposed to cover all my ancestral sins, and I then pay the bill, am I absolved of any future obligations rising from the ancestral sins? Can money just cover it?

    Also, how do we calculate the cost and percentage of blame? Certainly some institutions and individuals were horrible, but others were neutral and some still fought for the rights and justice of the enslaved. There is a continuum here of involvement. How do we count the cost?

    Lastly, and this one will sting, if we are to hold an institution accountable, what about a political party? The Democratic Party was the party of slavery. No dispute on that. It also was the party of Jim Crow, segregation and most of the policies that kept racial (note I HATE that word because there is only one race as God sees it) minorities in poverty. If Georgetown and Harvard have culpability, surely the Democratic Party shares some of the responsibility.

    Good luck on trying to right the wrongs of the past. I think in the end it is folly.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Scarlette Tarte

      And the Republican party left the blacks in a lurch after reconstruction ended. They also were fine with the south instituting Jim Crow, and did nothing to help blacks in that situation, like passing federal laws ensuring their rights, even as they held the Congress several times after the civil war, even up until the Roosevelt 30's. And of course, todays Republican party is the party of voter suppression of minority voters, so pretty sure they share some of the responsibility too.

      Who stinketh most? To quote the song from 1776.

      Collapse
  10. Avatar photo
    Carson J.

    Haven't listened to this one yet, but so excited for it! Justin Giboney with David French is my dream team.

    Collapse
Load More