As Chuck Schumer said in 2009, "Illegal immigration is wrong, plain and simple." With our own immigrant families, we believe America is still a welcoming country,  but there is a right way to do it.

Share

This is from a previous Pushback.us podcast episode but is very relevant today, given the continuing issues with border security and immigration policies.

Transcript

Will Loconto:

I'm Will Loconto, and I'm back with my partner in crime, Cindy Bass. We're here to talk about immigration, the border crisis, illegal and legal immigration. You might think we'd start off speaking about illegal immigration, but actually we're going to talk about legal immigration at first, and I want to begin with an American dream story who also happens to be my father, Pat Loconto, and will let him speak in his own words.

Pat Loconto:

I have always had a great desire to be the best. How did I get that way? Well, the truth is that as a child, my parents expected me to be the best. I was one of three sons of immigrant parents. In her attempt to learn the English language to obtain her US citizenship, my mother attended night school. Because she couldn't leave me at home, I was only three years old, she took me with her, and as a result, I learned to read and write before I entered kindergarten. I skipped the second and fifth grades, and I graduated number two in my class at the ripe old age of 11. By that time, my parents had singled me out as "the smart son," the one who must go to college so that my life would be easier and more enjoyable than theirs. My scholastic achievement became expected and even taken for granted. I can still recall a degree of disappointment because I was only number two in my class, and the way I respected my parents, I was a little disappointed too. I just wouldn't let them down again.

I went on to graduate from high school in three years, was awarded a Ford Foundation Scholarship, and hit the concrete jungle of New York City to attend the only Ivy League school with no Ivy. I was 15 years old and away from home and family for the first time in my life. During my four years at Columbia, I learned more about life and people than I did about history, calculus, or physics. I learned more from people than I did from books. I learned that my classmates at Columbia were as smart, and many were smarter than me. I learned that a 128 pound 15-year-old couldn't play football against 220-pound 19-year-olds. I learned that broken hearts hurt more than broken limbs but that they heal faster. I learned that a 15 year old boy is in no position to choose a career. I learned the importance of the balance between required between academic achievement and social maturity. I also learned that in all the transactions of life that I had encountered, it was not important where you started, what was important, is where you finished.

Will Loconto:

So that's my dad. He went from sweeping a barbershop for 5 cents a day to becoming the CEO of Deloitte Consulting. Truly an American dream story. The son of immigrants who came through Ellis Island, his father worked in coal mines. His mother took him to English class with her at night. When he was three years old, his parents pushed him to succeed. He was the first in his family to go to college, graduating from Columbia University. He was very successful. They pushed him to succeed, and he was a wonderful man. I miss him a lot, but he's a great story, great example of an immigrant family living the American dream and the pursuit of success and the pursuit of happiness.

Cindy Bass:

You are an immigrant family. Yes. And you're proud of it?

Will Loconto:

Very proud. My family on my dad's side came from Italy in 1917. My kids are half Cuban ethnically. They were born here, but very, very multicultural heritage. Very proud of it.

Cindy Bass:

Multilingual family.

Will Loconto:

Yes. The kids speak different languages,

Cindy Bass:

And so my family came from France. You came through, your family came through Ellis Island, New York and mine came through Louisiana and settled in Texas. It's really, really important that as listeners, that we both are immigrant families. They worked hard and like you said, the American dream, they wanted to do it the right way. It's wonderful and it works. What's happening in our country right now is not working, and it's overwhelming our country, and it's putting a burden on our country and our taxpayers

Will Loconto:

And it's unsustainable.

Cindy Bass:

Correct.

Will Loconto:

The true issue that we have at the border, the morality binary that they try to promote to everybody is the humanity of it. The idea that everybody has to be helped because it's the humane thing to do, and we understand it. We sympathize with it. I have empathy for people who pack all of their stuff up to try to move to a better life just like my grandparents did. I do have empathy for it. However, the practicality, the reality, the burden, the stress, the economic cost is immeasurable. The strain on public services, schools, hospitals,

Cindy Bass:

Law enforcement,

Will Loconto:

Law enforcement, everything is an unsustainable situation. We are a welcoming country. We should be a welcoming country. We can't let everyone in the entire world come to be a citizen of the United States,

Cindy Bass:

And we can't accommodate everyone.

Will Loconto:

We can't, and being a citizen of the United States is a privilege. More people need to look at it that way, that it's a privilege to be a citizen of the United States. It matters. The government of the United States should be treating citizens of the United States as more important than non-citizens. The policies of the United States should focus on the citizens of the United States, protecting the citizens of the United States, protecting the jobs of the citizens of the United States, protecting the businesses of the people of the United States. There is a legal process to come to the country. I have many friends that are immigrants from all different countries that came to America. They love America. They became citizens. They did it the right way. They went through the process, and honestly, it's both awesome and sad that my friends who immigrated to this country, many of them love this country more than a lot of people that are born here.

Cindy Bass:

Yeah,

Will Loconto:

That's true. And they respect this country more than a lot of people.

Cindy Bass:

Where are some of them from?

Will Loconto:

Israel, Brazil, Mexico, Greece, a lot of different ones.

Cindy Bass:

I have some from Africa, Afghanistan, Mexico, Peru. Family all came in the right way.

And obviously, family is Italian. My family is Italian and Cuban, and extremely proud of that. But they are also more proud to be Americans than they are to be ethnically wherever they're from.

Yes,

Will Loconto:

That should almost be a prerequisite of being an American citizen, is that the pride in the country and the pride in the pride in the American ideal and the pursuit of happiness and the pursuit of individual freedom. And there's a reason why so many people in the world want to come here, but as I said earlier, it's unsustainable to let everyone in and when we have to prioritize who's coming versus who prioritize certain people who get in versus others, that it doesn't make sense for it to be necessarily a random chance of who gets in. So they have asylum laws where somebody can come and request asylum to get into the country. Generally, the rule says if you are being persecuted politically, then you or a fear of harm, politically, retribution, things like that, such as the people coming from Afghanistan that worked with the United States. Obviously staying in Afghanistan is physically dangerous to them and their family, and they would be prime candidates for asylum.

Cindy Bass:

But not economical.

Will Loconto:

No, an economic reason is not an asylum reason. There is no economic, just because you come from a poor country, just because you were born in a poor country doesn't mean that you should have the right to come in here. And somebody that's going to say, well, what about your grandparents? Well, at the time, my grandparents came and did it the right way. Whether it takes one year, two years, five years, eight years, it can be done because I have a long list of friends that have done it, done it the right way. It is irresponsible for the border to be essentially open and by essentially open, what I mean is if the border patrol apprehends people coming in and then lets them go into the country that's essentially letting them go. And most of those people do not return for an immigration hearing at all, and it's ludicrous. It's insulting to the public that they say, we're just going to let them out and tell them to come back in six months or a year for a hearing to determine if their asylum claim is valid. 99% of those asylum claims are invalid and would be denied

Cindy Bass:

When they come over the border. They get fingerprinted. I don't know that. How do they keep up with criminals in other countries and what kind of databases do they have, if they have any? I don't know how they really communicate with our American databases, but I feel like that they could be a predator or anything coming right in and like you said, let go.

Will Loconto:

Well, they're unvetted.

Cindy Bass:

Unvetted. Yeah,

Will Loconto:

That's a good word. They have to be unvetted because the current encounter numbers at the border, they have 7,000 illegal alien encounters every day on the southern border.

Cindy Bass:

I also read in April that the total month encounters was 234,088

Will Loconto:

80 month. Well, and when you look at those numbers in the context when Trump was president and telegraph the message that we're going to send people back if they try to come across the border, the level of immigrant illegal aliens trying to come across dropped completely, almost to just a tiny fraction of what it is now

Cindy Bass:

Because there wasn't an invitation.

Will Loconto:

There wasn an invitation and anybody wants to see that invitation that about what's happening now. You can go back to the democratic debate where Joe Biden actually said he encourages the migrants to rush to the border the day after he is sworn into office. He encouraged them to rush to the border. It's an unsustainable path for the country, and I get a number of people arguing that what's the humane alternative? Well, the humane alternative is first of all, setting it up so that they don't just get lost into our country because that's a responsibility to our citizens. And then the other part of it is at some point, this humanity part of it, the government of the United States responsibility must end at some point. It there's a responsibility also on these people who choose to come across and try to come into the country when they know there's a chance that they're not going to make it in and they're not going to get in. And of course you feel bad for all of the people that are victimized by traffickers and drug cartels. But again, this is something where the numbers just bear out impracticality and sometimes policies need to be made based on numbers and not based on humanity and saving a life or a number of lives, and we can't save everybody.

Cindy Bass:

Well, my personal opinion is at the border and that this doesn't mean humanity or that I wouldn't save someone or that I don't love all people, but I take Americans first and whatever happens to them, how it affects them matters first. And if I was on the border, I would be looking at all the people trying to come in as, you're not my people yet. You can be. Here's how you do it, and you're going to do it this way and the legal way, and we're going to know who you are. You're going to follow our rules. Then when they get here, just like your friends and mine, they thrive and they have families and businesses and they're wonderful, but just like us, we wouldn't go to another country and expect them to let us in and put us in a chartered private jet to our, give us destination.

Will Loconto:

Give us a debit card, put us in a hotel.

Cindy Bass:

Cell phones,

Will Loconto:

Give us a cell phone. That's almost ludicrous to think about. It

Cindy Bass:

Is, and that I was reading about that International Organization for Migration, which is a un agency. They say that they're over there on the other side of the border distributing those debit cards. They're $400 loaded on the card. That's prior to coming to or through the border to America. They're given $400 a piece to use, and it says so that it makes their experience easier. What the like Yes,

Will Loconto:

Borders are. There's a reason that there's a border there. We've talked about the manipulation of language before, and this is one of those big things with immigration where people will talk about illegal aliens in the US code illegal aliens is the term, right? Because they are breaking the law coming across the border without permission. That's a crime period. The first crime is a misdemeanor. If you do it again, it's a felony. Those are crimes. They should be prosecuted. People should be held accountable for breaking the law, softening it up by calling them undocumented workers. Migrants a migrant makes it sound like they're some itinerant worker that works in Mexico half the year and then comes through the border to California to pick grapes.

Cindy Bass:

It almost sounds like birds migrating. Yes.

Will Loconto:

Well, it's trying to soften this whole question of,

Cindy Bass:

Yeah, we were looking at the words how they have evolved, and we started with illegal alien, undocumented immigrant, undocumented worker, unaccompanied minors, immigrants, and this is the woke language, and I was reading and we were laughing about it is a word now that they're using in the White House is irregular migration.

Will Loconto:

Irregular migration. That's the idea that migration is some normal thing and a cross border migration is some normalization, normalized thing that isn't issue is part of that agenda. What they're trying to do is say the irregular migration that by calling it migration, they're trying to soften the blow destigmatize, the illegal alienness of it and get more, nor it's not even getting more sympathy for it. It's normalizing the idea that we shouldn't consider crossing that border a crime

Cindy Bass:

Because Biden wants open borders.

Will Loconto:

I don't figured out really yet why they want to. I'm not a hundred percent sure I buy in. I don't buy into the replacement theory thing that they just want Democrat voters to come in. I think it's different than that. I think it's more of a woke social justice equity agenda. I don't think it has as much to do with how they're going to vote when they come in.

Cindy Bass:

I disagree

Will Loconto:

Because I don't think that believe that replacement theory is actually a real thing.

Cindy Bass:

I do.

Will Loconto:

Can you elaborate on it?

Cindy Bass:

No, I'm just saying it's my opinion that when they open the border, these people are going to come in and I wouldn't say every one of them would vote a certain way, but I would say at least 75% of 'em are going to vote the

Will Loconto:

Way in those 7,000 a day, 7,000 encounters a day. Those are just the ones that get caught. I mean, I would imagine there's two or three times that amount every day that well at least double that don't get caught. Right. I would imagine,

Cindy Bass:

And the burden that puts on our, we can go on and on and on about this, but the real problem is the burden it puts on every aspect of America is in New York, wasn't it? New York that is giving Medicaid to illegals that are over 65, that Scott to be because they don't have social security coming in or benefits like that,

Will Loconto:

But it's also normalizing people that are illegally here to stay.

Cindy Bass:

It's giving them the way I believe in deterrence. I

Will Loconto:

Believe a wall would've been a good deterrent.

Cindy Bass:

A wall is a deterrent, and I believe in a wall. I believe in deterrence

Will Loconto:

And Trump actually proved though you don't even really need the physical wall if they know they're going back. If

Cindy Bass:

The invitation is, and

Will Loconto:

Then the crazier part of it is that what else is coming across the southern border? Because when you look at it, we were seeing with the Ukraine war, they were seeing two to 300 Ukrainians a day coming through the Mexican border into the United States illegally, 200 to 300 a day Ukrainians, so there are people from all over the world somehow managing to get to Mexico and then coming up through the southern border to illegally enter the United States.

Cindy Bass:

Yeah. Who's getting them from the Ukraine area to the Mexican border and

Will Loconto:

Well, they're groups that do that. They're groups that fund these gigantic caravans that come from Central and South America,

Cindy Bass:

And that's wonderful because that's truly a crisis. That is true asylum, in my opinion. Well, from

Will Loconto:

The U Ukraine, yes,

Cindy Bass:

From the Ukraine, from a

Will Loconto:

War zone. That's different. I'm a war zone. Again, that's like with Afghanistan, the people that worked with the US military. Yes. They have a case to be made to to be brought here,

Cindy Bass:

And that's an emergency.

Will Loconto:

Yep, no problem with that at all. No, and so it's crazy, but not even when we're talking about immigration. We leave out the drugs, the drug cartels, the fentanyl

Cindy Bass:

That we were just reading also, that our government was wanting to say that fentanyl is a weapon of mass destruction. They want to call it that. I disagree with that personally. I think it's just a drug, not just a drug. It's one of the worst that's ever been, but that's clearly coming from Mexico.

Will Loconto:

Yes.

Cindy Bass:

It's identified as coming from Mexico.

Will Loconto:

Well, and the crazy part on a little bit about that is that because it's politically incorrect to militarize the southern border of our country, I don't understand. People were laughing at a comment that came out that said that Trump had said something about hitting drug cartels with missiles, and everybody laughed about it, thought it was the stupidest thing ever, and I don't know that it would be a stupid thing. I don't know that if it was something other than drugs, if it was weapons, if it was something else, I don't know that we would hesitate to go in and blow it out of there, but militarizing the southern border might be the best thing that we could do. The border patrol is overwhelmed and the federal government is refusing to spend the money that's required. As a matter of fact, we had just saw that they cut the budget on enforcement at the southern border and expanded the budget by 80% on illegal alien care.

Cindy Bass:

It was 700% increase for non-citizen processing in care, which is just care.

Will Loconto:

Yes. That's not enforcement of anything. Again, it comes back to that, the idea that as far as the American government is concerned, the priority of the American government should always be the American citizen

Cindy Bass:

And protecting them

Will Loconto:

And protecting them

Cindy Bass:

And protecting

Will Loconto:

Their interests, their businesses, their infrastructure, their hospitals, their schools. The fact that you have to have X number of bilingual teachers to accommodate kids that don't speak English. So why don't we make us,

Cindy Bass:

I should say that I was a teacher in high school and I was horrified that they brought a child in that spoke no English into my class. She sat there, she didn't know what was going on

Will Loconto:

In the middle of the year, right.

Cindy Bass:

In the Yes. And the kids around. If I told a little joke or the kids started laughing, she wouldn't know what the joke was or if we were even laughing at her. I mean, she just didn't know anything, and I had to try to translate everything that I was telling her individually, and it took, which slowed down the class. It took away from the class, and I'm not saying that it was just unfair to the kids that were in the class to her, it's unfair to her, but then I believe that when she or her family comes into the United States, that her first concern would be to learn our language, and even if it's our

Will Loconto:

Language, even if that meant a full immersion class, that the only thing she does is learn English,

Cindy Bass:

Full immersion works, and that's what they need to do as soon as they come here to learn our language.

Will Loconto:

Well, and these, that's the other thing is these problems are actually addressable. There are common sense solutions to these problems. There is, but a lot of people don't want to focus on any of that because they have an agenda to push and are afraid to offend anybody. Everything isn't okay. Everything doesn't need to be funded. We can't save everybody. The government of the United States can't help every single person on the planet. Things need to be prioritized, but again, that priority should start at home. I think that applies to foreign aid as well. There's a lot of money that goes out to all these other countries that maybe shouldn't be. We have enough problems here that we need to fix 40 billion that went to Ukraine. I wonder how much the wall would've cost if it and stepped up enforcement on the southern border because it, it's one of those things where if they signaled stepped up enforcement, the numbers would go down because that is how it works.

Cindy Bass:

And I've talked to law enforcement myself personally. Everyone knows that as soon as they come over the borders, they get a fake id. And these fake IDs, I was a previous bar owner, some of these IDs are just as good as the official. They're passing everywhere.

Will Loconto:

Even in the government entities, they're passing Yes,

Cindy Bass:

Fake documents, get in and get social security, get benefits. You haven't paid a diamond and they wonder how things go broke or that we could pay all of our life into social security and then not have it in the future. Wonder why you're giving benefits to people that haven't paid into it. And another thing is the danger in all this, it is so dangerous. I have a friend that has a thousand acre ranch down in south Texas and the other ranchers down there, not getting into the gun thing again, but they have to protect their land, and the illegals are coming through, drug cartels are coming through, they're laying

Will Loconto:

On, human traffickers are

Cindy Bass:

Coming through. Human traffickers are coming through, and it's so dangerous. I was reading an article where Biden discontinued the use of ankle monitors on illegals as a tracking device because the advocates insisted that it was humiliating and uncomfortable. Wow. I'm saying when you commit a crime, you can have an ankle monitor drug people can have, well, that's

Will Loconto:

Ankle monitors. Right. The idea that, well, you don't want to stigmatize people, but they committed a crime

Cindy Bass:

When they come out of prison like a drug person, they go to a halfway house, they're ankle monitored. Well, where are the advocates to say that it's uncomfortable to them or humiliating, because that is humiliating. Right.

Will Loconto:

But I'd argue it should be humiliating because you committed a crime

Cindy Bass:

For them and the illegals committed a crime. Yes, they did. They came over illegally. So you get a ankle monitor that way we can track you and make sure that you come to the hearings and that either you get to the process,

Will Loconto:

It ensures that you're going to do it the right way,

Cindy Bass:

And if something happens bad, you get taken out of the country. It reminds me of this story that I wonder if people even think about the insurance. Just insurance. We know that if we have a storm and our house gets damaged, our insurance goes up, usually our car

Will Loconto:

Wrecks. Yes. And here in Texas, one of the largest incidents that happens is wrecks. And the person at fault turns out to be an illegal alien that has no insurance, has no driver's license, but was driving a car. Anyway, so

Cindy Bass:

That happened to me and the illegal guy, he was drunk, no driver's license. It wasn't his car, and there was no insurance, and it caused a really bad wreck. We chased him down and finally got the police there. They got him out and they arrested him. The officer looked at me and said, ma'am, you're just going to have to file this on your uninsured motorist. You're not going to get anything. He's illegal. And I said, well, you are taking him back to Mexico and deporting him. And they said, I don't know. He'll probably get released because it costs so much money to do this deportation, and I can't imagine how much money that would cost and manpower. But when he hit me, I looked at him and I said, I am not going to have my insurance rates go up, and that's not going to come out of my pocket.

He is going to pay for it. And the officer laughed at me and said, yeah. Right. So I found that as a challenge, and I did some little work finding out that he falsified the report and then I did a little surveillance and found out where he lived, saw the car that was damaged and got someone to translate to him that he better have my money by the next Friday X amount. It wasn't any more than what the damage was. And I said, I'll be here next Friday at five. Have me my cash to fix my car. Low and behold, I came back the next Friday and I got my money. And that's a story I tell a lot, but it was awful what he did to me, and he came into this country illegally and caused me monetary loss.

Will Loconto:

No, that's a real loss. Yeah, that's a real loss. And it could have killed you.

Cindy Bass:

It could have killed me. And I am very serious about this, and I was not going to have it come out of my pocket. I didn't care what happened. He was going to pay for it. I was challenged to do that, and I got it. But you know, think about the big picture here. And we are required to have insurance. We have to have it. We have to have it. They don't because they're illegals. No one knows they're here. Right. They're not accounting for

Will Loconto:

Well, and there are active policies with police departments to where just like in that situation where that guy was really in no danger of being deported when the police came to the scene, when they get stopped by the police, they don't, don't call immigration. They don't, don't call ice. Most law enforcement, local law enforcement agencies don't cooperate with

Cindy Bass:

Ice. But the saddest part of that is, is that he had been drinking. He had been drinking. So not only was he here illegally, no insurance, not his car, no driver's license, no documentation. He was drunk and he could have killed me. And all it takes is for this country to have what is already in place. No, we don't want open borders. We want existing laws enforce the laws that are on the books.

Will Loconto:

You had made a comment to me before about a hypothetical, like you said, what would happen if suddenly something in the world happened that made Mexico the most successful country in the world and money and businesses and everybody was flocking there to work and Americans started crossing the border to go to Mexico? They wouldn't just let people

Cindy Bass:

Come in. No, they wouldn't. They would not.

Will Loconto:

Other countries don't let you just come in undocumented and live there. If I was going to Germany, I can't just move to Germany and not get permission. And also I can't just move to Germany and not learn to speak German.

Cindy Bass:

That's right. You will do what they do in their country and you will follow their rules and you won't ask for their rules to get changed. You certainly won't ask for a $400 debit card and a private jet.

Will Loconto:

Yes. Right. But on the positive note, we are people who come from immigrant families. We're proud of our immigrant families. Yes, we are proud of the immigrants that come the correct way. We're proud of the immigrants that love the United States and love being part of the United States and are willing to come to be part of the American dream.

Cindy Bass:

And don't come into America and fly your flag of another country in the back of your car, fly an American. If you're coming to America.

Will Loconto:

If you're coming to America to be here, you're coming to be an American. And that has no color, that has no religion, that has no creed, that has nothing except a national identity.

Cindy Bass:

It's not talking about pride of where you came from, but there's a clear difference when you fly a huge flag in the back of your truck in Texas, a Mexican flag, you're making a statement

Will Loconto:

And the statement isn't, we're happy to be here.

Cindy Bass:

Yeah.

Will Loconto:

That's not the statement that that's putting

Cindy Bass:

that's exactly right.

Will Loconto:

The American dream is still alive and it's still happening for immigrants every day. There isn't some coordinated anti-immigrant effort to destroy people from coming into the country. There's no xenophobia in conservatives. There's room for immigrants.

Cindy Bass:

Yes.

Will Loconto:

We're proud to lock arms with immigrants, and it goes back to my dad talking about his life and his dream, and the idea that it's not where you start. It's where you finish. Everybody still can climb the ladder. There's still the American dream. They're still the American ideal. Even if we don't meet it every single time, we strive for it and we want everyone to be a part of it. All Americans should be striving for it all Americans should build it up, not looking to tear things down.

Cindy Bass:

I would like to say that I am very proud that I knew your dad. He was a wonderful man. Yes, he was. And somebody to admire.

Will Loconto:

Thank you. Well, I think that's probably it for our show today. We will see you next time. Thanks.

Cindy Bass:

See you next time.

In November 2020, then-VP candidate Kamala Harris posted a video claiming, “Equitable treatment means we all end up at the same place.”

"Equity" is a concept that has often been misinterpreted and misapplied, leading to unintended consequences that undermine the very essence of fairness and meritocracy. In practice, “equity” empowers the incompetent, promotes the incapable, and implements the irrational.

Share

At its core, the pursuit of equity aims to ensure fairness and justice by providing equal opportunities for all individuals. It acknowledges the importance of creating a level playing field where everyone can thrive based on their abilities and efforts. However, the misinterpretation arises when equity is misconstrued as a guarantee that everyone should end up in the same place regardless of their skills, efforts, potential, or even luck.

Entitlement and Merit

This approach has a significant flaw rooted in the concept of entitlement. When people are taught they deserve results without earning them, it fosters a culture of complacency, reducing motivation for self-improvement. While equal access to opportunities is essential, striving for equal outcomes regardless of individual dedication, skill, and ambition is impractical and hampers progress.

Meritocracy, where success is based on merit, aligns with societal values of equality of opportunity. It reflects the notion that everyone should have a chance to succeed based on their abilities. Whether in education or business, qualifications, experience, soft skills, creativity, and adaptability are crucial in achieving success.

Subscribe now

Employment

Businesses exist to make profits, not simply to provide jobs. Individuals are responsible for ensuring they possess the required skills and abilities to be employable. While a job interview presents an opportunity, securing and excelling in the job depends mainly on an individual's actions and capabilities. Being employable is not just about finding a job but also about adapting, learning continuously, and adjusting to the changing demands of the job market.

The idea that most employees could seamlessly transition into a managerial or CEO position if they were only “lucky enough” overlooks the reality that such roles demand a distinct skill set, experience, and leadership qualities that only some possess. The bottom line is that most employees could never be a successful manager, let alone a CEO.

Education

Elevating the most qualified and capable students makes the world better. The best and brightest among us should be amplified and encouraged to contribute by utilizing their skills and knowledge to drive innovation, provide valuable services, and/or contribute to societal development. Providing gifted students opportunities for greater academic rigor (honors, AP, etc.) is common sense.

Culture

The assertion that all cultures are equal disregards the impact of cultural norms on various aspects of life, including education, work ethic, and societal values. Different cultures have strengths and weaknesses, and ignoring these distinctions can hinder progress by overlooking valuable insights and approaches.

While it may be politically incorrect to point it out, some cultures are better than others. Not all beliefs are equally valid.

Fairness

Excellence, ambition, and merit should be celebrated and rewarded rather than dismissed or downplayed as mere luck. Encouraging individuals to strive for greatness while rewarding their accomplishments fosters a culture of innovation, hard work, and continuous improvement. Any society should want that.

While acknowledging that luck may play a role in certain circumstances, it should never overshadow the importance of effort and competence in achieving success. Much of the “equity” commentary appears to be envy disguised in calls for “fairness.”

The focus on "equity" seems driven by envy, even when presented as calls for fairness. Envy is a feeling of resentment towards someone who has something that you don't have. It is often accompanied by a desire to take away what the other person has rather than work to acquire it for oneself. On the other hand, fairness involves treating everyone equally, regardless of their circumstances or possessions. It means giving everyone an equal opportunity to succeed rather than punishing or taking away from someone who has achieved success.

Pursuing equity should not be misconstrued as guaranteeing equal outcomes, as it undermines the essence of meritocracy. Fairness lies in aspiring to provide equal opportunities and acknowledging the inherent differences among individuals while rewarding excellence and ambition. Striking a balance between opportunity and recognizing individual merit is crucial to fostering a fair and just society.

The idea that everyone possesses the same potential is a myth. Many variables, including innate abilities, personal circumstances, and upbringing, contribute to the vast differences in people's capabilities. It's essential to recognize that individuals have different skills, levels of intelligence, and work ethic. Fairness always demands responsibility and accountability. Striving for equal outcomes is not only unrealistic but also unjust.

Share

Think about the term “parental controls.” Anyone raising children in the past 30 years likely has experience with “parental controls” on their televisions, media devices, and the Internet. I’ve personally used solutions such as OpenDNS to protect my family.

In a world of free expression, a child’s access to content must be rigorously vetted and controlled. As a parent, that means curating the books, media, games, and even the people you allow around your children. No child should have access to the world without a parental filter guiding them along the way. Make no mistake, that’s not “censorship.”

There is no logical reason for my young children to know what drag queens, porn stars, or drug addicts are, even if I happened to be one.

Parents Know Best

To claim that “parents don’t own their kids” pushes a dangerous narrative attempting to characterize children as a potentially “oppressed” group. Parents do know their children best, and they are ultimately far more important in raising them than systems outside of the family structure will ever be.

Growing Up Is Uncomfortable

No, kids don’t “know who they are.” The juvenile mind is very susceptible to influence and needs constant guidance and course correction.

Good parenting sometimes requires hurt feelings. If you, as a parent, haven’t made your child uncomfortable at some point, you’re probably doing it wrong. Hurt feelings are not harm or abuse.

We cannot dismantle the parental paradigm for what is, in reality, a very small number of kids with truly abusive parents. It’s entirely possible to have empathy for them while also not turning the system on its head.

Labeling strong families as “privilege” is an attempt at “othering” and wrestling control away from conscientious parents. Good families are still the norm and should be our expectation. Just because you might have had a bad parent doesn’t mean most people do.

Schools Are For Learning

Almost every decision in schools requires signed parental consent: taking an aspirin, opting in or out of instruction, going on a field trip, etc. With any significant concern, a call to the parents should always be the first step.

A preemptive assumption of parental abuse is a dangerous and ultimately destabilizing standard for society. There is a fundamental difference between mandatory reporting of abuse and active undermining of informed parental consent.

Whether or not a minor child is or isn’t LGBT is strictly a family matter and should never land under the purview of a government entity. It’s simply none of their business. It should only become their concern in cases of actual abuse (which is, of course, already subject to mandatory reporting laws).

A minor doesn’t have a right to privacy from a parent when that parent can be held responsible for things that the child does. Guidance and intervention in your child’s decision-making is not only a parental right but also an essential responsibility.

Encouraging and enabling children to harbor secrets from their families is wrong.

“They act like nobody should be allowed to live a happy life as long as anything, anywhere, is wrong.”

An insightful observation made by my eighteen-year-old son. By “they,” he meant “activists” and “allies.” Unfortunately, far too many activists are focused on disruption rather than solution, and identifying as “an ally” is a convenient way to fake activism.

On a recent college application, one question asked, “Which marginalized groups do you identify with?” An answer was required. A friend, only half-joking, said he should answer, “All of them.”

Far beyond simply raising awareness, cries of “grievance” are increasingly shrill, and there are so many examples of this in practice that it’s difficult to hone them down.

Share

Today, people scramble to identify as or with so-called “protected groups.” Designed to appeal to our human desire to appear kind and fair, the concepts are arbitrary in their application:

• “Equity”

• “Climate Justice”

• “Land Acknowledgements”

• LGBTQ+

• Racial Essentialism

• Homelessness

• Illegal Immigration

• “Reparations”

An Activist Mindset and The Myth of Increasing Awareness

Today most activism centers on disruptions rather than solutions. They won’t even admit when progress has been made because it destroys their grievance narrative.

One clear example is homelessness. Some misguided activists believe that visibility “increases awareness” of the problem. But rather than incentivizing solutions, it destroys neighborhoods. Businesses shut down, and families move away.

I recently spent time in Lima, Peru, and compared it with my experiences in some major US cities.

“Peru is a country with high economic disparities, yet there are no homeless encampments in city parks or public spaces, no Fentanyl zombies passed out in building entryways, no tents lining the streets.”

These things are choices we make as a society. Allowing and enabling people to live on our streets is inhumane.

Another example is “climate anxiety.” We are scaring our children into mental disorders. Pretending this is a good thing by claiming “we are merely teaching kids to care about the planet” is dangerous.

Accentuate The Positive - The Scientific Case Against Grievance

There is behavioral scientific reasoning that illustrates why we shouldn’t focus on highlighting “grievances.” Human brains are wired for negative bias. Research has shown that achieving a positive-negative balance requires five times more positive reinforcement to offset the negative.

A Negative Bias

How we teach and the example we set matters. “Critical consciousness” is not critical thinking, and teaching through a lens of “grievance” isn’t a healthy path.

For example, whether teaching about Thomas Jefferson or Frederick Douglass, the focus and priority should be on the positives. Living as a slave wasn’t Douglass’s sole defining characteristic. In an elementary-level US history class, the fact that Jefferson owned slaves would be primarily irrelevant and is usually brought up to discredit or diminish the moral authority of his contributions to the country and its founding ideals. That debate belongs in higher-grade history classes.

Calls for “Reparations” and “Land Acknowledgements” are far more arbitrary than activists will admit. When honestly examined at face value, reality doesn’t support the narratives.

Life Isn’t Fair

Constantly seeking out “grievance” and chasing “fairness” is an exercise in futility. There will always be an endless supply of “grievance.” Despite the narratives, disparities in outcomes do not usually result from injustice. People are individuals, each with different strengths, weaknesses, ambitions, and adversity.

Perceptions of “fairness” are often not reality. The solution isn’t “just make everything fair” because that can never happen. Advantages and disadvantages will always exist, and resilience will always be a far more critical quality than grievance.

Raise The Bar

What we choose to celebrate and promote matters. Disruption cannot be our desired norm. Instilling optimism and ambition in our children is more important than ever before.

It is an objective fact that humanity is far better off than ever. Incentivizing “grievance” and rewarding “victimhood” encourages false kindness and abdicates personal responsibility.

Lead by example. Teach your children to live a happy life. Raise the bar, don’t lower it.

Anything less than the five-to-one positive/negative ratio sets us on a harmful path.

Subscribe now

Kindness is widely considered to be one of humanity’s most important virtues. People generally want to be seen as “nice” and “compassionate.” Unfortunately, this leaves us vulnerable to something called “idiot compassion.”

Author Pema Chodron describes it this way: “In some ways, it’s what’s called enabling. It’s the general tendency to give people what they want because you can’t bear to see them suffering.”

Idiot Compassion is compassion without discernment, a false kindness that can be exploited using a forced morality binary, taking advantage of people’s desire to appear “kind” or “nice.” A self-serving narcissistic veneer of “kindness,” mostly reliant on the actions of others to implement. Words instead of deeds.

Share

This is done by creating false narratives of “perceived consensus” on an issue. It’s conveniently used to shut people up, curtail rational discussion, and hide dissent. Many people may not even realize they are being manipulated.

Some Examples of Weaponized Empathy

Censorship

Binary: “We're protecting you from dangerous disinformation.”

Reality: Pay particular attention to what is labeled as “disinformation” and by whom, as it’s often merely dissenting viewpoints being silenced.

Immigration and the Border

False Binary: “Don’t be xenophobic. Everyone deserves a chance and should always be welcome here. Putting kids in cages is evil.”

Reality: Any country with finite resources cannot let everyone in, logistically or practically. Expecting immigrants to use legal channels isn’t cruelty.

Homelessness, Mental Health, and Drug Addiction

False Binary: “Housing dignity is a human right. You obviously don’t care about homeless people.”

Reality: Allowing and enabling people to live on the streets is inhumane and destroys our cities and public spaces. Rather than addiction maintenance, mandatory compulsory treatment for addiction and mental illness should be required.

Parental Rights

False Binary: “Teenagers must have a safe way to hide things from bad parents.”

Reality: Family matters. Questioning and intervening in your child’s decision-making is both a parental right and an essential responsibility. It’s not dangerous, and it’s certainly not abuse. Dismantling the parental paradigm cannot be our path forward. Informed consent for minors always requires parental involvement.

Age-Appropriate Content Curation

False Binary: “Book banning is evil.”

Reality: Parental discretion regarding content isn’t “banning books.” Any content made available to children should always be rigorously vetted and controlled.

Fossil Fuels

False Binary: “You don't care about the planet.”

Reality: Renewable energy is not currently capable of reliably sustaining power grids. Forcing a premature transition away from fossil fuels is economic suicide.

Gender Identity

False Binary: “Celebrate gender diversity and let people be who they are.”

Reality: We cannot dismantle societal norms in the name of comfort for a minuscule percentage of a small percentage of people.

The Bottom Line

Fundamentally, manipulation usually comes back to “You don’t care enough. You must show us that you care more.” The narrative hijacks your empathy. You might then be afraid to ask questions or state a dissenting opinion.

People often say, “Mind your own business.” Shutting up and minding your own business is not a path to a thriving society.

Telling someone they should “Just be a good person” is naive, dismissive, and ultimately unhelpful idiot compassion. Emotions are being exploited.

It makes sense to pay attention and think critically about everything you see and hear. Ask tough questions and demand tough answers. “If it saves or improves one life” is a foolishly impractical metric. Sometimes the most compassionate solutions are harsh realities.

The current phenomenon normalizing the idea that “parents are unsafe” is dangerous. Efforts are being made to restructure laws and redefine the term “abuse.” In California, a proposed bill (AB 957) would classify parents as abusive if they refuse to affirm their child's gender identity.

Share

Abuse Is Abuse

Child privacy laws exist for cases of actual abuse. Conflating “gender identity” questions with “my father is touching me inappropriately” is willfully dishonest. There are existing laws in place to deal with truly abusive parents.

Encouraging children to lie to their parents, either outright or by omission, is unhealthy and detrimental to families. Any assumption that a parent might be unwilling or even hostile to discuss issues with their child misses the point. Responsibility is not someone else’s to take, except in rare worst cases.

Let’s be clear; bad parents are the outliers, not the norm. Far more often than not, parents know their children much better than anyone outside the family. They know strengths and weaknesses, struggles and successes. Parents are best equipped to help and guide their children.

No, Kids Don’t Know Who They Are

Teenagers are, almost by definition, defiant, confused, and uncomfortable; Feelings of body dysmorphia, estrangement, and insecurity are a normal part of growing up.

It’s extremely common for adolescents to feel misunderstood by their parents. Affirming and empowering a teenager's normal confusion and uncertainty is dangerous, and it sets them up for a life of potential regret and hardship.

The Juvenile Mind

In Roper v Simmons (2005) and again in Graham v. Florida (2010), the United States Supreme Court agreed with the American Psychological Association’s brief that adolescents are immature risk-taking individuals who have an underdeveloped sense of responsibility which can result in ill-considered actions and decisions and are more susceptible to negative influences and peer pressure.

Parental Responsibility

Questioning and intervening in your child’s decision-making is not only a parental right but also an essential responsibility. It’s not dangerous, and it’s certainly not abuse. Dismantling the parental paradigm cannot be our path forward.

This week, I had the fantastic opportunity to travel to Lima, Peru, to perform with my band, T-4-2. Some things struck me while spending time in this beautiful city.

Share

The US State Department currently has a travel advisory for Peru ranging from “Level 2: Exercise Increased Caution” to “Level 4: Do Not Travel,” depending on the area of the country. Peru is also experiencing their largest outbreak of Dengue Fever in history.

Like most other countries, Peru was devastated during COVID-19 and still hasn’t recovered.

Despite this, one of the first things I noticed in Lima was the vibe. The city is energetic and alive. Parks filled with families, streets packed with cars, crowded public transit, plazas filled with young couples, vibrant nightlife, and no masks to be seen.

Peru is a country with high economic disparities, yet there are no homeless encampments in city parks or public spaces, no Fentanyl zombies passed out in building entryways, no tents lining the streets. Trash or litter on the streets seen at night is cleaned up by morning. Walking through different parts of the city, I noticed I wasn’t forced to step over catatonic drug addicts or avoid the next oncoming random crazy person on the street. I didn’t smell urine and weed. It’s a stark contrast from experiences in San Francisco, Los Angeles, Las Vegas, and Austin.

Lima actually feels normal to me. It’s been a long time since I could say that about any large city in the United States.

Friends in Peru tell me, “whatever happens in the United States comes here in about five years.” Let’s hope they are able to avoid what has happened to us. Normalizing open drug use, addiction maintenance, enabling people to live on the streets, slackened enforcement of laws, treating criminals as victims, and insane gender ideology are all destructive.

Maybe we can learn something from countries like Peru before it’s too late. Maybe we can find normal again. Good people need to stand up and provide the political will to help make things right. Hopefully common sense will win.

Imagine this church: good people and good families, welcoming to all—a “United” Methodist Church (UMC).

Known for its generosity, this church spent significantly more of its money percentage-wise on outreach than many other churches of similar size. Giving was not merely substantial monetary donations but an abundance of hands-on volunteering.

Fellowship, youth groups, Sunday school, and preschool. Community spaces, a food bank, feeding the homeless, providing school supplies, delivering Christmas presents to families in need, clothing donations, dental care, and simply paying people’s rent.

Purchasing animals for families in Uganda, helping to build and maintain an orphanage in Guatemala, mission trips, rebuilding homes for low-income families, disaster response, and relief for victims of fires, floods, and hurricanes.

This church gave a lot.

My children have grown up in this church. My parents were founding members. We had my father's funeral there. I was a leader in worship music. But sadly, this church no longer exists. As someone who mostly keeps my faith private, this is a challenging subject to discuss. I’m angry, but mostly I’m sad. Something extraordinary has been lost.

Through the discernment process, my church held a vote on whether we would disaffiliate from the UMC. More than half of the members voted to leave but failed to reach the 66.7% threshold required for the exit to be validated by the UMC. 

This was essentially the worst possible outcome for the church itself. Most of those members will leave the church, taking their donations, time, and compassion elsewhere. Many may be disillusioned and leave church altogether. A once-thriving church has been externally thrown into chaos and now faces reduced membership, financial hardship, and leadership changes.

Whether you believe the split of the UMC was primarily about same-sex marriage or see that as a convenient over-simplification obfuscating deeper issues, the loss is tangible.

In research during the process of discernment, the phrases “Progressive Methodism,” “radical inclusion,” and “doing the work” reminded me quite a bit of the “woke dismantling” of Queer Theory.

In a somewhat odd parallel, the systematic dismantling of the church is similar to what appears to have happened to The Walt Disney Company in recent years. Hiding disruption behind demanding kindness is a constant feature of our current culture war.

A church is its people. Many with good intentions will attempt to pick up the pieces, but the price hasn’t been worth the cost. In many ways, the reasons don’t matter much. I sincerely mourn the loss.

Following up on America’s Fundamental Breakdown - Part 1, let’s look at the city of San Antonio’s ballot Proposition A, the so-called “San Antonio Justice Charter.”

This proposed amendment intertwines unrelated issues such as marijuana, abortion, cite-and-release, police chokeholds, and no-knock warrants. Additionally, it introduces a "Justice Director" position that oversees the implementation of the Justice Policy. The proposition's attempt to connect soft-on-crime policies with controversial topics such as abortion and marijuana legalization is deceptive and distorts the goal of justice.

It is difficult to determine what's worse, the policies themselves or the attempt to bundle them into a single ballot proposition.

Share

Currently, San Antonio police department policy restricts the cite-and-release program to thefts from businesses. Proposition A would expand it, lowering the consequences of vandalism and theft against individuals.

Decriminalizing property crime is a dangerous path to take. Despite the narrative framing, property crimes are not “victimless,” and pretending that the current shoplifting epidemic is a “crime of poverty” is dishonest. These are not people stealing bread to feed their families. Businesses are, in many cases, legally prevented from having on-site security guards physically intervene to stop theft.

In several U.S. cities, rampant theft has resulted in stores locking up their merchandise or simply going out of business. When businesses flee due to crime, it’s part of a downward spiral: higher neighborhood crime rates create less access to businesses and services, fewer available jobs, and far less money in our communities.

The focus should be on helping, enabling, and protecting law-abiding taxpayers, property owners, families, and businesses in our community. Rather than enacting policies meant to keep citable offenses off someone’s record, we should prioritize disincentivizing criminal activity.

The best way to avoid a criminal record is not to commit a crime. Habitual criminals belong in jail. Common sense.

Installing a “Justice Director” merely creates a DEI administrator in charge or minimizing consequences and giving criminals accommodations in a misguided concept of “justice.”

San Antonio’s own City Attorney says the ballot measures are unenforceable, so fundamentally, voters will weigh in on an arbitrary bundle of disparate measures that cannot ultimately be implemented or enforced.

What is the real agenda behind having Prop A on the ballot, then?

Share

America’s Fundamental Breakdown - Part 2 is available here.

A bare minimum ask of city government is to provide safe streets for taxpayers, businesses, and property owners. Unfortunately, sometimes it seems like we have given up. Soft-on-crime policies have significant consequences.

With organized crime rings targeting retail and drug addicts camping outside storefronts, it’s no wonder businesses are closing their stores.

Chicago: Walmart closes 4 Chicago locations permanently

San Francisco: Whole Foods to close San Francisco flagship store a year after opening.

While high-profile store closings are the most visible, property crime substantially affects small businesses.

Los Angeles: Tarzana small businesses shutting down due to relentless crime.

New York: Retail theft rises, and N.Y.C. small business owners are paying the price.

In an environment where consequences for crime are decreasing, and in-store security guards are legally hamstrung regarding what they are allowed to do to protect their stores, it’s a losing situation for business owners.

Policies prioritizing concepts like “equity,” “restorative justice,” and “de-carceration” take us down the wrong path. Enabling habitual criminality is dangerous.

In New York City, thousands of crimes have been committed by just 327 people. The simplest solution would be to keep career criminals off the streets. Criminals shouldn’t be treated as victims.

All the “equity” in the world won’t stop crime. Solutions are available. What’s missing is political will.

If your eyes glaze over when seeing a subject like “Weaponizing Empathy and the Forced Morality Binary,” I have a simple question for you: Has someone inferred or even outright accused you of being a terrible human being because you hold an opinion or belief?

Continuing in the direction of my previous posts about “The Woke Mind Virus” and “The Grievance Engine,” this is a further look at the tactics of using a forced morality binary and weaponized empathy to shut down discussions and dismiss opinions. Once able to spot the tactics, it’s easier to avoid being manipulated.

In today's media, both corporate and social, legitimate questions and criticisms are too often met with responses like “how dare you?” How dare you question or criticize the motives or experiences of (insert any one of the many so-called “protected groups”)?

Intersectionality Theory allows a convenient crossover of differing levels and categories of victimization status leading to “protected groups.”

Share

What Is a Forced Morality Binary?

A forced morality binary is a circumstance or issue where a manufactured narrative is presented as having only two valid choices, only one being consistent with an inferred moral imperative. This often involves a motte and bailey fallacy,” a combination of bait-and-switch and equivocation disingenuously crafted to avoid nuanced discussion by framing a narrative to be seen as a binary choice. One side is held up to appear “absolutely good” while the other appears “unequivocally bad,” creating a false representation of perceived consensus from which there can be no nuance, skepticism, or dissent.

What Is Weaponized Empathy?

Many people scoff at the concept of weaponized empathy and ask, “how can empathy possibly be a bad thing?"

Using empathy as a weapon: exploiting or taking advantage of someone’s kindness to manipulate or silence them.

These are tactics to control, manipulate, and ultimately shut people up. That's the bottom line. It's an emotional plea. Unfortunately, it works most of the time. No conscientious person wants to be perceived as lacking empathy and compassion.

Recognize and refuse to willingly participate in the manipulation.

Further Examples of Weaponized Empathy and the Forced Morality Binary

• Crime

  • Desiring government to be tough on crime, you don’t care about the plight of criminals (mostly assumed to be unfairly convicted or unjustly punished).

  • Generally supporting law enforcement, you don’t care about victims of police brutality.

• Foreign Policy

  • Forcing an imperative and moral binary where one does not necessarily exist.

  • Questioning Ukraine policy makes you a Putin sympathizer that supports Russia.

• Immigration

  • Believing immigration should be done through proper legal channels, you don’t care about immigrants.

  • “Immigrants are being whipped at the border.”

• Family

  • Asking about the decay of the nuclear family and the rise in fatherless homes, shows you don’t care about single parents or want to eliminate “alternative families.”

• Individual Rights - 1st and 2nd Amendments

  • Believing in the 2nd Amendment, you don’t care about school shootings.

  • Caring about essential freedom of speech and association, you don’t care about victims of “hate speech.”

• Intersectionality - “Protected Groups” are beyond reproach.

  • Honduran illegal aliens killed bald eagle, but the government is reluctant to prosecute them.

  • Destroying statues is OK. Tire marks on a “pride” flag painted on the street is not.

  • Gender theory - If you question whether children should be given so-called “gender-affirming treatments,” you support the genocide of trans-identifying people.

• Race

  • All white people are racist, even those that aren’t actually racially white.

  • “Black Lives Matter” phrase vs. the Marxist organization.

  • “BYU students yelled racial slurs at a Duke volleyball player.” There is zero corroboration that this even happened.

• Government and Media Censorship

  • Dissent = domestic terrorist threat vs. “saving democracy.”

  • Being concerned about “The Twitter Files,” you don’t care about the welfare of an ex-Twitter executive (whose sexuality makes them part of a so-called “protected identity group”).

• Elections

  • Asking about election integrity and voter ID, you want to disenfranchise minority groups (Georgia and “Jim Crow 2.0”).

  • If you ask even the most logical questions about the 2020 Presidential election, you are an “election denier” despite a history of democrats denying the results of elections.

• Abortion

  • Discussing unborn children means you hate women.

• Homelessness

  • Believing it’s inhumane to allow and enable people to live on the streets, you want to exterminate homeless people.

• Education

  • Questioning the merits of teaching through the lens of Critical Theory, you don’t care about “honest history.”

  • Parents questioning what is taught to children in schools is hate speech against LGBTQ+.

• Trump

  • Russiagate

  • Steele Dossier

  • It’s possible to like some things Trump does/says without liking everything

• Politics

  • Supreme Court - Court is illegitimate when it rules in a way contrary to a desired narrative.

  • January 6th - “It was an armed violent insurrection that almost overturned our democracy.”

  • John Fetterman - Questioning his fitness for the job is ableist. Expecting Senators to be healthy, able, and capable is discriminatory.

• COVID

  • COVID lab-leak theory is “racist.”

  • Vaccines / Masks / Mandates / Natural Immunity - Public health prioritized a narrative over the truth, and if you questioned anything, you were “causing more COVID deaths.”

• Climate

  • “Climate Justice” - asking real questions means you don’t care enough about the planet.

These examples involve shaping and promoting a desired narrative, obfuscating the truth, and shutting down discussion.

Refuse to be manipulated, and don’t let them pretend you don’t care.

The American Heritage Dictionary defines a grievance as “an actual or supposed circumstance regarded as just cause for complaint.” In our current environment, where feelings transcend facts, grievances are used to drive and amplify false narratives for political and personal gains. The Grievance Engine is about control.

Often the crafted narratives actively block the truth from being discussed at all. Topics ranging from the decay of the nuclear family to education and immigration are manipulated using weaponized empathy to limit debate. It’s much easier to demonize and dismiss someone outright rather than engage in a cogent argument to support a belief.

Weaponized Empathy

“But you don’t care about X?” is a standard weaponization tactic.

• Wanting to be tough on crime, you don’t care about criminals (mostly assumed to be unfairly convicted).

• Generally supporting law enforcement, you don’t care about victims of police brutality.

• Believing immigration should be done through legal channels, you don’t care about immigrants.

• Worrying about the decay of the nuclear family and the rise in fatherless homes, you don’t care about single parents or “alternative families.”

• Caring about freedom of speech and association, you don’t care about victims of “hate speech.”

• Being concerned about “The Twitter Files,” you don’t care about the welfare of an ex-Twitter executive (whose sexuality makes them part of a so-called “protected identity group”).

• Wondering about election integrity and voter ID, you don’t care about minority groups (Georgia and “Jim Crow 2.0”).

• Believing it’s inhumane to allow and enable people to live on the streets, you don’t care about homeless people.

• Questioning the merits of teaching through the lens of Critical Theory, you don’t care about “honest history.”

Of course, the logical consequence of these narratives is “you are a bad person and are not worth being heard.” Weaponized empathy is a motte and bailey fallacy designed to stifle discussion and dismiss opinions outright. It’s a forced morality binary: you are either seen as ultimately good or bad with no nuance at all.

The Perpetually Aggrieved

Everyone has grievances. However, not every grievance rises to a level that deserves amends, and not every perceived grievance is genuine. Habitually and preemptively assuming injustice or negative bias is unhealthy and counterproductive. Complaining is contagious, and it’s easier to blame others than to take ownership of our circumstances.

Although sexism, racism, and discrimination exist in America today, most interactions you will experience have little to do with your sex, race, skin color, or religion.

Savior Syndrome

While helping others is a laudable goal, the projection of grievances on behalf of others has become an industry in itself. The concept of “privilege” allows the creation of arbitrary “protected identity groups” that are considered beyond reproach. Projection of guilt and the demonization of others are hallmarks of this savior syndrome. It allows hatred in the name of inclusion and acceptance when the reality isn’t either inclusive or accepting.

Critical Theory

Critical Theory is not critical thinking. It demands an illogical assumption of injustice and unfairness before evidence is presented. It begins with a predetermination something is problematic and then fills in the blanks to justify grievances and responses.

Teaching through a lens of grievance isn’t simply another perspective. Essential to this lens is a call for actively dismantling structures and systems predetermined to be unjust. Labeling grievances as built-in or systemic while disingenuously avoiding discussing all potential variables involved is dishonest.

What Can We Do?

Grievances don’t create, build, liberate, or empower. Discernment matters. Disparate outcomes aren’t always a result of injustice or unequal treatment. Correlation does not imply causation. People are individuals, and guilt is not collective. Trauma does not create an identity. Words aren’t violence. Hurt feelings aren’t “harm” or a chronic disorder. Your feelings are not any more important than mine. And in reality, truth is more important than our feelings. We can’t control what happens to us, but we absolutely can control how we react.

I wrote this to illustrate some thoughts and beliefs and reject being forced into a political box by others.

Everyone can work together for a better society despite having different beliefs. We don’t have to agree on everything to get things done.

The United States of America

I believe in American exceptionalism. The founding ideals of the USA are worth lifting up and aspiring to, regardless if we ever truly achieve them. There is a reason people clamor to come here. We can claim the ideals and constantly work to reach them. Where we fall short should not be the focus.

Rights

Individual freedom is paramount. The USA is founded on the principle that liberty outweighs lives. So many lives have been lost to secure our freedom. That is absolute.

Individualism over collectivism.

I support equality for every US citizen, regardless of race, sex, religion, or sexual preference. All individuals are equal before the law and have inalienable rights.

Property rights are a foundation of American prosperity.

Freedom of speech and freedom of association are cornerstones of America. Therefore, we should update our anti-discrimination laws to protect political beliefs.

Americans have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. So-called “positive rights” (food, shelter, and healthcare) are not human rights. We only have the right to pursue them.

Abortion isn’t healthcare. It’s an elective procedure with significant consequences. I am pro-choice, but abortion shouldn’t be common, easy, or free. Like most Americans, I support reasonable restrictions on abortion access (cutoff after 12-15 weeks except in cases of rape/incest/physical harm).

I support legal gay marriage.

Government

In most cases, the government is a poor, inefficient, and expensive way to address problems.

The private sector is far better than the public sector for getting things done and solving problems.

Our government should prioritize common people who actively work to make their lives and the lives of others better. Not corporations, not unions, not billionaires. And it’s not the government’s job to find victims.

The government cannot “give” anyone things like shelter or healthcare without first taking away something from someone else.

I support the systems of the US government. The three branches will survive and sustain the country, no matter what radicals on either side claim.

Military

I don’t support foreign wars to intervene in the affairs of a region, but America should protect our interests.

I support a US military strong enough to counter multiple adversaries simultaneously and project our power globally when needed.

Intersectionality, DEI, anti-racism, and gender theory have no place in our armed forces.

Over the last 100 years, American prosperity has been primarily due to military superiority and affordable, abundant energy.

Immigration / Globalism

Immigration can’t be unlimited. It’s neither practical nor economically viable. As a country, we can’t help everyone.

We should be Americans before “global citizens.”

Crime / Police

The bare minimum responsibility of city government is to provide safe streets for taxpayers, businesses, and property owners.

Decriminalizing crime is a dangerous path that leads to more crime. Non-prosecution of criminals makes us all less safe.

Police are essential to civilization.

Allowing and enabling people to live on the streets is inhumane.

Mandatory treatment for addicts and the mentally ill and compulsory shelter for the homeless are solutions.

Education

Public education in America is failing our children. It’s not a funding problem. The problems are systemic and run very deep. A complete overhaul is needed.

Public sector teachers’ unions have destroyed public education.

Taxpayer funding of public schools should follow students, not the schools themselves.

Competition in education is a net positive for society.

Gender

Human sex/gender is binary. Anything else is an anomaly or pretending.

No one is ever “born in the wrong body.”

Only females can menstruate, and males cannot get pregnant.

I am against transgender people competing in opposite-sex sports from their birth sex. Biology is real.

Social Justice

I strongly support equality of opportunity, but social equity isn’t something that can be regulated or granted to anyone.

I don’t support the teaching of Critical Race Theory to our children. It’s dangerous and divisive. Struggle sessions are not solutions. Grievances don’t build anything.

Intersectionality couldn’t be more useless as a social dynamic. People are unique. Each individual is more than their “identity points.” Prioritizing or de-prioritizing groups based on “identities” is divisive. It’s the opposite of what we should be doing.

I am against racism. I’m not “anti-racist” in the CRT sense. It has a Neo-Marxist deconstructionist agenda that is ultimately divisive and inflammatory.

Pretending that an advantage or disadvantage can be legislated away is disingenuous. People will always have advantages or disadvantages no matter what laws are passed because everyone is unique.

I cannot ever support treating criminals like victims.

Energy

Forcing a premature transition away from fossil fuels is economic suicide.

Being energy independent as a country should always be a priority, regardless of how we do it. Fossil fuels, nuclear, solar, wind, geothermal, hydroelectric. All of it should be on the table.

Energy policy needs to be done in an economically responsible way. Unfortunately, the Green New Deal and Paris Climate Agreement don’t do that.

We don’t need to panic. It’s entirely possible to regulate emissions without destroying the economy.

Renewable energy isn’t a realistic option to replace fossil fuels. “Green” energy sources cannot sustain power grids. Intermittence continues to be a real obstacle. Wind and Solar require fossil fuel backup, and battery technology isn’t ready for mass storage. Expecting people to tolerate blackouts and forced restrictions is also not a viable strategy.

Economy

The narrative that some aren’t “paying their fair share” is a convenient class divider. “Fair” is entirely subjective.

We need fewer government programs, not more.

Deficit spending is irresponsible, no matter which party is doing it.

I don’t support a higher capital gains tax. Investors are taking risks.

Every job isn’t meant to support a family. Not every job can demand a living wage. Your job is only worth what it costs to replace you. You are responsible for making yourself employable and moving up the wage ladder.

Conclusion

This is a living document that may be expanded as needed.

Today, being “woke,” has little relevance to its original 1930s racial context. The term has become broadly generalized to encompass so-called “protected groups.” These mostly arbitrary, and unrelated, groups are labeled beyond reproach by the media and government.

Share

Woke no longer means merely being aware of discrimination, unfairness, and oppression, nor does it connote simply being a good, compassionate, caring human being. Ironically, in practice, wokeness manifests in bullying, threats, identitarian essentialism, and devaluation of others. Many times it’s just narcissism masquerading as empathy. Acceptance and tolerance aren’t seen as good enough. Good people must actively celebrate and promote. Wokeness perverts empathy by elevating victimhood and weakness, literally incentivizing people to identify as members of perceived victimized groups, stumbling over themselves to claim trauma, even on behalf of others. In reality, compassion and empathy must be tempered by discernment, discretion, and healthy skepticism.

The Forced Morality Binary

Empathy and compassion have become weaponized through a crafted morality binary: if you don’t agree with us, on whatever “the thing” is, you are a monster, an enemy, and your opinion must be silenced. “Too dangerous to be heard,” is far too common.

“The thing,” seamlessly moves from one issue to another, demanding compliance with a preferred narrative: Gender Theory, Donald Trump, Black Lives Matter, Critical Race Theory, COVID vaccines, Wearing Masks, Ukraine, Climate Change, Abortion, Election Integrity, The Border Crisis, Monkeypox, Elon Musk, Censorship, Parental Rights in Education. It’s all seen to be black and white, right and wrong, a morality binary, despite all being nuanced topics that demand deeper discussion.

Progressing from a black square to the newest version of a pride flag, from COVID vaccination status to the Ukrainian flag, narcissistically worn as if a badge of honor, virtue-signaling is constantly on display. Any questions or deviation from the approved narrative is quickly ostracized and silenced.

Freedom of speech and association are cornerstones of America. We need more discussion, more transparency, and more dissent, not less. “De-platforming” and “de-banking” should have no place here. Perhaps we need to update our anti-discrimination laws to include protecting political opinions.

Education

Wokeness has no place in education. Collective guilt, incentivized grievance, racial essentialism, and rejection of merit & achievement aren’t healthy ingredients for prosperous successful students. In teaching our children, we should be honest about injustices in the US, but only in context with American ideals and the actual progress that has been made toward realizing them. Grievance-centered teaching through a Critical Theory lens is not teaching honest history, and ultimately sets children up for an unhappy and pessimistic life. Prioritizing “equity,” which, by definition, requires arbitrarily enforced discrimination, over equality, isn’t healthy nor equitable. Merit-based admissions, academic standards, and optimistic possibility should be the norm. Elimination of standardized testing, grading, and disciplinary standards will only produce mediocre students unprepared for adult life. The bar should be raised, not lowered. Raising our children to be successful productive citizens should be the priority.

Criminals, Addicts, and Homeless

Safe streets are the bare minimum obligation of a city government to its taxpayers. Woke progressive policies are destroying our cities. Unsafe streets result from bail reform, de-carceration, harm-reduction and homelessness. It’s common sense that decriminalizing crime causes more crime. More criminals on the street means more crime. So called “safe use,” sites aren’t an answer, merely enabling the problems with no significant addict redirection into treatment programs. The answers seem simple: mandatory compulsory in-patient treatment for the mentally ill and drug addicts, and jail time for criminals. The funding is there, but it’s being used incorrectly and funneled to the wrong non-government organizations. Prioritizing the safety and well-being of taxpayers and families should be the norm.

LGBTQQIAAP2+

While the list of “protected people” is constantly growing, in reality, most LGB don’t consider the others a legitimate part of their community. Their long-fought struggle to mainstream same-sex marriage is now overshadowed. Pride has been co-opted and weaponized in the name of “queering” and gender ideology. We must not only accept, but also actively celebrate every element, without question, in the name of inclusion.

Again, in reality, compassion and empathy should be tempered by discernment, discretion, and healthy skepticism. None of that requires celebration or promotion.

Control

Wokeness, from an activist standpoint, is ultimately about control, exploiting the kindness of people, policing language and narrative under the guise of empathy. “Fat-shaming, misgendering, and land acknowledgements” are some  examples of this. It is an objective fact that obesity is unhealthy, but stating that fact is now somehow a “perceived harm,” to an obese person. “Misgendering” someone is also now “harm.” In some places, a purely virtue-signaling “land acknowledgement” is required at the start of an event.

For a woke protector, taking on “grievances of oppressed people” on behalf of others delivers a narcissistic savior complex endorphin rush. It literally feels good to signal ones virtue, whether truly virtuous or not. Censoring any questioning or skepticism of their views is always within bounds because those on the opposite side of the issue are considered “the bad guys.” To them, the ends justify the means.

In attempting forced normalization of things that would be conventionally unpopular, woke narratives divide and control through manipulation of “grievance,” creating and then amplifying problems, rather than solving them.

Anti-woke isn’t anti-black, anti-immigrant, anti-LGBT, or anti-equality. It’s neither MAGA nor fascist, and it’s absolutely not discriminatory or extremist. Anti-woke rejects the artificially constructed forced morality binary. Elevating arbitrarily chosen “grievances” and protecting select groups above others can only end in disaster. Not all grievance rises to a level that requires or demands redress. Don’t allow yourself to be manipulated.