A couple days ago, I posted about how rising sea levels are overtaking the island nation of Kiribati. I had a list of other islands facing the same prospect of being forced to relocate their populations, but decided to hold it back for a couple days. Didn’t want to overload everyone. Now, here’s that list of imperiled island nations. All of these places have been inhabited for hundreds, if not thousands, of years. As the earth warms, water expands. It’s all happening far more rapidly than occurs naturally.

The Maldives, with 400,000 people inhabiting 1100 islands and atolls south of India. The highest areas are 8 feet above sea level, so any rise is a seriou threat. A rise of three feet will make the Maldives uninhabitable.

The Seychelles, with 95,000 people on 115 islands off the coast of East Africa.

Tuvalu, with 10,000 people living on three islands and six atolls halfway between Australia and Hawaii. Most of the land is less than a meter above sea level. Their prime minister said in 2015, “Any further temperature increase will spell the total demise of Tuvalu.”

Cape Verde, a nation of 10 islands with a half million people off the west coast of Africa.

Micronesia, with 100,000 people inhabiting over 600 mountainous islands and low atolls.

Palau, a chain of eight islands and 250 islets southeast off the Philippines, with 20,000 people.

The Marshall Islands, northwest of Kiribati, with 1100 islands and islets, most of them less than six feet above sea level. Half of the country’s 53,000 people live on the Majuro atoll, which wil be under water if sea level rises another meter.

Five of the Solomon Islands, in the South Pacific, have already disappeared, and another six have lost over 20% of their area. About 580,000 people live on the Solomon Islands.

In 2016, the Inuit villagers of Shishmaref Island, in Alaska, voted to relocate their ancestral home to safer ground.

The population of the Carteret Islands in Papua New Guinea is being relocated, many to the island of Bougainville 50 miles away.

Kiribati bought 6000 acres on Figi as a future home for its people. But Figi itself is threatened. Some islands have high mountains, but people in lower areas are moving inland as the ocean encroaches on them. Nearly 1 million people live in Figi.

About 8000 people live on the Torres Strait Islands between Australia and New Guinea–274 islands. The United Nations declared the approximately 100 residents of Tegua, part of the Torres Strait Islands, the first climate change refugees in 2005.

In a few cases, islands are slowly sinking even as sea water rises, causing a double whammy. In all of these places, islanders build seawalls and plant mangrove trees to counter erosion, but it’s a losing battle. The oceans are rising, and will continue doing so.

In April, George Will wrote a column which has stayed with me. Actually, three words stuck. They’re from a German proverb: “Beware the beginnings.”

Will talked about the power of one person to affect history. Without Hitler, there would have been no Holocaust. But he said Hitler began with small things, and as the years passed, progressed to bigger and worse things. Beware the beginnings, when the small things are happening.

Will mentioned the new fascist government in Hungary, and the growing appetite for authoritarianism, tribalism, and anti-semitism across Europe. It’s still in the early stages…but beware the beginnings.

Many countries are tilting toward authoritarianism. Turkey, The Philippines. Venezuela. Nicaragua. I spoke recently with a missionary from India who says the current government is the worst she has seen in this regard. I’ve been told of alarming ways China is clamping down on religion. Russia, under Putin, is sliding back to its old Soviet ways.

Beware the beginnings.

America used to be a strong voice for freedom and democracy. But President Trump seems uninterested in that role. He loves being around dictators, strongmen, and has raised the idea of indefinite terms for presidents–jokingly, he says, but there are some ideas you just don’t voice in any context. The world is listening, and dictator wannabes are taking heart. I’m sure they see a kindred spirit in Trump.

In the years ahead, amidst silence from the United States, will more and more countries descend into authoritarian rule? Pay attention to what happens.

Beware the beginnings.

Growing up in the United Brethren denomination amidst the Vietnam War, the Christian adults around me always supported the war. As I proceeded into adulthood, I never saw a US war or military action that my fellow parishioners didn’t overwhelmingly support. Vietnam. Cambodia. Lebanon. Grenada. Panama. Libya. Nicaragua. Kuwait. Somalia. Bosnia. Haiti. Kosovo. Afghanistan. Iraq. Although we’ve not taken denominational stands on any of these conflicts, the general United Brethren sentiment has always been approval. This is what I, Steve Dennie, have observed. I don’t pretend to speak for the experience of other UBs.

People can say, “We were just supporting the troops.” But that’s hogwash. It goes beyond that. At some level, we–and white evangelicals in general–are just inclined to like the use of military force. All of which intrigues me. Why are we so supportive of warfare?

Pacifism reigned among the early United Brethren. Founder Martin Boehm, a Mennonite, was criticized for associating with non-pacifists (English-speaking people, in general). During the Revolutionary War, the young Christian Newcomer recalled how, being “conscientiously opposed to war and bearing arms,” he was placed in many “disagreeable situations.” Early UB historians mentioned wars mainly as hindering the spread of the Gospel, but otherwise as things that didn’t concern us.

The Mexican American War was a voluntary war of aggression on America’s part–a land grab, basically. At least one UB minister was expelled for enlisting. The 1849 General Conference, after the war, took a principled stand clearly aimed at the US government: “We believe that the spirit that leads men to engage voluntarily in national warfare is unholy and unchristian and ought not to be tolerated by us.” Key word: voluntarily.

Invading Iraq was also voluntary, but it’s unthinkable that we would take such a stand today. To call such an action “unholy and unchristian” and something we shouldn’t tolerate–it would split the church.

The Civil War was a turning point for us. Being mostly a Northern abolitionist church, we were fervent Union supporters. Our colleges poured students into the war. A couple months after Appomattox, we adopted what is basically a Just War statement: “We believe it to be entirely consistent with the spirit of Christianity to bear arms when called upon to do so by the properly constituted authorities of our government for its preservation and defense.”

Today, we still have a statement against “voluntary, national, aggressive warfare.” But when the shooting starts, and we’re the ones who start it (a la Iraq), we ignore it. That’s been my experience. In practice, UB people are okay with voluntary, national, aggressive warfare if the United States does it.

All of this intrigues me–how we abandoned our pacifist roots, and came to support virtually any military action by our government. I lack satisfying answers.