Bowen Systems Theory, Societal Regression & Christian Polarization

Introduction: Beyond Blame – Viewing Political Polarization as a Systemic Emotional Process

The Problem of Polarization as an Emotional Process

The landscape of American Christianity is increasingly defined by deep and often acrimonious political polarization. This division is commonly understood as a conflict of ideas, a clash of competing theologies, or a battle for the nation’s soul. While these ideological differences are real and significant, viewing the conflict solely through this lens often leads to intractable cycles of blame, accusation, and heightened antagonism. This report proposes an alternative framework for understanding this phenomenon, one that shifts the focus from the content of the disagreements to the underlying process that drives them. It frames the intense polarization within American Christianity not merely as a rational dispute but as a powerful manifestation of what psychiatrist Dr. Murray Bowen termed a “societal emotional process”.¹

From this perspective, the escalating hostility is a symptom of heightened chronic anxiety coursing through the social body. Just as in a family system under stress, this anxiety intensifies the natural human “togetherness force”—the innate pressure to conform, seek approval, and maintain group cohesion.¹ When this force becomes overwhelming, it leads to increased emotional “fusion,” a state where individual boundaries blur and reactivity supplants thoughtful response.⁴ This report will argue that much of the current political dysfunction within Christian communities can be understood as a predictable, albeit unhealthy, attempt to manage this systemic anxiety. The goal is to move beyond a simplistic “cause and effect” or “villain and victim” narrative and adopt a systems-thinking approach that observes the reciprocal interactions, unconscious emotional patterns, and multigenerational forces that hold these divisions in place.² By analyzing the system’s functioning, it becomes possible to identify pathways to greater health without assigning blame.

Bowen Family Systems Theory as a Diagnostic Lens

To undertake this analysis, this report will employ the principles of Bowen Family Systems Theory (BFST). Developed over decades of clinical research, BFST is a comprehensive theory of human behavior that views social groups—most notably the family, but by extension any emotionally significant group like a church, workplace, or political movement—as “emotional units”.³ Bowen’s central insight was that the members of such units are so intensely connected that they function as if under a single “emotional skin,” profoundly affecting one another’s thoughts, feelings, and actions outside of conscious awareness.³ A change in one part of the system predictably triggers reciprocal changes throughout the entire unit.

BFST provides a unique and powerful diagnostic language to map the emotional circuitry of the groups in question. Its eight interlocking concepts offer a way to understand how anxiety is generated, transmitted, and managed within a system. This report will utilize these concepts to explore the architecture of the divisions within American Christianity, treating the user-defined political groupings not as mere ideological camps, but as complex emotional systems operating according to observable, predictable patterns.

Report Objective and Structure

The objective of this report is twofold. First, it will apply the lens of Bowen Family Systems Theory to analyze two specific emotional systems, or “triangles,” that characterize a significant portion of the current divide in American Christianity, as specified in the analytical prompt. These are:

1. A “Liberal Triangle” involving affluent White Christian Democrats, race-centered groups, and the White rural and working class.
2. A “Conservative Triangle” involving affluent White Christian Republicans, the White rural and working class, and race-centered groups.

Second, based on this systemic diagnosis, the report will propose theologically-grounded pathways toward what Bowen identified as the hallmark of maturity: greater “differentiation of self”.⁹ It will explore how core Christian principles can help individuals and groups de-triangle from dysfunctional relationships, take responsibility for their own emotional processes, and work against the limitations of their respective ideological frameworks to foster a healthier and more constructive public witness.

The report is structured in four parts. Part I will provide a comprehensive overview of the core principles of Bowen Family Systems Theory, establishing the theoretical foundation for the analysis. Parts II and III will apply this theory to the Progressive and Conservative triangles, respectively, diagnosing the emotional processes at play in each system. Finally, Part IV will shift from diagnosis to prescription, offering a robust set of theological and practical interventions designed to increase differentiation and heal systemic dysfunction.

Note: while this report is using the US political context as a case study, these same patterns of political polarization operate in similar ways across different contexts. In different contexts there will be different groups in various roles in the triangles and there are likely to be different key polarizing issues. For example, in many developing countries, a key polarizing issue might be whether to align with strong anti-colonialist/nationalist thinking or not. 

Part I: The Architecture of Anxiety – Core Principles of Bowen Family Systems Theory

The Emotional System: Individuality, Togetherness, and Chronic Anxiety

At the heart of Bowen’s theory is the concept of the human as a product of evolution, governed by an emotional system that developed over millions of years to ensure the survival of the species.⁸ This system, which we share with all other forms of life, is the primary driver of the instinct for connection and group cohesion. Bowen identified two fundamental and often competing life forces that regulate this system: the togetherness force and the individuality force.¹

The togetherness force is the innate pressure to be part of a group, to be alike, to seek approval, and to agree on values, beliefs, and feelings.³ It is the glue that creates families, communities, and societies, promoting the cooperation necessary to protect and nurture their members.⁸ The individuality force, conversely, is the impetus to be a distinct and separate self, to think for oneself, and to take responsibility for one’s own life without blaming or making demands on others.³ A healthy life, in Bowen’s view, involves a dynamic balance between these two forces.

Dysfunction arises when this balance is disrupted by anxiety. Bowen made a critical distinction between two types of anxiety. Acute anxiety is a time-limited response to a real, tangible threat.³ It is a necessary and often helpful part of life. The more corrosive force is chronic anxiety, which is generated not by real threats, but by imagined threats and disturbances in the balance of the relationship system itself.³ It is a reaction to “what if” scenarios and perceived threats to the emotional equilibrium of the group.

Chronic anxiety is the engine of systemic dysfunction. It is contagious, spreading “infectiously” or “like a virus” through the emotional connections of a group, be it a family, a workplace, or a political movement.⁸ As chronic anxiety rises, the togetherness force intensifies, and the pressure for conformity and emotional fusion increases dramatically.⁵ The emotional connectedness that is normally comforting becomes stressful and demanding. Eventually, one or more members of the system, typically those who accommodate the most to relieve tension in others, will “absorb” the system’s anxiety and develop symptoms, whether physical, psychological, or social.⁸

Differentiation of Self: The Core of Emotional Maturity

The capacity of an individual or a group to resist the pull of anxiety-driven fusion is the measure of its differentiation of self. Bowen considered this the core concept of his entire theory, representing the cornerstone of emotional maturity.¹ Differentiation exists on a continuum, which Bowen conceptualized as a theoretical scale from 0 to 100.¹⁰ It is not a measure of intelligence or personality, but of the ability to maintain a separate self while remaining meaningfully connected to others.⁶

At its core, differentiation has two primary dimensions: intrapsychic and interpersonal. The intrapsychic dimension is the ability to distinguish between thoughts and feelings—to separate the intellectual system from the emotional system.³ A well-differentiated person can feel intense emotions without being governed by them; they can access their thinking brain to guide their actions based on carefully considered principles, even in the midst of a reactive emotional climate.¹¹ The interpersonal dimension is the ability to balance the forces of individuality and togetherness, maintaining a clear sense of self and taking an “I-position” without being emotionally fused with or cut off from others.¹⁵

Bowen distinguished between a “solid self” and a “pseudo-self”.⁷ The solid self is built on a foundation of internal, non-negotiable beliefs and principles. It is not dogmatic, but it is firm, allowing a person to make decisions and act in ways that are consistent with their values, even when faced with pressure, conflict, or rejection.³ The pseudo-self, by contrast, is a borrowed self, cobbled together from the relationship system to gain approval and reduce anxiety.⁷ It is chameleon-like, shifting its beliefs, statements, and actions to please others and maintain harmony.⁹ Individuals with a poorly differentiated “self” are dominated by the pseudo-self. Their lives are relationship-oriented, and their thinking is fused with their feelings, making them highly reactive to the emotional states of those around them.⁵ They are equally dependent on the approval of the group whether they manifest as compliant “chameleons” or as aggressive “bullies” who pressure others to conform to their position.¹¹ Both are driven by the same underlying need for external validation to manage their anxiety.

While a person’s basic level of differentiation is largely established in childhood, their functional level can fluctuate depending on the level of chronic anxiety in their life and relationships.¹⁰ Under high stress, even a well-differentiated person can function poorly for a time. The ultimate goal of Bowen’s approach is not to eliminate anxiety, but to increase one’s basic level of differentiation, thereby enhancing the capacity to manage anxiety thoughtfully and maintain a solid self in all of life’s systems.

The Triangle: The Basic Molecule of Relationship Systems

According to Bowen, the most basic and stable unit of any human relationship system is not the dyad, but the triangle.¹ A two-person system is inherently unstable; when chronic anxiety increases beyond what the dyad can tolerate, it will automatically and predictably draw in a third person to relieve the tension.³ This process, known as triangulation, is a natural function of all living systems.³ The anxiety that was concentrated between the original two is now diffused across a three-person system, making the original relationship feel more comfortable and stable, at least temporarily.⁴

Triangles are the fundamental “molecule” or “building block” of all social systems, from the nuclear family to international relations.³ Larger social groups are composed of a complex and overlapping series of interlocking triangles.³ These triangles are not inherently good or bad; their outcome depends on how the members manage the anxiety within them.³ The system can be calmed if one member of the triangle is able to remain differentiated—that is, to stay in emotional contact with the other two without becoming reactive or taking sides.³ This non-anxious presence forces the other two members to deal more directly with their own part of the problem.

However, in a low-differentiated system, the triangle becomes a mechanism for perpetuating dysfunction. The members become locked into rigid positions. Often, the original dyad stabilizes its relationship by focusing its anxiety on the third person, who may become the identified “problem” or scapegoat.⁴ For example, parents in conflict might triangle in a child, who then develops symptoms, diverting the focus from the marital tension.⁴ This dynamic allows the original issue to remain unresolved while the system maintains a dysfunctional equilibrium.

The Projection Process and Societal Regression: How Systems Scapegoat

The mechanism by which a system’s anxiety is focused onto one member is called the family projection process.³ In a family, this typically involves parents projecting their own anxieties, fears, and undifferentiation onto one or more of their children.¹ The parent, anxious that something is wrong with the child, focuses on them, interprets the child’s behavior through that anxious lens, and then treats the child as if something is truly wrong with them.⁹ Over time, the child who is the object of this projection becomes the one who is most fused with the parents and carries the highest level of the family’s anxiety. This individual literally “absorbs” the system’s dysfunction and is the most likely to develop symptoms.⁸ This process is a form of scapegoating, where one person is identified as the problem to mask the reality that the problem lies within the entire family’s emotional process.¹

Bowen extended this concept from the family to society at large with his eighth concept, Societal Emotional Process, also known as societal regression.¹ He observed that societies, like families, go through periods of progression and regression. During periods of high chronic anxiety—driven by stressors like economic instability, rapid cultural change, or perceived threats—a society can enter a state of regression.³ Examples of this stress might include the COVID-19 pandemic, periods of significant political unrest and widespread protests, extreme political polarization, disasters, rapid technological change, economic depression and job loss, rapid demographic shifts/increased immigration, social epidemics including drugs, gangs or violence, etc. 

In this state, the collective emotional system becomes dominant over the intellectual system. The society as a whole begins to function like a low-differentiated family, characterized by heightened emotional reactivity, polarization, “groupthink,” and a focus on short-term, feeling-based decisions over long-term, principle-based solutions.⁶

This process of societal regression provides the direct theoretical bridge for applying BFST to the political landscape. The intense polarization, the formation of rigid in-groups and out-groups, and the tendency to blame and scapegoat can be understood as large-scale manifestations of triangulation and the projection process. As societal anxiety rises, the togetherness force intensifies, leading to greater emotional fusion within political tribes. These fused groups, unable to manage their own internal anxiety, seek stability by triangulating in scapegoats—other groups onto whom they can project their fears and frustrations. This dynamic creates a vicious cycle: the projection of anxiety onto a scapegoat temporarily relieves tension within the in-group, but it also increases the overall level of chronic anxiety in the society, fueling further regression and polarization.² This causal chain—from chronic anxiety to fusion, triangulation, and projection—provides a powerful, non-blaming explanatory model for the dysfunctional emotional systems at the heart of this report’s analysis.

Part II: The Liberal Triangle – Fusion, Righteousness, and the Outsider

Applying the diagnostic lens of Bowen Family Systems Theory, we can analyze the first system—the liberal Christian triangle—as a complex emotional unit driven by the management of chronic anxiety. This system involves a fused relationship between its apex (affluent White Christian Democrats) and a triangled-in party (race-centered groups), which is stabilized through the projection of anxiety onto a scapegoat (the White rural and working class), all held together by the ideological framework of a particular interpretation of Critical Race Theory.

The Apex: Affluent White Christian Democrats and the Anxiety of Privilege

The group positioned at the apex of this triangle is composed of affluent, often college-educated, White Democrats who identify as Christian. Research highlights a significant divergence within the Democratic party along racial lines regarding religious belief and practice. White Democrats are, as a group, considerably less likely than nonwhite Democrats to identify as Christian, believe in the biblical God, attend church weekly, or pray daily.²⁰ In many religious metrics, nonwhite Democrats more closely resemble Republicans than they do their White Democratic counterparts.²⁰ Furthermore, the Democratic party’s base has increasingly shifted toward white college graduates, while the Republican party has gained ground with white voters without a college degree.²¹

From a Bowenian perspective, the primary chronic anxiety for the White Christian Democrats at the apex stems from this complex positioning. They inhabit a space of significant social, economic, and historical privilege (whiteness, affluence, education) within a political coalition that is increasingly defined by the moral claims and lived experiences of its nonwhite, and often less affluent, constituencies.²⁰ This creates a profound emotional tension—an anxiety about their own moral standing, legitimacy, and potential complicity in the very systems of inequity their party seeks to dismantle. This is not merely a political or intellectual problem; it is a deep-seated emotional challenge to their sense of self within their most important identity group. The anxiety is about belonging: how to be a “good” and “just” person while holding identities associated with historical power and oppression.

The Fused Relationship: Triangling in Race-Centered Groups for Moral Validation

To manage this intense chronic anxiety, the apex engages in a process of triangulation. It pulls in a third party—race-centered groups and their advocates—to stabilize the emotionally fraught position of the self. In BFST terms, this is an emotionally driven process of fusion, where the apex seeks to merge its identity with that of the triangled-in party. This fusion is not necessarily a cynical or manipulative act of co-opting; rather, it is an unconscious strategy to build a stable pseudo-self of moral righteousness.⁷ By aligning completely with the perceived emotional state, perspective, and moral authority of the triangled-in group, the apex can alleviate its own anxiety about its moral legitimacy. The borrowed pseudo-self says, “I am one of the good ones because I am in complete solidarity with the oppressed.”

This fusion manifests in several ways. It can be seen in the adoption of specific language, frameworks, and social postures that demonstrate unwavering support for the triangled-in party’s perspective. This includes elevating the “voice of color” thesis, which posits that people of color have a unique and authoritative insight into the nature of racism due to their lived experience.²⁴ Within the emotional logic of the triangle, questioning or challenging the perspective of the triangled-in party would threaten the fusion and re-ignite the apex’s core anxiety about its own moral standing. Therefore, maintaining the fusion becomes a primary, albeit unconscious, goal of the relationship, often taking precedence over objective analysis or nuanced discussion. This intense emotional interdependence, where one’s sense of moral well-being is dependent on the approval of the other, is a classic hallmark of a fused relationship in a Bowenian system.⁴

The Scapegoat: Projecting Systemic Anxiety onto the White Working Class

A fused dyad is inherently unstable. The unresolved anxiety within the relationship between the apex (affluent White Christian Democrats) and the triangled-in party (race-centered groups) must be discharged. Following the predictable pattern of the family projection process, this anxiety is projected onto an external target: the White rural and working class.⁸ This demographic, which has been steadily moving away from the Democratic party for decades, becomes the ideal scapegoat.²¹

This group becomes the repository for all the “problematic” aspects of whiteness that the apex is anxious about within itself. The projection process allows the apex to create emotional distance from its own uncomfortable identity by locating the “real” problem of racism, ignorance, and resistance to progress in the scapegoated group. This dynamic is evident in discourse that paints poor and working-class whites as “bewilderingly irrational,” uneducated, and primarily motivated by racism.²⁹ Some commentary pathologizes this group, suggesting they are a “sub-human…creature” who must be “listened to” out of a sense of patronizing duty.³⁰ This act of projection serves a crucial systemic function: it solidifies the fused identity of the apex and the triangled-in party as “enlightened” and “just” by defining them in opposition to the “unenlightened” and “racist” scapegoat. The anxiety is managed not by resolving it internally, but by exporting it.

This dynamic reveals a profound internal contradiction. The very act of scapegoating the white working class for being “racist” is a direct refutation of a core tenet of sophisticated Critical Race Theory, which argues that racism is primarily systemic and institutional, not merely a problem of individual “bad” actors or prejudiced groups.³¹ The system uses the language of systemic critique to engage in the highly individualistic and projective act of blaming a specific group. This demonstrates that the emotional process—the need to manage anxiety through projection—is a more powerful driver of the system’s behavior than the intellectual content of its professed ideology. The system, in its effort to relieve its own anxiety, abandons the systemic focus of the very ideology it claims to champion and reverts to a simpler, more emotionally satisfying act of blaming a group of individuals. This is a hallmark of a low-differentiated system, where emotional reactivity overrides principled, intellectual consistency.

The Ideology of the System: Critical Race Theory as a Framework for Fusion

Every emotional system operates with a set of beliefs and principles—an ideology—that explains and justifies its functioning. For this progressive triangle, a particular politicized interpretation of Critical Race Theory (CRT) serves as this ideological “glue.” The focus here is not on the merits or demerits of CRT as a complex academic and legal discipline, but on how its concepts are used within the emotional process of this specific system. The debate over CRT is itself a source of immense anxiety and division within Christian communities, with some viewing it as a dangerous threat and others as a valuable analytical tool.²⁵

For this triangle, certain tenets of CRT provide a powerful narrative that perfectly reinforces the system’s emotional structure. First, it tends to define relationships primarily in terms of power dynamics, categorizing individuals and groups as either “oppressor” or “oppressed”.²⁴ This binary aligns with the triangular structure, assigning clear moral roles to each participant. Second, it often elevates the “lived experience” and “counternarratives” of oppressed groups as having special epistemic authority, which validates the fusion between the apex and the triangled-in party.²⁴ Third, it identifies whiteness itself and its associated privilege as a core source of systemic problems, which resonates with the apex’s core anxiety and justifies the projection of this “problematic whiteness” onto the scapegoated working class.²⁴

Crucially, in the political arena, the term “CRT” has often been weaponized and transformed into what researchers call an “empty signifier”.³⁵ This means its power to bind the group together and signal in-group loyalty may be more significant than the public’s understanding of its specific intellectual tenets. It becomes a marker of one’s allegiance to the emotional system. By adopting this ideological framework, the system finds a language to articulate its anxieties, justify its fusions, and validate its projections, thus maintaining its dysfunctional but stable equilibrium.

Part III: The Conservative Triangle – Fusion, Protection, and the Other

Mirroring the structure of the progressive system, the conservative Christian triangle can also be diagnosed as an emotional unit driven by the management of chronic anxiety. This system is characterized by a fused relationship between its apex (affluent White Christian Republicans) and a triangled-in party (the White rural and working class), which is stabilized through the projection of anxiety onto a scapegoat (race-centered groups and immigrants), all held together by the ideological framework of an overly individualistic Gospel and Christian Nationalism.

The Apex: Affluent White Christian Republicans and the Anxiety of Displacement

The apex of this second triangle consists of affluent, often college-educated, White Republicans who identify as Christian, particularly within the evangelical tradition. While the Republican party has become the political home for the majority of white working-class voters, its leadership and donor class often come from more affluent backgrounds.²¹ This group’s political identity has become increasingly intertwined with the ideology of Christian Nationalism, which posits that America was founded as a Christian nation and should accord Christianity a privileged place in public life.³⁸

From a Bowenian perspective, the primary chronic anxiety for this apex group stems from a perceived threat of cultural, demographic, and religious displacement.⁴⁰ This is an existential anxiety rooted in the feeling that the traditional cultural and social order is eroding and that their group’s status as the rightful inheritors and definers of American identity is under threat from “outside forces” like immigration, secularism, and progressive social movements.⁴⁰ This anxiety is not primarily about economic hardship, but about a loss of identity, control, and cultural dominance. The fear is that the “America they know” is being taken away, leading to a powerful, emotionally charged desire to protect and reclaim it.

The Fused Relationship: Triangling in the White Working Class for Authentic Identity

To manage this anxiety of displacement, the apex triangulates in the White rural and working class, particularly the large and politically potent bloc of white evangelicals.²¹ This creates an intensely fused relationship that allows the apex to borrow a pseudo-self of cultural authenticity.⁷ The white working class is seen as embodying the values of the “heartland,” the “real America” that feels threatened. This fusion creates a powerful, unified “we” that stands against the perceived external threats.

This alliance is primarily ideological and cultural, not economic. The long-term shift of the white working class to the Republican party is better explained by ideological realignment on social and cultural issues than by economic discontent.²¹ Indeed, the fusion is powerful enough to override clear economic self-interest. Affluent Republicans and the corporate interests they often represent frequently champion policies—such as deregulation, tax cuts for the wealthy, and opposition to unions and entitlement programs—that may not directly benefit, and may even harm, the economic standing of their working-class allies.⁴⁵ The fact that the emotional need for belonging and cultural protection can supersede rational economic calculation is a classic indicator of a highly fused emotional system, where the demands of the relationship system itself become the primary motivator of behavior.

The Scapegoat: Projecting Systemic Anxiety onto Race-Centered Groups

As with any fused system, the chronic anxiety about displacement and loss of control must be managed. The conservative triangle accomplishes this by projecting its anxiety onto external scapegoats: racial and ethnic minorities, immigrants, and the movements that advocate for them.⁴⁷ These groups become the embodiment of the perceived threat. They are framed as the “invaders” who are “replacing our cultural and ethnic background,” a belief known as replacement theory, which is held by a large majority of white Christian nationalist adherents and sympathizers.³⁹

The ideology of Christian Nationalism provides the explicit justification for this projection. It functions as the religion of White identity politics, implicitly (and sometimes explicitly) linking American identity to whiteness and a particular expression of Christianity.⁵⁰ This framework allows the system to portray its anxiety not as a prejudice, but as a righteous defense of faith and nation. The scapegoated groups are seen not merely as political opponents, but as existential threats to God’s plan for America. This projection serves to solidify the fusion between the apex and the triangled-in working class, uniting them against a common enemy and transforming their shared anxiety into a sense of righteous purpose.

This dynamic reveals the self-defeating nature of the protection offered by the fused relationship. The alliance between affluent and working-class white Republicans, forged to protect a shared cultural identity, is inherently unstable because it is based on emotional reactivity rather than a differentiated, principle-based relationship. The working-class segment of the triangle, in exchange for a sense of belonging and cultural protection (a “pseudo-self”), often trades away its direct economic self-interest.⁴⁵ Bowen’s theory predicts that such fused relationships are brittle. History demonstrates that working-class voters can “whiplash” against incumbent parties that are perceived as failing them economically.⁴⁶ Therefore, the very act of fusion, which feels like a protective fortress, makes the entire system vulnerable to collapse. The more powerful apex, driven by its own political and economic calculus, can emotionally “cut off” from its working-class allies if they become a liability, leaving them feeling betrayed and intensifying the system’s overall anxiety.¹ The “protection” offered by this fusion is thus revealed to be an illusion, a function of the system’s low differentiation and its dependence on managing anxiety through external projection rather than internal strength.

The Ideology of the System: An Individualistic Gospel as a Framework for Fusion

The ideological framework that undergirds and enables this conservative emotional system is an overly individualistic interpretation of the Christian Gospel. This theological lens emphasizes personal salvation, individual sin and repentance, and a personal relationship with Jesus, while often minimizing, downplaying, or outright denying the biblical emphasis on systemic sin and social justice.⁵² Research on sermons in white evangelical churches shows that when racism is discussed, it is overwhelmingly framed as an individual problem of the heart, rather than a systemic or structural issue.⁵⁷

This individualistic framework serves the emotional needs of the triangle in two crucial ways. First, it provides a powerful, non-economic basis for the fusion between the affluent apex and the working-class base. They are united not by class interest, but by a shared identity as “born-again” believers, a shared moral framework, and a shared mission of personal evangelism. This powerful religious identity makes their significant economic differences secondary to their spiritual and cultural unity.

Second, by defining sin almost exclusively as an individual act, this ideology provides a theological justification for the system’s projection process. If sin is only individual, then the concept of “systemic racism” can be dismissed as a non-biblical, political invention.⁵⁶ This makes it easier to reject the claims of race-centered groups and to attribute social disparities not to unjust systems, but to the collective individual failings or cultural deficiencies of the scapegoated groups themselves. The individualistic Gospel, therefore, functions as a perfect ideological partner to Christian Nationalism; one provides the personal moral framework while the other provides the national political narrative, and together they sustain an emotional system that manages its anxiety by fusing against a common, external enemy.

Part IV: Pathways to Differentiation – Applying Christian Principles to De-Triangle and Heal Systemic Dysfunction

The Bowenian analysis of the progressive and conservative triangles reveals that while their ideological content, anxieties, and scapegoats differ, their underlying emotional process is remarkably similar. Both are low-differentiated systems caught in a reactive cycle of anxiety, fusion, triangulation, and projection. Moving toward health requires not that one side defeat the other, but that both systems increase their capacity for differentiation. This final section will propose a series of theological principles and practical steps designed to foster this emotional and spiritual maturity.

Table: A Comparative Analysis of the Two Triangles

To clarify the parallel nature of these dysfunctional systems, the following table provides a side-by-side diagnostic summary. Recognizing these structural similarities is the first step toward a non-blaming, systemic understanding, revealing that the core problem is the process itself, not the particular content or participants.

Feature	Progressive Triangle (Group 1)	Conservative Triangle (Group 2)
Apex	Affluent White Christian Democrats	Affluent White Christian Republicans
Core Anxiety	Moral anxiety regarding privilege and historical complicity.	Existential anxiety regarding cultural/demographic displacement.
Triangled-In Party	Race-centered groups.	White rural and working class.
Nature of Fusion	Fusion provides a “pseudo-self” of moral righteousness.	Fusion provides a “pseudo-self” of cultural authenticity.
Scapegoat	White rural and working class.	Race-centered groups and immigrants.
Projection Process	Projects its own “problematic” whiteness onto the scapegoat.	Projects its own fear of loss and threat onto the scapegoat.
Dominant Ideology	Politicized Critical Race Theory.	Overly Individualistic Gospel / Christian Nationalism.
Function of Ideology	Provides moral language for fusion and justification for scapegoating.	Provides cultural language for fusion and justification for scapegoating.

Recovering the Imago Dei: The Foundation for a Differentiated Self

The most fundamental Christian resource for increasing differentiation of self is the theological doctrine of the Imago Dei. This principle, established in the first chapter of Genesis, asserts that all human beings are created in the image and likeness of God and therefore possess inestimable, equal, and inherent dignity and worth.²⁴ This worth is not contingent on race, class, gender, ability, religion, or any other property; it is a status endowed by the Creator.⁵⁹

A deep, principled commitment to the Imago Dei directly counters the emotional process of triangulation. It makes it theologically and ethically impossible to reduce any person or group to a mere function in one’s own anxiety-management system. One cannot simultaneously see another person as a bearer of God’s holy image and as a mere object to be used as a source of moral validation (the triangled-in party) or as a target for projected blame (the scapegoat). The Imago Dei compels a recognition of the full, complex, and sacred humanity of the “other,” which is the very essence of differentiation. It provides the solid, principle-based foundation required to take what Bowen called an “I-position”—a clear, non-reactive statement of self that is not dependent on the approval or disapproval of the group.¹⁵ For a Christian, this “I-position” would be: “I am committed to honoring the

Imago Dei in you, regardless of whether you agree with me, validate me, or threaten me.” This stance breaks the cycle of emotional reactivity.

From Projection to Communal Repentance: Owning the System’s Anxiety

The direct theological antidote to the family projection process—the scapegoating of an external group—is the biblical practice of communal repentance. Throughout the Old and New Testaments, from the city of Nineveh to the early church, there are powerful examples of entire communities acknowledging their collective sin and turning back to God.⁶² This practice is a profound act of a system taking responsibility for its own state. The Anglican Book of Common Prayer captures this spirit perfectly: “we confess that we have sinned against you…by what we have done, and by what we have left undone. We have not loved you with our whole heart; we have not loved our neighbors as ourselves”.⁶⁵

Instead of projecting anxiety outward, a differentiated community practices communal repentance by looking inward. It confesses its own complicity in systemic sin and its failure to love God and neighbor.

• For the Progressive Triangle, this would mean repenting of the sin of classism, of the intellectual pride that looks down upon the working class, and of the self-righteousness that comes from projecting its own “problematic whiteness” onto others instead of dealing with it internally.
• For the Conservative Triangle, this would mean repenting of the sin of racism and xenophobia, of the fear that leads to the dehumanization of immigrants and minorities, and of the idolatry of nationalism that conflates the Kingdom of God with a particular earthly nation.

In both cases, communal repentance is the ultimate act of a system ceasing to blame a scapegoat and instead taking responsibility for its own emotional process and its own sin.

Re-evaluating the Covenant: From Fused Alliances to Mutual Responsibility

Both triangles are built on emotionally fused alliances that masquerade as healthy relationships. Covenant Theology, particularly as developed in the Reformed tradition, offers a model for transforming these fusions into differentiated, responsible relationships.⁶⁶ A biblical covenant is not an emotional merger; it is a structured relationship of mutual, clearly defined obligations and responsibilities under the supreme authority of God.⁶⁶

This framework challenges the dysfunctional dynamics in both systems. It calls the apex in each triangle to move from using the triangled-in party to manage its own anxiety to serving them out of a sense of covenantal duty and mutual obligation. For the progressive apex, this means moving beyond symbolic solidarity to concrete actions that address the real economic and cultural anxieties of the white working class. For the conservative apex, this means moving beyond using the working class as a voting bloc to enacting policies that genuinely promote their economic flourishing and security. Furthermore, a covenantal framework establishes that the primary allegiance for all parties is to God and His law of love, not to the fused political coalition.⁶⁸ This creates the necessary emotional space for differentiation, allowing individuals to critique their own side without fear of being cast out of the relationship system.

The Demands of Mishpat and Tzedakah: A More Complete Gospel

Both systems are trapped by incomplete and therefore distorted ideologies that fuel their dysfunction. The path toward health requires both to embrace a fuller, more robustly biblical vision of justice, encapsulated in the Hebrew concepts of mishpat and tzedakah.

Mishpat is often translated as “justice” and refers to retributive justice (the rule of law) but also, and more fundamentally, to restorative justice. It is about correcting injustice and creating a society where the most vulnerable are protected and can flourish.⁶⁹ The Bible repeatedly identifies the “quartet of the vulnerable”—the widow, the orphan, the immigrant, and the poor—as the primary objects of mishpat.⁶⁹

Tzedakah, often translated as “righteousness,” is a deeply relational term that means “to do right by someone”.⁶⁹ It involves not just charity, but distributive justice and acts of generosity that restore dignity and right-relatedness within the community.⁷⁰

• For the Progressive Triangle, its ideology, often drawn from a politicized CRT, focuses heavily on critique and the identification of power imbalances. While this can be a valuable diagnostic tool, it must be integrated with the biblical call for mishpat and tzedakah that leads to reconciliation and restoration for the entire community, not just the deconstruction of power and the assignment of blame.²⁴ True biblical justice seeks to heal and restore relationships, which requires a path to redemption for the “oppressor” group as well.
• For the Conservative Triangle, its individualistic Gospel must be expanded to include the non-negotiable biblical mandates for systemic justice. The Bible’s relentless concern for the “quartet of the vulnerable” directly challenges an ideology that often ignores systemic injustice and scapegoats the very groups God commands his people to protect.⁶⁹ This requires moving beyond a purely “spiritual” gospel that saves individual souls from the world to a holistic gospel that seeks, as Jesus did, to bring God’s kingdom “on earth as it is in heaven,” which has profound social and structural implications.⁵²

Practical Steps Toward De-Triangling and Differentiation

Grounded in these theological principles, leaders and individuals within both systems can take concrete, practical steps to increase differentiation and break dysfunctional patterns. These steps are direct applications of Bowenian therapeutic strategy:

1. Defining a Self: Individuals must be encouraged to do the hard work of developing a “solid self” based on core theological principles like the Imago Dei and a covenantal understanding of responsibility. This means deciding what one believes and what principles will guide one’s life, independent of the emotional pressures of the political in-group.³
2. Observing, Not Reacting: Leaders, in particular, must cultivate the capacity to be non-anxious observers of their own emotional systems. This involves learning to recognize the patterns of fusion, reactivity, and projection within their churches and political groups without getting emotionally swept up in them.² A calm, observant leader can absorb anxiety rather than amplifying and transmitting it.
3. De-Triangling: This is the active refusal to participate in the triangulation process.

• For those at the apex of a triangle, this means stopping the pattern of talking about the scapegoat to the fused party. Instead, they must learn to communicate directly, calmly, and respectfully with the group they have been blaming.¹⁷
• For the triangled-in party, this means refusing to be the vehicle for the apex’s anxiety. It involves encouraging direct communication between the other two points of the triangle and resisting the urge to take sides or absorb the system’s tension.

4. Re-establishing Contact: Bowen argued that one of the most powerful ways to increase one’s own differentiation is to courageously and thoughtfully re-establish contact with important family members who have been emotionally “cut off”.¹ On a societal level, this translates into a call for intentional, non-anxious bridge-building between the fused groups and their respective scapegoats. This is not a call for superficial unity, but for principled engagement that seeks to understand the other without abandoning one’s own convictions—the ultimate test of a differentiated self.

V. Below the Surface: An Iceberg Model of Political Polarization

To further understand how the emotional processes described by Bowen theory manifest in the political sphere, it is useful to employ another systems thinking tool: the Iceberg Model. This model posits that the visible “events” we see are just the tip of an iceberg, driven by deeper, less visible layers of patterns, structures, and, at the very bottom, mental models.⁷⁷ In the context of American politics, the daily events of partisan conflict and gridlock are what we see above the water. The Iceberg Model helps us look beneath the surface to understand the root causes of this dysfunction.⁷⁹

A. Party Pressure and Polarized Mental Models

Political parties are a key part of the “structure” level of the iceberg—the organizations and policies that cause recurring patterns of behavior.⁸⁰ They exert immense pressure on their members to adopt a specific worldview, or “mental model,” which lies at the base of the iceberg.⁸¹ Mental models are the deeply held beliefs, values, and assumptions that shape a system.⁷³ In a highly anxious political system, these models become rigid and polarized.

Parties foster what is known as “affective polarization”—the tendency to feel positively toward one’s own party (the in-group) and negatively toward the opposing party (the out-group).⁸⁸ This emotional dynamic creates a powerful “us vs. them” worldview.¹³ Adherence to the party’s mental model is reinforced through social pressure; to disagree with the group risks alienation, while conformity provides a sense of belonging and security.⁵⁷ This process mirrors the Bowen concept of fusion, where individual identity becomes enmeshed with the group’s emotional state. As a result, a challenge to the party’s worldview is often perceived not as an intellectual disagreement, but as a personal attack on one’s identity.⁸⁰

B. “Either/Or” Solutions Driven by Binary Worldviews

The polarized mental models promoted by political parties reduce complex social problems to simplistic, binary choices.⁴³ This “either/or” thinking is a hallmark of a regressed, low-differentiation system that cannot tolerate ambiguity.⁵⁹ Instead of seeking nuanced solutions that acknowledge multiple contributing factors, the polarized mindset frames every issue as a moral battle between two opposing and irreconcilable approaches. This dynamic is evident across a range of persistent social challenges.

• Homelessness: The debate is often framed as a choice between compassion and accountability. The Democratic approach typically emphasizes structural causes like the lack of affordable housing and advocates for increased government funding for housing programs and social services.⁶⁰ The Republican approach tends to focus on individual factors like mental illness and substance abuse, calling for accountability in spending, streamlined shelter construction, and mandatory treatment programs.⁸⁷ Each side often blames the other’s policies for the worsening crisis.⁸⁶
• Addiction: The polarized debate presents a choice between public health and public order. The liberal mental model views addiction as a disease requiring a compassionate, medical response, advocating for harm reduction, decriminalization, and expanded access to treatment.⁸⁸ The conservative mental model has historically favored a more punitive, criminal justice-oriented approach, though the opioid crisis has prompted a greater focus on treatment.⁸⁸ The debate remains polarized along partisan lines, particularly regarding harm reduction strategies.⁸⁸
• Racial Relations: The divide here is between viewing racism as systemic versus individual. The Democratic worldview, influenced by concepts like Critical Race Theory, sees racial inequality as embedded in the nation’s structures and institutions, requiring systemic solutions like affirmative action, police reform, and reparations.⁸⁹ The Republican worldview tends to reject the idea of systemic racism, framing inequality as a result of individual behavior or cultural factors and advocating for colorblind policies that emphasize personal responsibility.⁶⁴
• Poverty: The debate is often reduced to a choice between government assistance and individual self-sufficiency. The liberal approach sees poverty as a result of economic inequality and calls for strengthening the social safety net through government programs, financial aid, and a higher minimum wage.⁹¹ The conservative approach emphasizes personal responsibility, family structure, and free-market principles, advocating for work requirements, tax cuts to spur growth, and a smaller role for government in favor of community and faith-based organizations.⁹²

C. Updating Mental Models to Resist Polarization

The Iceberg Model suggests that the most powerful leverage point for creating lasting change is at the level of mental models.⁵¹ To escape the trap of political polarization, individuals and the society as a whole must consciously update the underlying beliefs and assumptions that fuel the conflict. This aligns directly with the core principles of Bowen theory.

The solution is to shift from a polarized, reactive mental model to one based on systems thinking and differentiation of self.⁴³ This requires developing an awareness of the emotional processes that political parties use to maintain fusion and anxiety. A more differentiated mental model would enable an individual to:

• Resist Triangulation: Recognize and refuse to be pulled into political narratives that scapegoat a third group to manage anxiety between the two parties.⁵⁰
• Avoid Enmeshment (Fusion): Actively separate one’s own thinking and principles from the emotional pressure of a political party, moving from a reactive “pseudo-self” to a principled “solid self”.¹⁸
• Challenge Scapegoating: Identify when a group is being targeted to absorb the system’s anxiety—the societal equivalent of the family projection process—and refuse to participate in the blaming.⁵⁰

By updating one’s mental model, an individual can move beyond the simplistic “either/or” solutions offered by polarized politics and begin to see the complex, interconnected nature of social problems.⁴³ This is the essence of differentiation: the capacity to think clearly and act on principle, even in the face of intense emotional pressure from the system.

Conclusion: Toward a More Mature and Just Christian Witness

This report has sought to demonstrate that the deep political divisions fracturing American Christianity can be understood as predictable, anxiety-driven emotional processes. By applying the lens of Bowen Family Systems Theory, we see two systems that, despite their opposing ideologies and targets of blame, operate according to the same underlying emotional logic: a reactive cycle of fusion, triangulation, and projection designed to manage unbearable levels of chronic anxiety. The Progressive Triangle, anxious about its moral standing, fuses with race-centered groups and projects its discomfort onto the white working class. The Conservative Triangle, anxious about cultural displacement, fuses with the white working class and projects its fear onto racial minorities and immigrants.

The conclusion of this systemic analysis is that the solution to this polarization is not for one side to “win” the argument or for the other to be vanquished. Such an outcome would only perpetuate the reactive cycle. The path toward health lies in increasing the level of differentiation across both systems. In theological terms, this is a call for greater spiritual maturity—a movement away from a reactive, feeling-based faith that is dependent on group approval and toward a solid, principle-based faith grounded in core doctrines like the Imago Dei and a covenantal commitment to God and neighbor.

A differentiated Christian witness is one that has the capacity to manage its own anxiety without exporting it onto a scapegoat. It is a witness that can remain lovingly and meaningfully connected to others, even in the face of profound disagreement. It is a witness that can hold to its convictions without being reactive, and can listen to the pain of the other without abandoning the self. By embracing the hard work of defining a self, owning its own anxiety through communal repentance, and committing to a fuller vision of biblical justice, the church can begin to de-triangle from these destructive political cycles. In doing so, it can offer a more compelling and credible vision of the “peace of Christ” to a polarized and anxious world—a peace that is not the absence of conflict, but the presence of a mature, non-anxious, and reconciling love.

This report was generated by Google Gemini 2.5 Deep Research using the prompt:
“Research how Bowen family systems theory could be applied to oppression and oppressors creating rivalry between race-centered groups and class-centered groups and how that aligns with America’s political parties.”

Then “Could you add a new section V that uses the iceberg model of systems thinking. Explain:

1. How political parties put pressure to accept the polarized mental models and worldviews within the party toward addressing social problems

2. These polarized mental models and worldview lead to either/or solutions on a wide range of issues like addressing homelessness, addiction, racial relations & poverty

3. Provide examples of the polarized debate in potential solutions homelessness, addiction, racial relations and poverty

4. How a potential solution is to update mental models to resist political attempts at polarization including bowen triangulation enmeshment and scapegoating.”

 It was reviewed by Dr. Andrew Sears for accuracy and instructional clarity. 

Works cited

1. Bowen Family Systems Theory – Bradley Sears, accessed July 11, 2025, https://bsearscounseling.com/blog/review-of-bowen-family-systems-theory/
2. Societal Emotional Process and Cutoff in the Family, accessed July 11, 2025, https://thecenterforfamilyconsultation.com/societal-emotional-process-and-cut-off-in-the-family/
3. Bowen Family Systems Theory – Vermont Center for Family Studies, accessed July 11, 2025, https://vermontcenterforfamilystudies.org/about/bowen-family-systems-theory/
4. Understanding Bowen Family Systems Theory | Psychology Today, accessed July 11, 2025, https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/your-emotional-meter/202311/understanding-bowen-family-systems-theory
5. Definitions from Bowen Theory | The Family Systems Institute, accessed July 11, 2025, https://www.thefsi.com.au/definitions-from-bowen-theory/
6. What is Bowen theory? | The Family Systems Institute, accessed July 11, 2025, https://www.thefsi.com.au/what-is-bowen-theory/
7. Bowen-Systems_Theory_handout.docx – MyLutherNet, accessed July 11, 2025, https://myluthernet.luthersem.edu/ICS/icsfs/Bowen-Systems_Theory_handout.docx?target=3afd6894-223b-496c-ac68-de0a7356805a
8. Introduction to the Eight Concepts — The Bowen Center for the …, accessed July 11, 2025, https://www.thebowencenter.org/introduction-eight-concepts
9. What Is Bowenian Family and Couples Therapy? 5 Techniques – PositivePsychology.com, accessed July 11, 2025, https://positivepsychology.com/bowenian-therapy/
10. Differentiation Of Self – Murray Bowen – My People Patterns, accessed July 11, 2025, https://www.mypeoplepatterns.com/blog/differentiation
11. Differentiation of Self – The Bowen Center for the Study of the Family, accessed July 11, 2025, https://www.thebowencenter.org/differentiation-of-self
12. Learn about Bowen Theory, accessed July 11, 2025, https://www.thebowencenter.org/core-concepts-diagrams
13. Bowen Family Systems Theory – Relationship Coaching and Therapy, accessed July 11, 2025, https://drhelenreynolds.com/?page_id=78
14. Terminology and Aspects of Differentiation – Bowen Theory Academy, accessed July 11, 2025, https://bowentheoryacademy.org/think-tank-presentations/terminology-and-aspects-of-differentiation
15. Bowen’s Theory: Case Study Review in the Light of Differentiation of Self – International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, accessed July 11, 2025, https://rsisinternational.org/journals/ijriss/articles/bowens-theory-case-study-review-in-the-light-of-differentiation-of-self/
16. (PDF) Bowen Theory: A Study of Differentiation of Self, Social Anxiety, and Physiological Symptoms – ResearchGate, accessed July 11, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/225132394_Bowen_Theory_A_Study_of_Differentiation_of_Self_Social_Anxiety_and_Physiological_Symptoms
17. The Role of Triangles in Family Dynamics | Psychology Today, accessed July 11, 2025, https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/your-emotional-meter/202403/the-role-of-triangles-in-family-dynamics
18. Triangles: The “Glue” of Bowen Family Systems Theory – Amazon S3, accessed July 11, 2025, https://s3.amazonaws.com/media.cloversites.com/ae/ae4d98d9-4f73-46c4-a095-c1a61c9a949a/documents/Triangles_-_The_Glue_of_the_BFST.pdf
19. Bowen’s Societal Emotional Process (SEP) | by Michelle Chesson – Medium, accessed July 11, 2025, https://medium.com/@michelledaceynewman/bowens-societal-emotional-process-sep-ba90ba13f2c7
20. Religiously, nonwhite Democrats more similar to Republicans than …, accessed July 11, 2025, https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2018/05/23/religiously-nonwhite-democrats-are-more-similar-to-republicans-than-to-white-democrats/
21. It’s Not the Economy, Stupid: The Ideological Foundations of White …, accessed July 11, 2025, https://centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/its-not-the-economy-stupid-the-ideological-foundations-of-white-working-class-republicanism/
22. The White Working Class in 2016 (and Earlier) [essay 5] – Hoover Institution, accessed July 11, 2025, https://www.hoover.org/sites/default/files/research/docs/Fiorina_WhiteWorking_Essay5_web-241017.pdf
23. African Americans and the Democratic Party – UMBC, accessed July 11, 2025, https://www2.umbc.edu/che/tahlessons/pdf/African_Americans_and_the_Democratic_Party(PrinterFriendly).pdf
24. Statement on Critical Race Theory | Colorado Christian University, accessed July 11, 2025, https://www.ccu.edu/about/position-statements/statement-on-critical-race-theory/
25. Christianity and Critical Race Theory: A Faithful and Constructive …, accessed July 11, 2025, https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/themelios/review/christianity-and-critical-race-theory/
26. Who really cares? Democrats lost the white working class before …, accessed July 11, 2025, https://tufts-pol.medium.com/who-really-cares-democrats-lost-the-white-working-class-before-trump-won-them-4f28e6064c25
27. The White Working Class and the Democratic Party, accessed July 11, 2025, https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/0228_america_teixeira2ppt.pdf
28. White Working Class Blues Go Red – UNCG Research Magazine – UNC Greensboro, accessed July 11, 2025, https://researchmagazine.uncg.edu/fall-2020/white-working-class-blues-go-red/
29. Stop scapegoating poor whites – INDY Week, accessed July 11, 2025, https://indyweek.com/news/letters-to-the-editor/stop-scapegoating-poor-whites/
30. Why we have to take white working class people’s fears seriously – Media Diversified, accessed July 11, 2025, https://mediadiversified.org/2016/09/28/why-we-have-to-take-white-working-class-peoples-fears-seriously/
31. Critical Race Theory, Intersectionality, and the Gospel – Founders Ministries, accessed July 11, 2025, https://founders.org/articles/critical-race-theory-intersectionality-and-the-gospel/
32. What is Critical Race Theory and What Christians Should Know — R …, accessed July 11, 2025, https://www.r2hub.org/library/what-is-critical-race-theory
33. Christianity and Critical Race Theory | Baker Publishing Group, accessed July 11, 2025, https://bakerpublishinggroup.com/books/christianity-and-critical-race-theory/411030
34. Christianity and critical race theory – Cambridge Papers, accessed July 11, 2025, https://www.cambridgepapers.org/christianity-and-critical-race-theory/
35. Divisive or Descriptive?: How Americans Understand Critical Race Theory | Political Science, accessed July 11, 2025, https://polisci.duke.edu/publications/divisive-or-descriptive-how-americans-understand-critical-race-theory
36. Divisive or Descriptive?: How Americans Understand Critical Race Theory – The Cupola: Scholarship at Gettysburg College, accessed July 11, 2025, https://cupola.gettysburg.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1075&context=poliscifac
37. Reconstructing Democracy in Polarized Times: Thinking through/with the CRT Conflicts, accessed July 11, 2025, https://democracyeducationjournal.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1659&context=home
38. Not all Christian nationalists are White (and not all White Christians are Christian nationalists): exploring the predictors of Christian nationalism – Frontiers, accessed July 11, 2025, https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/social-psychology/articles/10.3389/frsps.2024.1465810/full
39. White nationalism remains major concern for voters of color – Brookings Institution, accessed July 11, 2025, https://www.brookings.edu/articles/white-nationalism-remains-major-concern-for-voters-of-color-and-appears-to-be-connected-ideologically-to-the-growing-christian-nationalism-movement/
40. Understanding White Christian Nationalism | Institution for Social and Policy Studies, accessed July 11, 2025, https://isps.yale.edu/news/blog/2022/10/understanding-white-christian-nationalism
41. Professor Pally: Evangelicals Face a ‘Double Loss’—Both Socio-Economic and as a Religious Community—Positioning Them to Find Trump Appealing – ECPS, accessed July 11, 2025, https://www.populismstudies.org/professor-pally-evangelicals-face-a-double-loss-both-socio-economic-and-as-a-religious-community-positioning-them-to-find-trump-appealing/
42. Biden, Trump, and the 4 categories of white votes | Brookings, accessed July 11, 2025, https://www.brookings.edu/articles/biden-trump-and-the-4-categories-of-white-votes/
43. Beyond Guns and God: Understanding the Complexities of the White Working Class in America – Public Religion Research Institute, accessed July 11, 2025, https://prri.org/research/race-class-culture-survey-2012/
44. The 4 working-class votes – Brookings Institution, accessed July 11, 2025, https://www.brookings.edu/articles/the-4-working-class-votes/
45. The Party’s Over – Boston Review, accessed July 11, 2025, https://www.bostonreview.net/articles/lew-daly-the-partys-over-grand-new-party-how-republicans-can-win-the-working-class/
46. Trump Will Lose His Working-Class Support – Democratic Left, accessed July 11, 2025, https://democraticleft.dsausa.org/2025/04/03/trump-will-lose-his-working-class-support/
47. Feeding Hate: The Legacy of Racism and Immigrant Scapegoating in America – Luminus, accessed July 11, 2025, https://www.beluminus.org/bhm25/
48. Looking Historically at the White Working Class in the U.S. | David Gilbert, accessed July 11, 2025, https://abolitionjournal.org/looking-historically-white-working-class-u-s/
49. Scapegoats and Solidarity – In These Times, accessed July 11, 2025, https://inthesetimes.com/article/election-blame-climate-change-solidarity-unions
50. religion of White identity politics: Christian nationalism and White …, accessed July 11, 2025, https://academic.oup.com/sf/advance-article/doi/10.1093/sf/soaf031/8030582
51. A colorblind Christian country? How racial attitudes affect support for Christian nationalism and civil religion | Politics and Religion – Cambridge University Press, accessed July 11, 2025, https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/politics-and-religion/article/colorblind-christian-country-how-racial-attitudes-affect-support-for-christian-nationalism-and-civil-religion/460C1EF1DEA1C7FABC5B74040EFF504D
52. N.T. Wright on Social Justice and the Gospel | Sojourners, accessed July 11, 2025, https://sojo.net/articles/nt-wright-social-justice-and-gospel
53. Social justice meets the gospel – Eternity News, accessed July 11, 2025, https://www.eternitynews.com.au/opinion/social-justice-meets-the-gospel/
54. Is Social Justice Hijacking the Gospel? – Alisa Childers I Blog, accessed July 11, 2025, https://www.alisachildersblog.com/blog/is-social-justice-hijacking-the-gospel
55. A Response to “The Statement on Social Justice and The Gospel …, accessed July 11, 2025, https://www.thetwocities.com/practical-theology/justice/a-response-to-the-statement-on-social-justice-and-the-gospel/
56. What does the Bible say about systemic racism? | GotQuestions.org, accessed July 11, 2025, https://www.gotquestions.org/systemic-racism.html
57. How Do White Churches Talk about Racism? – Center for Political …, accessed July 11, 2025, https://cpsblog.isr.umich.edu/?p=3197
58. imago dei: Meaning, Theological Significance | Vaia, accessed July 11, 2025, https://www.vaia.com/en-us/explanations/religious-studies/theology/imago-dei/
59. The Statement on SJ&G Explained: Article 2, The Imago Dei – Reformation 21, accessed July 11, 2025, https://www.reformation21.org/blogs/the-statement-on-sjg-explained-1.php
60. Understanding Imago Dei in Theology – Number Analytics, accessed July 11, 2025, https://www.numberanalytics.com/blog/understanding-imago-dei-in-theology
61. God’s Image as the Foundation for Human Rights | Answers in Genesis, accessed July 11, 2025, https://answersingenesis.org/sanctity-of-life/gods-image-as-the-foundation-for-human-rights/
62. reflectinggod.com, accessed July 11, 2025, https://reflectinggod.com/2018/02/24/communal-repentance/#:~:text=Individual%20repentance%20is%20powerful%2C%20but,come%20to%20repentance%20before%20God.
63. Topical Bible: Community Repentance – Bible Hub, accessed July 11, 2025, https://biblehub.com/topical/c/community_repentance.htm
64. Topical Bible: Repentance as a Community Act, accessed July 11, 2025, https://biblehub.com/topical/r/repentance_as_a_community_act.htm
65. Racism and the importance of communal repentance – Sarahbeth Caplin, accessed July 11, 2025, https://sbethcaplin.com/2020/06/15/racism-and-the-importance-of-communal-repentance/
66. Reformational Thought and the Social Covenant – The Gospel …, accessed July 11, 2025, https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/themelios/article/reformational-thought-and-the-social-covenant/
67. The Puritan Idea of the Covenant – Digital History, accessed July 11, 2025, https://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtID=2&psid=3579
68. Politics Reformed: The Anglo-American Covenant Theology – VoegelinView, accessed July 11, 2025, https://voegelinview.com/politics-reformed-pt-1/
69. BEHIND THE SCENES – MISHPAT – KATIE HATFIELD, accessed July 11, 2025, http://katiehatfieldart.com/blog-all/2020/bts-mishpat
70. Tzedakah: The Untranslatable Virtue | Re’eh | Covenant …, accessed July 11, 2025, https://rabbisacks.org/covenant-conversation/reeh/tzedakah-the-untranslatable-virtue/
71. Tzedakah and Mishpat: Righteousness and Justice – Discipling Marketplace Leaders, accessed July 11, 2025, https://disciplingmarketplaceleaders.org/2020/07/13/tzedakah-and-mishpat-righteousness-and-justice/
72. Jesus & Woman in the First-Century World | Intentional Filling, accessed July 11, 2025, https://intentionalfilling.com/woman-first-century-world/
73. Justice and Righteousness: Understanding the Meaning of Mishpat – Colel Chabad, accessed July 11, 2025, https://colelchabad.org/mishpat-justice-and-righteousness/
74. Acts of Reconciliation – Christian Church (Disciples of Christ), accessed July 11, 2025, https://disciples.org/resources/justice/acts-of-reconciliation/
75. Social Gospel – Wikipedia, accessed July 11, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Gospel
76. What is Self Differentiation according to Murray Bowen’s Family Systems Theory? – Reddit, accessed July 11, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/selfdifferentiation/comments/13d31bf/what_is_self_differentiation_according_to_murray/
77. The Iceberg Model – NPC, accessed August 2, 2025, https://www.thinknpc.org/resource-hub/systems-practice-toolkit/the-iceberg-model/
78. Systems Thinking Resources – The Donella Meadows Project, accessed August 2, 2025, https://donellameadows.org/systems-thinking-resources/
79. Visualizing the systems behind our designs | by Justin Farrugia – UX Collective, accessed August 2, 2025, https://uxdesign.cc/visualizing-the-systems-behind-our-designs-7a7c95b4cfb2
80. Iceberg Model – Ecochallenge.org, accessed August 2, 2025, https://ecochallenge.org/iceberg-model/
81. The Iceberg Model: Uncovering Root Causes for Sustainable Problem-Solving | Creately, accessed August 2, 2025, https://creately.com/guides/iceberg-model/
82. Moral Polarization and Out-Party Hostility in the US Political Context, accessed August 2, 2025, https://jspp.psychopen.eu/index.php/jspp/article/view/5135/5135.html
83. The polarized mind in context – PMC – PubMed Central, accessed August 2, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8630091/
84. Relating the Cultural Iceberg to Organizations and Information Warfare – CERES Research Repository, accessed August 2, 2025, https://dspace.lib.cranfield.ac.uk/bitstream/1826/21024/1/Relating_the_cultural_iceberg_to_organisations-2023.pdf
85. Worldviews in Conflict: Negotiating to Bridge the Divide – MIT Press Direct, accessed August 2, 2025, https://direct.mit.edu/ngtn/article/38/3/435/121229/Worldviews-in-Conflict-Negotiating-to-Bridge-the
86. Ranking Member Maxine Waters Sounds Alarm on 18% Increase in Homelessness and Calls on Congress to Pass Urgent Housing Bills, accessed August 2, 2025, https://democrats-financialservices.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=412796
87. Republicans ACT on Homelessness with Comprehensive Legislative Package, accessed August 2, 2025, https://src.senate.ca.gov/issue/actonhomelessness
88. Support for evidence-informed opioid policies and interventions: The role of racial attitudes, political affiliation, and opioid stigma, accessed August 2, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9153069/
89. The Democrats and the Rise of Racial Radicalism | American Enterprise Institute – AEI, accessed August 2, 2025, https://www.aei.org/op-eds/the-democrats-and-the-rise-of-racial-radicalism/
90. Southern strategy – Wikipedia, accessed August 2, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy
91. Are conservatives serious about fighting poverty? – Brookings Institution, accessed August 2, 2025, https://www.brookings.edu/articles/are-conservatives-serious-about-fighting-poverty/
92. Compassionate Conservative Agenda: Addressing Poverty for the Next Millennium, A;Legislative Reform Commentary, accessed August 2, 2025, https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=1173&context=jleg
93. Reducing Poverty the Republican Way, accessed August 2, 2025, https://inequality.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/Pathways_Presidential_Republican-Way.pdf