In the opening essay of this series (read part 1 here), I introduced the central tension that has increasingly occupied my work: the space between Ralph Waldo Emerson and James Baldwin, between spiritual self-trust and moral reckoning, between the belief that something sacred speaks within the human soul and the recognition that human beings are profoundly shaped by the societies that form them. At the center of that tension was a difficult question: Can the soul* still be trusted once it has been shaped by fear, power, mythology, nationalism, race, and social conditioning? In this next reflection, I want to move deeper into one of the foundational issues underneath that question itself—the problem of truth, the cost of truth, and the long American habit of praising truth publicly while deferring the consequences it demands privately and collectively.
* soul in this context means the conscience of an individual and/or nation.
I don’t know about you, but I’m tired, and I think America is too. Specifically, tired of the lies. Everyday it seems we are assaulted with another set of lies - particularly from the Trump Administration.
Every week seems to bring another spectacle. Another claim collapsing under the weight of easily verified evidence. Another conspiracy recycled into public discourse despite repeated debunking. Another attempt to convince Americans not to trust journalists, scientists, historians, judges, universities, election officials, or even their own eyes. Another cycle of outrage manufactured not to clarify reality, but to exhaust the public’s ability to discern it.
And these lies are not abstract.
They carry enormous social, psychological, and financial costs.
The false claims about the 2020 election alone produced billions of dollars in public expense, legal settlements, security costs, investigations, property damage, and institutional disruption. Election workers across the country faced harassment, threats, and resignations after becoming targets of conspiracy narratives. Companies like Dominion Voting Systems secured massive settlements after demonstrably false claims were amplified for political and media advantage. Entire communities have spent years trapped inside a cycle of distrust and grievance fueled by narratives that repeatedly fail under scrutiny yet continue circulating because they remain emotionally useful.
The economic consequences extend far beyond lawsuits.
Markets fluctuate under chaotic policymaking and contradictory public messaging. Government agencies spend enormous resources correcting misinformation. Public health systems still carry the lingering costs of disinformation campaigns that undermined trust during the pandemic. Families fracture. Communities radicalize. Citizens lose confidence not merely in leaders, but in the possibility of shared reality itself.
The war with Iran has become another example of how lies become invoices. Reuters reported that the Pentagon placed the cost at $29 billion by mid-May, while the ongoing expense is approaching or exceeding $1 billion a day.
Meanwhile, Trump’s White House ballroom project, once framed as privately funded, has become entangled with a proposed $1 billion security package. And then comes the most revealing grift of all….
The proposed $1.7 billion “anti-weaponization” fund—described by supporters as compensation for those wrongly targeted by government and by critics as a taxpayer-funded slush fund for Trump allies—reveals the same pattern again: grievance is converted into public cost, while truth is treated as optional accounting.
I wrote about it here:
Perhaps most exhausting of all is not even the lying itself, but the growing expectation that we are supposed to adapt ourselves psychologically in order to function inside it.
We are expected to move on quickly. To normalize it. To absorb it. To become emotionally acclimated to distortion.
After a while, something inside people begins to break down. Not simply politically, but morally.
Because human beings are not designed to live indefinitely inside epistemological chaos. We are not built to constantly negotiate between reality and performance, between evidence and propaganda, between what is happening and what powerful people insist is happening.
Eventually exhaustion sets in. And exhausted people become vulnerable people.
Vulnerable to authoritarianism. Vulnerable to cynicism. Vulnerable to conspiracy.
Vulnerable to surrendering the difficult work of discernment altogether.
When truth becomes exhausting, fantasy starts to feel merciful. And this is also where spiritual practice can be distorted into escapism. Too often I encounter like minded spiritual seekers who have prided themselves on the practice of “not watching the news” or becoming blissfully detached from the “drama” in one way or another. Sigh.
Claiming “this isn’t hell, and it’s not hot” while you are in the middle of the fire is not a spiritual practice. It’s denial, delusion and destructive.
So what do we do?
Before we reduce this crisis to a single administration, political party, or historical moment, we should pause long enough to ask a more uncomfortable question:
Is this actually new?
Or are we simply watching older patterns within the American psyche become impossible to ignore?
Because the deeper crisis may not be that America suddenly abandoned truth. Stay with me here. The deeper crisis may be that America has long loved the idea of truth while resisting the cost of living by it.
We begin, then, with a question that sits at the heart of our current crisis and our inability to resolve it:
What is truth?
It is an ancient question, debated for centuries and still sitting at the front steps of our collective future. A question we can scarcely afford to avoid, though avoidance itself has become one of our most practiced national habits. Too often we sidestep the difficult work of public reckoning what truth is for us as a nation, while performing certainty instead. We parade pre-conceived victories over the crises we face, hoping conviction itself will silence the need for deeper reckoning.
In other words we avoid all together the difficult task of constructing truth together through facing challenges circumstances with honesty. Instead we present our truth onto others as certainty that we’ve got it figure out before even wrestling with the questions. Naturally this leads to conflict. What you present as truth, may not be the same as what I present - especially if we come from different worldviews. Rather than reconcile that inherent conflict, each side doubles down on being right!
Yet what feels distinctive about our moment is not the presence of conflict that this battle with truth brings, but the exhaustion that surrounds it. We are not simply disagreeing more loudly than previous generations; we are living inside a culture where “truth” has been invoked so often, and carried so unevenly, that it no longer feels like a shared moral commitment. It feels transactional, “truth” is now something to be deployed, contested, and discarded, rather than an obligation to be borne together.
Instead of wrestling with what is true and how to respond, we begin to argue about the truth itself. Facts are disputed not because they are unclear, but because accepting them would require reckoning. Reality becomes negotiable when responsibility feels intolerable. What we often describe as polarization, at its core, is a widespread refusal to inhabit a moral world in which truth makes claims upon us, rather than we dictating its boundaries. This refusal may feel unprecedented, but it is not new.
From its beginning, truth has arrived in America carrying an invoice. The truth about conquest and displacement. The truth about enslaved labor and racial hierarchy. The truth about wealth extracted and opportunity restricted. None of these truths were hidden. They were debated publicly, documented extensively, and justified relentlessly. What made them survivable was not ignorance, but deferral. Truth was acknowledged in theory and postponed in practice.
That habit, praising truth while delaying its consequences has become one of America’s most durable moral technologies. It allowed the nation to speak the language of liberty while structuring exclusion into law. It preserved moral self-regard without requiring transformation. Over time, this pattern hardened into an operative norm in the public imagination.
James Baldwin recognized this pattern with a kind of devastating clarity. Writing in the middle of the twentieth century, Baldwin was not diagnosing a new illness so much as naming a long-standing condition. Born into the afterlife of emancipation and betrayal, he inherited the language of freedom and equality alongside their systematic violation. He did not need to imagine contradiction; he lived inside it.
By the time The Fire Next Time appeared in 1963, the nation was congratulating itself, prematurely of course, on “progress” with its racial tensions. Court decisions were shifting. Rhetoric was softening. Patience was being prescribed as virtue. Baldwin refused the comfort of incremental reassurance because he understood that patience was never evenly distributed. It was demanded almost exclusively from those already paying the price of delay.
When Baldwin wrote that he was “sick of hearing people say that you must be patient,” he was not expressing irritation so much as moral clarity. He was naming a system in which truth is acknowledged only to be postponed, its urgency absorbed by those with the least power to refuse it. In such a system, patience becomes a mechanism of extraction. It allows injustice to persist while preserving the appearance of reasonableness, transferring the cost of delay away from those who benefit and onto those who cannot afford to wait.
What Baldwin exposes here is not simply hypocrisy, but a moral economy - one in which truth circulates unevenly, and its cost is consistently borne by the same bodies, the same communities, and the same lives, over and over again.
American democracy claims to value truth. In many ways, it has always depended upon that claim. The question is whether America has ever been willing to pay the price truth demands, or whether that price has been quietly passed along, generation after generation, under the respectable language of patience.
That question does not remain in the public square. It settles inward, shaping conscience and interior soul of a nation.
And so, I’m tired. Tired of waiting for the consequences of our nations lies to catch up with those who get rich off of them. Tired of watching truth become optional for the powerful and unbearably expensive for everyone else. Tired of watching public cruelty rebranded as “strength,” corruption reframed as “strategy,” and basic decency mocked as weakness or naivety. Tired of watching ordinary people exhaust themselves trying to remain psychologically grounded inside systems that constantly reward distortion.
But perhaps exhaustion itself can become clarifying. After all, there is something about the surrender of pretense that moral exhaustion exposes.
Its that moment when fatigue strips away illusion. When the soul can no longer survive on slogans, tribal loyalty, curated narratives, or spiritual bypassing. When we begin realizing that truth is not merely something we believe. It is something we must be willing to carry.
And that carrying has always cost something.
The deeper challenge and invitation now is:
“What truths am I unwilling to carry because they threaten the story I want to believe about myself, my nation, my religion, or my world?”
That question has unsettled me personally over the years.
It unsettles my own spiritual tradition at times as well.
New Thought spirituality has often emphasized the transformative power of consciousness, intention, prayer, and mental causation. And while I continue to believe deeply in the creative and formative power of consciousness, I also believe spirituality becomes dangerous when it teaches people to transcend reality before they have reckoned honestly with it. Authentic spiritual practice is never a shortcut.
Truth is not negated by positive thinking. (some of you need to read that line again.)
Reality is not healed through denial.
Consciousness itself matures through encounter with truth, not avoidance of it.
And perhaps this is part of what Baldwin came to teach America: that avoiding painful truth does not preserve innocence. not mine, or yours or our nation’s. Rather it corrodes the soul. Individually and collectively.
The lies eventually exact their price somewhere.
If not in policy, then in trust.
If not in institutions, then in relationships.
If not in economics, then in the human nervous system itself.
Nothing remains untouched by sustained dishonesty. And we are in the midst of a profoundly corrupt and dishonest choke hold.
Which means the work before us is not merely political.
It is moral and spiritual.
We are being asked - what kind of people we are becoming inside all of this?
Whether we are cultivating the courage necessary to remain truthful in an age addicted to performance, spectacle, and emotional manipulation.
Whether we are willing to let reality make claims upon us again.
And whether the soul itself can still become trustworthy, not because it is naturally pure, but because it has undergone the difficult discipline of honesty.
That may be where freedom actually begins.
Not in certainty. Not in innocence.
But in the willingness to stop running from what is true.
UPNEXT: We’ll explore the the interior cost of deferring the truth of our being (individually and collectively. Stay tuned and be sure to comment and share this series.
What truths feel emotionally difficult for you to fully face right now?
Where do you notice the temptation toward avoidance, numbness, cynicism, or denial in your own life?
Have you ever confused “positivity” with spiritual maturity?
What stories about America, spirituality, success, race, identity, or morality feel difficult to question?
What would it mean to become someone capable of carrying truth without collapsing into despair?
This week, choose one issue you normally avoid because it feels exhausting, overwhelming, or emotionally destabilizing.
Instead of turning away from it, spend fifteen quiet minutes sitting with it intentionally.
Read carefully.
Listen slowly.
Notice your reactions without immediately defending, explaining, spiritualizing, or escaping them.
Then ask yourself gently:
“What part of me wants comfort more than truth?”
Do not ask this question with shame.
Ask it with curiosity.
Because spiritual maturity is not the absence of discomfort.
It is the growing capacity to remain present long enough for truth to transform us.
Rev. Dr. David Alexander D.D., is a public theologian and spiritual writer exploring the intersection of spirituality, justice, and moral imagination in public life. Bringing 20 plus years of pulpit ministry with Centers for Spiritual Living, into everyday life and the call for a better world. He is the author of Freedom from Discord: The Promise of New Thought Liberation Theology and the visionary behind Recovery from the Lie of Whiteness. David also writes the monthly column Philosophy in Action for Science of Mind magazine. Visit www.revdavidalexander.com to learn more.
Thanks for reading The Liberation Lens! This post is public so feel free to share it.
This is my full time work and primary source of income. Thank you for sharing your good with me. Together, we can demonstrate that abundance is the nature of reality.
Comments
Nothing yet. Say the first thing.
Sign in to join the conversation.