[00:00:01.580]
Welcome to Episode 333 of The Non-Anxious Leader Podcast. I'm Jack Shitama. If you are new to this podcast, you can connect with me at jack@christian-leaders.com. You can email me with your questions, comments, and suggestions for future episodes. You can get more resources at thenonanxiousleader.com, where you can find blog posts, find out about my coaching and my speaking engagements, as well as subscribe to my Two for Tuesday email newsletter. I'll also put a link to that subscription page in the show notes. Finally, if you would like to support my work by helping me cover the expenses of making all of this content available, you can become a patron for as little as $5 a month. I will put a link to that page in the show notes. Thank you in advance for considering that. Now, without further ado, here is episode 333, What in the World is Going on Right Now, Part 2 of 2.

[00:01:34.770]
In last week's episode, I covered Murray Bowen's concept of societal regression, which is a large-scale version of emotional regression, which typically occurs in families. If you haven't listened to that episode, I encourage you to do that before listening to this one. And thanks to fellow podcaster Lauren Richmond Jr, who asked about recent examples of differentiated leaders. I'll get to that at the end. In short, a societal regression is the result of chronic anxiety that occurs in the midst of challenge and/or rapid change, both of which we have experienced for at least a half a century. According to the Bowen Center for the Study of the Family, citing Bowen's work, the current societal regression began when, A regressive pattern began unfolding in society after World War II. It worsened during the 1950s and rapidly intensified in the 1960s. The symptoms of societal regression include a growth of crime and violence, an increasing divorce rate, a more litigious attitude, a greater polarization between racial groups, less principled decision making by leaders, increased drug abuse and bankruptcies, and a focus on rights over responsibilities. I believe this last point that is a focus on rights over responsibilities is key.

[00:03:03.090]
The former, that is rights, is focused on what I deserve. The latter, that is responsibilities, is focused on the common good. Of course, as I often say, there is a tension between self-definition and emotional connection. A focus on rights tends to lean too far towards self-definition, and a focus on the common good tends to lean too far in the direction of emotional connection. The challenge in any system is holding these two in a healthy balance. It's also important to note that it's not all or nothing. Society does progress during a regression, and conversely, society's regress during times of progression. If, in fact, we've been in a regression since World War II, you can also say we've made progress in many areas such as civil rights, women's rights, reducing income disparities, cleaning up waterways, and the like. We still have a long way to go, but I think most people would agree that this has improved the common good. The Bowen Center goes on to say, quote, Human societies undergo periods of regression and progression over their histories. The current regression seems to be fueled by anxiety related to such factors as exploding population, a sense of diminishing frontiers, and the depletion of natural resources.

[00:04:24.290]
Bowen predicted humans would deal symptomatically with crises growing out of the regression until forced to address the anxiety feeding it. He predicted that a final major crisis would come as soon as the middle of the 21st century, and the type of human who survived would be one who could live in better harmony with nature. Before I break this down, I would also add that rapid technological change has fueled anxiety in our world society. The first thing that is pointed out here is that society is going to continue to deal with things symptomatically until forced to address the anxiety feeding it. That is, we will continue to deal with content and not the emotional process. Some of the symptoms right now are climate change, immigration, world trade, economic economic equality and racial injustice. The list is long and the polarization continues. Second, Bowen predicts that things won't really change until a major crisis occurs, which could occur as soon as the middle of this century. Michael Kerr interprets this as being as early as the fourth decade, which is the next decade, the 2030s. The key point in all of this is that the pain has to be intense enough for society as a whole to overcome short-term thinking with long term principled thinking.

[00:05:47.140]
The question is, what would that look like? I have no idea what this crisis would be, but recent history makes me think it would be something like a world war or a worldwide depression. Certainly, a worldwide pandemic wasn't enough to snap us out of it. If Bowen is correct, I think the best thing we could hope for is some climate crisis that require global cooperation to make our way out of it. However, in an article, Societal Anxiety/Regression, the Murray Bowen Archives Project cites Bowen's own words that give us a glimpse of what he believes that looks like. He starts by saying, In a family or small group, and I believe it operates also on national and international levels, the chaotic, disturbed, over-leniant, or over-mean rights-oriented group can begin to pull up to better maturity. Let me unpack this. The chaotic, disturbed, over-leniant group is any group that is focused on the rights of the complainers and avoids conflicts by taking the easy way out. My take on this is that this is the extreme left who is so focused on injustice that they focus on rights over responsibilities. An example of this, in my opinion, is the Biden administration simply opening our Southern border to a massive number of immigrants.

[00:07:13.100]
Now, I'll say I was a big supporter of Biden and his policies, and I'm a progressive through and through. I believe we should be open to people who want to come to the US to seek a better life, especially those who are refugees. That said, my own take is that the Biden border policy was an example of an over-lenient policy that gave in to the complainers. The interesting thing here is that the complainers, that is, the far left, wasn't even complaining on their own behalf. My other take is that the over-mean, rights-oriented people is the far right. When it comes to immigration, they maintain that illegal immigrants infringe on the rights of US citizens to pursue their own economic well-being, and therefore, they are willing to support deportation education without compassion. Neither group is entirely wrong, but neither group is entirely correct. Anyway, it's process, not content. You can apply overlenient and overmean to a lot of issues, and the roles might be reversed. The result is the same: polarization and societal regression. What Bowen is pointing to here is that the only way we reverse societal regression is when one side or the other moves toward maturity.

[00:08:31.940]
He continues, This occurs when one family member or one person can begin to assume responsibility and can spearhead a course of action based on principle that is not partisan and not for or against anyone. The principle followed is not as important as having a clearly defined blueprint and knowing where one stands. In times of chaos, people are generally pleased to have a person who is sure of their convictions and who can take action. Then comes the first action and the leniency group squawks, a second action and a louder squawk, etc. Eventually, the leader is forced to take unpopular action, which is followed by monumental opposition If the leader still stays on course, the opposition subsides and the whole group is operating on a new level of maturity and integration. Now, you might be saying to yourself, this is what's happening Donald Trump right now. You can argue that he is acting on principle and is sure of his convictions. Of course, the leniency group, the far left, is squawking. The main reason I disagree with that take is that Trump does not represent a mature leader. He rarely takes responsibility for self and is constantly blaming others.

[00:09:51.210]
This is more a sign of narcissism than self-differentiated leadership. I believe that the person who could possibly lead us out of a regression is likely a moderate who gets both sides squawking at them and is able to maintain a non-anxious presence in the midst of that sabotage. It may only occur when we face that major crisis that Bowen predicted. Because of our global connectedness, it won't necessarily be an American. Finally, I'll get to Lauren Richmond's question. Who are the people who are leading in this way today? First, I'll say that I don't really see anybody doing this on a national or global basis. I will say that I believe Dr Martin Luther King Jr. And Nelson Mandela represented this leader. I'll also say that two examples stick out in recent memory of somebody who took a stand in the midst of intense surrounding togetherness pressure. The first is Mitt Romney when he voted to impeach Donald Trump. He stood up to Trump like no one else has in the Republican Party. He put principle over politics. You might also add Nikki Haley to this list as she stood up to Trump during the 2024 primaries.

[00:11:03.970]
That said, neither Romney nor Haley stuck it out. They couldn't deal with the sabotage. Each ultimately decided that Trump's power was too great, and they receded in to the background. I'd also say that Chuck Schumer's recent decision to agree to a budget compromise put what he believed to be the common good over partisan politics. In general, I believe Schumer is more a part of the polarization than he is a self-differentiated leader who can pull us out of our regression. But this, to me, was an example of what that can look like. I'm sure there are many examples of people who are leading through self-differentiation across the world in different contexts. The question is, when will we get a world leader who can lead us out of a regression as a non-anxious presence? That remains to be seen. That's it for episode 333. Don't forget, you can connect with me at jack@christian-leaders.com. You can find more resources at thenonanxiousleader.com. If you have found this episode helpful, please share it with someone who might benefit, and please leave a review on your podcast platform of choice. Thanks for your help. Until next time, go be yourself.

[00:12:22.450]
Thank you for listening. If you found this episode helpful, there are two things you can do to help others find this podcast. First, tap the subscribe button on your podcast app, and second, leave a review. I appreciate your help. Finally, you can find more resources as well as subscribe to my blog at thenonanxiousleader.com. Now, go be yourself.