I've been feeling so uninspired and so heartbroken about this country. What I realize, I keep wanting to put my head in the sand and pray that I wake up and it's all over.
For a nation whose founding symbols were carefully engineered around the balance of peace and war, that omission is hard to read as accidental. Dropping the olive branch from the dime isn't just a design choice: it's a cultural signal.
Organizational filibustering refers to strategies that delay and obstruct efforts to pursue social justice in systems. These additions can stretch out the process of implementation of diversity strategic plans or multicultural programs for years. Change agents can become battle-fatigued and give up their efforts. They can also become so disheartened that they leave a group or organization altogether.
In perhaps a vain attempt to prove themselves moderate, the Democratic lawmakers helped override Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper's vetoes. Voters responded with the kind of ballot-box fury that should serve as a lesson to other incumbents. It wasn't just a case that the incumbents lost. They were buried, with several of them getting trounced by margins of 40 points or more.
A record high of adults—80 percent—believes that Americans are divided on the most important values. National pride, trust in government, and confidence in institutions are near record lows. The Princeton University historian Sean Wilentz says the United States hasn't been this divided since the Civil War. Nearly half of Americans think another civil war is likely in their lifetime.
Populism may well have been the defining word of the previous decade: a shorthand for the insurgent parties that came to prominence in the 2010s, challenging the dominance of the liberal centre. But no sooner had it become the main rubric for discussing both the far left and far right than commentators began to question its validity: worrying that it was too vague, or too pejorative, or fuelling the forces to which it referred.
The principle of intellectual charity is fundamental to constructive political conversations. This principle states that, in any discussion, we should accept the best version of an opponent's ideas, not a distorted version or a "straw man." Exaggeration and distortion of opposing opinions (always present, to some degree, in political debates) have become the standard form of political argument in contemporary America.
In the early 20th century, sociologist Max Weber noted that sweeping industrialization would transform how societies worked. As small, informal operations gave way to large, complex organizations with clearly defined roles and responsibilities, leaders would need to rely less on tradition and charisma, and more on organization and rationality. He also foresaw that jobs would need to be broken down into specialized tasks and governed by a system of hierarchy,
Among Trump's guests is Saige Blair. Blair is at the center of a lawsuit involving allegations that Virginia school officials made decisions about Blair's well-being and gender identity without informing the then-14-year-old's parents.
I am using the word pragmatism in a specific sense. I am not speaking about being pragmatic as a political tactic; deciding what issues should be given priority and what battles to choose, or a willingness to compromise, or a recognition that there are limits to what can be accomplished at any time. I am writing now about pragmatism in a meaning closer to its philosophical origin in the writings of William James-that truth is not found in abstract principles or beliefs,
It turns out: not that many world leaders or global citizens. That's because the Board of Peace, created last year by a UN security council resolution, and intended to have a singular focus on implementing a Gaza peace plan, is increasingly looking like a Donald Trump fiefdom, which could allow the US president to wade into other countries' affairs as he sees fit.
Researchers at the University of Cambridge's Political Psychology Lab tracked shifts in Americans' views across nearly four decades and found that divisions were broadly stable through the 1990s and early 2000s, before rising steadily from 2008 onward. Using more than 35,000 responses from the American National Election Studies between 1988 and 2024, they estimate that issue polarization has increased 64% since the late 1980s, with almost all of that change occurring after 2008.
Just under half, 45%, of U.S. adults now identify as independents, a new Gallup survey found. That's a substantial shift from 20 years ago, when closer to one-third of Americans said they didn't identify with the Democrats or Republicans. This group appears, increasingly, to be driven by their unhappiness with the party in power, according to Gallup's analysis. That's a dynamic that could be good for Democrats in this year's midterm elections, but doesn't promise lasting loyalty.
Jim Boots is exactly right that conservatives constantly complain about Obamacare but can't put forth an alternative either on an individual basis or as a unified position for legislation. By default, then, their many efforts to repeal it would put the U.S. health care system back to its pre-Obama status quo. Has any conservatives ever specifically advocated that? Would anybody want that?
The vote formalized plans announced last year to wind down operations [for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting] after lawmakers voted to strip more than $500 million in annual funding from the organization. Executives have been emptying the corporation's coffers in recent months by making grants to public media organizations. After the federal funding ended, executives at the corporation discussed putting the organization into hibernation, keeping it alive in case Congress eventually voted to restore its federal appropriation.
