The Stewardship Report

The Stewardship Report

Connecting The World

    Home Blog Page 5

    Satirical Commentary Sparks Online Speculation About Presidential Burial

    Liz Webster
    -
    0
    Satirical Commentary Sparks Online Speculation About Presidential Burial

    Daily Beast Column Comparing Trump To Lenin Creates Viral Rumors About Red Square Interment

    New York, N.Y. — A satirical opinion piece published by The Daily Beast on August 28, 2025, has ignited widespread online speculation about whether President Donald Trump might someday be buried alongside Vladimir Lenin in Moscow’s Red Square.

    The rumor, which has circulated across social media platforms and messaging apps, stems from a provocative commentary that employed dark humor to discuss the president’s health and political legacy.

    Origin of the Rumor

    The speculation originated from a column titled “It’s Tasteless to Speculate That Trump Might Soon Be Buried On Red Square Like Lenin” by foreign policy expert David Rothkopf. The piece began with a Soviet-era joke about a man searching newspaper obituaries for a death announcement that would appear on the front page, implying the demise of a major political figure.

    Rothkopf’s commentary suggested that “if he keeps serving the Motherland as he always has,
    Trump could end up buried in a glass casket in a mausoleum on Red Square like Lenin.”

    This satirical observation, intended as political commentary rather than factual reporting, quickly became distorted as it spread across digital platforms.

    The author used this provocative imagery to recommend viewers watch Armando Iannucci’s film “The Death of Stalin” as preparation for potential political transitions. However, social media users began sharing excerpts from the piece without proper context, leading some to interpret the satirical speculation as genuine reporting.

    Social Media Amplification

    Digital platforms have amplified fragments of Rothkopf’s commentary, with users sharing screenshots and partial quotes that omit the satirical nature of the original piece. Twitter/X, Facebook, and Telegram channels have circulated versions of the rumor that present it as breaking news rather than opinion journalism.

    The viral spread demonstrates how satirical content can transform into apparent fact when removed from its original context. Meme culture and algorithmic content distribution have accelerated this process, with engagement-driven platforms prioritizing provocative headlines over nuanced analysis.

    Several fact-checking organizations have begun addressing the rumor, emphasizing that no credible sources suggest any plans for presidential burial in Russia. The speculation appears entirely rooted in Rothkopf’s rhetorical device rather than any substantive political developments.

    Historical Context of Lenin’s Mausoleum

    Lenin’s preserved body has been on “almost continuous public display inside the mausoleum since its completion in 1930” on Red Square. The Soviet Union constructed the monument as a shrine to the revolutionary leader, where his embalmed remains lie in a glass casket for public viewing.

    Russian President Vladimir Putin has “rejected any plans so far to bury the body, saying that he was not in favor of taking any steps that would divide society.”

    This reluctance to alter Lenin’s resting place reflects ongoing political sensitivities around Soviet history and Russian identity.

    The Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia has petitioned to “rid Red Square of the remains of the main persecutor and executioner of the 20th century”, though domestic religious authorities have not supported this position.

    The mausoleum remains a significant tourist attraction and symbol of Russia’s revolutionary heritage.

    The Kremlin Wall Necropolis adjacent to the mausoleum contains the remains of other Soviet leaders and prominent figures, making it a politically charged location for any hypothetical international burial.

    Political Reality Assessment

    Foreign policy experts emphasize that the rumor has no basis in diplomatic reality or established precedent. U.S.-Russia relations remain strained across multiple fronts, making any ceremonial burial arrangement highly improbable regardless of political circumstances.

    International law and diplomatic protocols would require extensive negotiations for such an unprecedented arrangement. No American president has ever been buried on foreign soil in a manner that would honor both nations’ political traditions.

    The U.S. State Department has not commented on the rumors, likely viewing them as unworthy of official response. Presidential burial traditions in the United States follow established patterns at national cemeteries, presidential libraries, or family burial grounds.

    Russian government officials have similarly ignored the speculation, focusing instead on current diplomatic and economic priorities. The Kremlin’s silence suggests they view the rumor as irrelevant to serious policy discussions.

    Media Literacy Implications

    The incident highlights ongoing challenges in distinguishing satirical commentary from factual reporting in digital media environments. Algorithmic distribution systems often prioritize engagement over accuracy, allowing provocative content to spread rapidly regardless of its factual basis.

    Lenin’s Tomb on Red Square in Moscow.

    Media literacy experts recommend readers examine source context, author intent, and publication standards before sharing content that makes extraordinary claims.

    Satirical publications and opinion columns employ rhetorical devices that can be misinterpreted when circulated without proper attribution.

    The Trump-Lenin burial rumor serves as a case study in how political satire transforms into apparent news through social media amplification.

    Educational institutions and civic organizations increasingly emphasize critical thinking skills to help citizens navigate complex information environments.

    Journalism ethics require clear distinctions between news reporting, opinion commentary, and satirical content, though these boundaries blur in digital spaces where content appears without editorial context.

    Summary

    A satirical opinion piece from The Daily Beast has generated viral rumors suggesting Trump might be buried on Red Square with Lenin. The commentary, written by foreign policy expert David Rothkopf, used dark humor to discuss presidential health concerns and drew parallels between Trump and Soviet leadership. The piece sparked widespread social media speculation, though experts emphasize the rumor has no factual basis. The story highlights how satirical content can evolve into misinformation in digital spaces.

    #TrumpLenin #RedSquare #PoliticalSatire #Misinformation #MediaLiteracy
    #FakeNews #DailyBeast #PoliticalCommentary #SovietHistory #DigitalMedia

    TAGS: Trump, Red Square, burial rumor, Daily Beast, political satire, misinformation,
    social media, viral content, David Rothkopf, Moscow, Kremlin, Soviet history, mausoleum,
    Lenin, political commentary, fake news, digital media, fact-checking media literacy

    Thai Court Ousts PM Shinawatra Over Leaked Cambodian Call

    Liz Webster
    -
    0
    Thai Court Ousts PM Shinawatra Over Leaked Cambodian Call

    A constitutional breach involving a private call with Cambodia’s former leader ends the Shinawatra Dynasty, deepening Thailand’s protracted political instability.

    New York, N.Y. — The nine judges of Thailand’s Constitutional Court delivered a seismic verdict on Friday, voting six to three to remove Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra from office for ethics violations stemming from a leaked private phone call with Cambodia’s former long-ruling strongman, Hun Sen.

    The ruling immediately plunged the nation into fresh political turmoil and marked a severe blow to the enduring, yet besieged, political dynasty founded by her father, the exiled billionaire Thaksin Shinawatra.

    The case centered on a June phone conversation, the audio of which was publicly released by Hun Sen himself. In the recording, the 39-year-old prime minister could be heard referring to the Cambodian leader as “uncle” and offering criticisms of the Thai army. The call occurred against a backdrop of rapidly escalating military tensions along the two nations’ disputed border, which weeks later erupted into a deadly five-day conflict that killed dozens of soldiers and civilians and displaced hundreds of thousands of people.

    In its written ruling, the court determined that Paetongtarn’s “personal relationship” with Hun Sen “appeared to align with Cambodia’s interests” over those of Thailand. The judges dismissed her defense that the call was a good-faith, “personal negotiation to… bring back peace without using violence,” stating it instead “caused the public to cast doubt” on her loyalties and whether her actions “would benefit Cambodia more than the nation’s interest.”

    The ousted leader publicly acknowledged the court’s verdict but stood by her actions. “From the first day I took this office, my every action has been for the benefit of the people,” she stated in a televised address from Government House. “My intention in that private discussion was solely to save lives and prevent violence, drawing upon a long-standing personal connection to achieve peace. I maintain that this was in the nation’s best interest.”

    A Fraught Border and a Familial Connection

    The leaked call exposed the deeply personal and political complexities of Southeast Asian diplomacy. Hun Sen was once a close ally of Paetongtarn’s father, Thaksin, during his premiership in the early 2000s. The Shinawatra family’s populist policies and immense wealth have long made them adored by the rural poor and reviled by the Bangkok-centric elite, the military, and the royalist establishment, leading to two previous premiers being removed from office.

    This familial history provided the subtext for the court’s decision. The use of the familiar term “uncle” and the criticism of the Thai military—a sacrosanct institution—were deemed by her critics as evidence of a cavalier attitude toward national security and a conflict of interest. “A prime minister cannot have a private foreign policy, especially with a nation we have a volatile border with,” said Prawit Wongsuwon, leader of the Palang Pracharath party and a former army chief. “It was a profound error in judgment that compromised her position.”

    The Shinawatra Curse and Judicial Intervention

    Paetongtarn Shinawatra becomes the fifth Thai prime minister to be dismissed by the Constitutional Court since 2008 and the third member of her family to have a premiership cut short. Her father, Thaksin, was deposed by a military coup in 2006, and her aunt, Yingluck Shinawatra, was removed by the same court in 2014 for abuse of power over a rice subsidy scheme. Thaksin, who returned from a 15-year exile last year under a controversial deal with his former rivals, has seen his influence wane considerably with his daughter’s dismissal, raising questions about the future of the Shinawatra political machine.

    Her own rise to power was itself a product of judicial intervention. She assumed the leadership of the Pheu Thai party and became prime minister only after her predecessor, Srettha Thavisin, was dismissed by the court for illegally appointing a cabinet member who had a prior conviction.

    A Swift Realignment of Power

    The vacuum of power was filled with astonishing speed. Within hours of the verdict, the conservative Bhumjaithai party, a one-time coalition partner in Paetongtarn’s government, announced it had secured enough support from other parties to form a new government. Its leader, Anutin Charnvirakul, is now poised to become the next prime minister.

    The party, which has strong influence in the northeast, had earlier outlined its top priorities, which include resolving the ongoing border dispute with Cambodia and dissolving parliament to call for new elections within the next four months. This rapid shift underscores the fragile and transactional nature of Thai coalition politics, where alliances are quickly made and broken.

    Regional Implications and a Diplomatic Spat

    The fallout extends beyond Thailand’s borders, significantly straining relations with Cambodia. The act of Hun Sen—who ceded power to his son, Hun Manet, last year but is widely believed to still control the government—leaking a private diplomatic call is viewed as a profound breach of diplomatic protocol. Analysts suggest it was a calculated move, possibly intended to destabilize a Thai government led by a family he once considered friends, or to gain leverage in the border negotiations.

    “This is an unprecedented level of diplomatic sabotage,” said Thitinan Pongsudhirak, a professor of political science at Chulalongkorn University. “Hun Sen has effectively intervened directly in Thai domestic politics with severe consequences. It will take a long time to rebuild any semblance of trust between the two capitals.”

    The Unending Cycle of Thai Politics

    The court’s decision reinforces a persistent pattern in modern Thai history: elected governments, particularly those affiliated with the Shinawatras, are systematically challenged and often removed by the nation’s unelected institutions, including the judiciary and the military. This cycle has prevented any single elected government from completing a full term in over two decades, creating a perpetual state of political uncertainty that has hampered economic growth and deepened social divisions.

    For millions of the Shinawatras’ “Red Shirt” supporters, the verdict is the latest evidence of an entrenched establishment using its power to nullify the will of the voters. Protests are planned for the weekend in the party’s stronghold in the northeast, with leaders decrying what they call a “judicial coup.”

    As Anutin and Bhumjaithai move to consolidate power, the nation is left to grapple with the same fundamental tensions that have defined it for a generation. The removal of Paetongtarn Shinawatra is not merely a change in leadership; it is the latest eruption of a deep-seated conflict between the elected will of the majority and the power of the old guard, a conflict that shows no signs of abating.

    Summary

    Thailand’s Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra has been removed from office by the Constitutional Court for ethics violations related to a leaked phone call with Cambodia’s former leader Hun Sen. The court ruled her private discussion during a border crisis undermined national trust. Her removal continues a pattern of judicial intervention against Shinawatra family leaders and triggers a rapid political realignment, with the Bhumjaithai party moving to form a new government.

    #Thailand #PaetongtarnShinawatra #ThaiCrisis #ConstitutionalCourt #HunSen
    #Cambodia #PheuThai #Bhumjaithai #SoutheastAsia #PoliticalInstability

    TAGS: Thailand politics, Paetongtarn Shinawatra, Constitutional Court, Cambodian-Thai relations,
    Pheu Thai party, Bhumjaithai party, Anutin Charnvirakul, Thai military, judicial coup, Hun Sen

    Conservative Activist Sean Feucht’s Seattle Rally Ignites Backlash

    Liz Webster
    -
    0
    Conservative Activist Sean Feucht’s Seattle Rally Ignites Backlash

    Progressive Activists Label Worship Event as Harassment, Urging Permit Revocation While Mayor Upholds Free Speech Rights

    New York, N.Y. – Amid escalating tensions in one of the U.S.’s most progressive urban centers, a so-called Christian worship concert led by conservative activist Sean Feucht is proceeding as scheduled at Seattle’s Gas Works Park on August 30, 2025.

    Despite vehement opposition from LGBTQ+ organizations, who have branded the event as “malicious harassment and incitement,” city officials have affirmed the organizer’s constitutional protections under the First Amendment.

    Conservative Activist and So-Called Christian Preacher Sean Feucht in Washington, D.C. Photo credit: Sean Feucht / Facebook.

    This clash highlights ongoing debates over religious expression, public spaces, and community inclusivity in deeply divided American cities.

    Sean Feucht, a California-based singer, songwriter, and preacher, gained national attention during the COVID-19 pandemic through his Let Us Worship movement.

    Launched in 2020, the initiative protested government-imposed restrictions on religious gatherings, framing them as infringements on faith-based freedoms.

    Feucht’s events often blend contemporary Christian music with conservative political messaging, including support for President Donald Trump [Luce Index™ score: 35/100] and critiques of progressive social policies.

    His “Revive in ’25” tour, which kicked off earlier this year, aims to spark spiritual renewal across North America, but it has repeatedly encountered resistance in liberal strongholds.

    In Seattle, a city renowned for its vibrant LGBTQ community and progressive politics, Feucht’s planned rally has stirred significant controversy. Initially set for Cal Anderson Park in the Capitol Hill neighborhood—a historic hub for LGBTQ rights and the site of the 2020 CHOP autonomous zone—the event was relocated to Gas Works Park following concerns raised by local leaders.

    Seattle Mayor Bruce Harrell and Councilmember Joy Hollingsworth urged the shift, citing public safety considerations rather than content-based restrictions. “The law is crystal clear. You cannot shut down a venue on anticipated speech,” Harrell stated in an interview with KING 5 News. He emphasized that any group, regardless of viewpoint, has the right to assemble in public parks under constitutional protections.

    Backlash from Community Advocates

    Opposition to the event has been spearheaded by groups such as Capitol Hill Pride and the Lavender Rights Project, a Black transgender feminist organization.

    Charlette LeFevre, director of Capitol Hill Pride, described the rally as antithetical to Seattle’s values, telling local media, “This is not what Seattle is about.” Critics point to Feucht’s past statements on social issues, including his opposition to LGBTQ-inclusive policies, as evidence that the gathering could foster an environment of exclusion or harm.

    The Lavender Rights Project, along with 15 partner organizations, announced plans for a counter-event to challenge what they termed a “propaganda machine.” This response echoes broader concerns about Christian nationalist movements, as outlined in analyses from outlets like Cascade PBS, which situate Seattle within a larger playbook of conservative activism targeting progressive cities.

    Activists argue that allowing such events in symbolically significant locations like Capitol Hill could undermine efforts to create safe spaces for marginalized communities.

    Recent history amplifies these fears. Just months earlier, in May 2025, violence erupted at Cal Anderson Park during the MayDayUSA “Don’t Mess With Our Kids” rally, a Christian-led protest against certain educational policies perceived as promoting LGBTQ ideologies. Counter-protesters clashed with attendees, resulting in 23 arrests by the Seattle Police Department.

    Police reports indicated that items were thrown between groups, and one officer required medical treatment after being assaulted. Mayor Harrell attributed the unrest to both the rally participants and “infiltrating anarchists,” underscoring the volatile potential of such gatherings.

    Echoes of Canadian Controversies

    Feucht’s challenges in Seattle follow a string of permit revocations in Canada, where eight cities canceled his tour stops earlier in August 2025.

    Conservative Activist Sean Feucht. Photo credit: Sean Feucht / Facebook.

    In Edmonton, Alberta, on August 22, 2025, Feucht performed on the legislature grounds amid protests from LGBTQ supporters, who displayed messages decrying the event.

    Canadian officials cited public safety and permit issues, but Feucht framed the decisions falsely as “discriminatory against Christians.”

    In West Kelowna, British Columbia, the concert was axed over “public safety” concerns, with Feucht accusing mayors of hypocrisy for allowing pride events while restricting worship services.

    These international setbacks have fueled Feucht’s narrative of persecution. In a video posted on X, he rallied supporters for the Seattle event, stating, “Will you help us bring the fire of God’s presence to Seattle?” and soliciting donations.

    He referenced past Antifa disruptions in Seattle, humorously noting how opponents’ live streams inadvertently spread his message.

    Feucht’s resilience is evident in his statement to Fox News Digital:

    “Every single time we come to worship in Seattle, we face many different kinds of resistance. However, as you’ve seen through the five-year history of Let Us Worship, we refuse to back down for anything.”

    Police Preparedness and Free Speech Debates

    In anticipation of potential unrest, the Seattle Police Department has bolstered its presence at Gas Works Park, a 19-acre (7.7-hectare) site overlooking Lake Union. The department’s strategy draws from lessons learned in May, aiming to prevent escalations while respecting assembly rights. A spokesperson for Mayor Harrell reiterated the city’s commitment to the LGBTQ community, noting, “At the same time, the City strongly celebrates and supports the LGBTQ+ community.”

    This situation underscores broader U.S. tensions surrounding free speech. Legal experts argue that content-based permit denials violate the First Amendment, as affirmed by Harrell. Yet, advocates for vulnerable groups contend that speech perceived as inciteful can lead to real-world harm, prompting calls for nuanced public policy.

    In Seattle, where 26% of residents identify as non-religious according to
    recent surveys, the intersection of faith and politics often sparks debate.

    Feucht’s movement has also drawn support from conservative figures. Pastor Paula White-Cain, a former Trump White House faith advisor, condemned violence at previous events on Fox News’ “Hannity,” alongside journalist Katie Daviscourt. Additionally, reports indicate the FBI is investigating claims of targeted violence against religious groups following evangelical protests in Seattle.

    Looking Ahead: Revival or Division?

    As the concert unfolds, observers anticipate a mix of worship, protest, and police oversight. Feucht’s tour continues post-Seattle, with stops in Missoula, Montana, and Yakima, Washington, before heading to the nation’s capital. His efforts have inspired similar revivals, such as a blue-city pastor reporting tens of thousands attending a Christian crusade earlier this year.

    Critics, however, view these events as part of a larger Christian supremacist strategy, as detailed in The Stranger’s coverage. Edmonton City Councilor Andrew Knack publicly opposed a similar Feucht event, calling it counter to values of inclusion. In contrast, supporters like those on X pray for Feucht’s safety and success, seeing the backlash as affirmation of their cause.

    Ultimately, the Seattle rally encapsulates America’s cultural fault lines. While Feucht frames it as a stand for faith and freedom, opponents see it as a threat to hard-won progress.

    As one protester’s sidewalk message in Edmonton poignantly stated amid the August 22, 2025, gathering: the divide persists. With the event drawing national attention, its outcome may influence future policies on public assemblies in progressive enclaves.

    Summary

    In Seattle, Christian worship leader Sean Feucht defies backlash from LGBTQ groups to hold his “Revive in ’25” concert at Gas Works Park on August 30, 2025. Activists label it harassment and plan counter-events, but Mayor Bruce Harrell upholds First Amendment rights amid safety concerns. This follows Canadian permit denials and echoes past violence at similar rallies, highlighting tensions over free speech and inclusion in progressive cities.

    #SeanFeucht #SeattleRally #ChristianWorship #LGBTQBacklash
    #FirstAmendment #LetUsWorship #ReviveIn25 #SeattleProtests

    TAGS: sean feucht, seattle, christian rally, worship event, bruce harrell,
    lgbtq, gas works park, first amendment, progressive activists, public safety

    Guns, Not Gender: Challenging Dangerous Narratives After Minneapolis Tragedy

    Liz Webster
    -
    0
    Guns, Not Gender: Challenging Dangerous Narratives After Minneapolis Tragedy

    By the Staff of The Stewardship Report: Let the truth-telling begin

    New York, N.Y. — As grief grips Minneapolis in the wake of the horrific shooting at Annunciation Catholic School, a familiar cycle of blame and misinformation has swept across influential media. Right-wing outlets such as Breitbart, Fox News and the New York Post have harnessed the tragedy for sensational headlines and divisive narratives, seizing on the shooter’s transgender identity while sidestepping the urgent reality of gun violence.

    This moment calls us not to succumb to fearmongering, but to reaffirm the principles of truth, context, and compassion that should define responsible journalism.

    Who

    The tragedy centers on Robin Westman, a 23-year-old former student of Annunciation Catholic School, who opened fire during a morning mass, killing two children and injuring seventeen others before taking their own life. Stephen King, acclaimed author and vocal advocate for gun reform, entered the national discourse after urging the public to recognize that access to guns — not gender identity — is the central danger.

    What

    Multiple right-leaning media platforms immediately amplified the shooter’s gender identity, aggressively promoting the notion that transgender status is a factor in mass violence. Their coverage, echoing voices on Fox News and Breitbart, often ignored or minimized mental health issues, hateful messaging in the shooter’s statements, and — most critically — the role of guns in enabling such devastation.

    When

    On August 27, 2025, Minneapolis was again scarred by gun violence, marking the first mass school shooting of the new academic year and the worst school attack since Uvalde in 2022. The media’s rapid pivot to gender-focused blame occurred in the immediate aftermath.

    Where

    The attack took place within the sanctuary of Annunciation Catholic School, a location that should be a bastion of safety and peace.

    Why

    Politically motivated outlets have a clear interest in weaponizing this tragedy to distract from America’s epidemic of gun violence. Leveraging identity politics and moral panic, they hope to shift public focus from systemic failures with gun policy to stigmatize marginalized groups — especially transgender individuals.

    Stephen King points out that access to guns — not gender identity — is the central danger.

    The Media’s Distorting Mirror

    Coverage by the New York Post, Fox News, and others frequently replaced compassion and evidence with inflammatory rhetoric.

    They fixated on Westman’s trans identity, fueling online attacks and reinforcing harmful myths.

    Such narratives ignore established facts: the overwhelming majority of mass shooters are not transgender, and transgender people are far more likely to be victims of violence than perpetrators.

    When ideology trumps accuracy, the public loses sight of what tools truly enable mass murder — access to high-powered firearms.

    Fact Over Spin: What the Data Really Shows

    Despite breathless speculation, the rarity of shooters who are transgender is clear, with multiple studies showing no statistical correlation between gender identity and mass violence.

    On the other hand, the U.S. continues to lead the developed world in gun deaths and school shootings, with 83 campus shootings reported in 2024 alone. Most perpetrators have been cisgender (not transgendered) men. Properly contextualized data demonstrates that blaming identity is a red herring that distracts from the central factor: widespread access to lethal firearms in the U.S.

    The Cost of Scapegoating

    By focusing on sensationalist identity politics, Fox News and the New York Post embolden those who wish to roll back protections for LGBTQ+ people and divert public outrage from necessary gun reform.

    Scapegoating trans people not only fails to explain or prevent violence, it actively harms a community already
    facing disproportionate dangers, both from bigotry and the far more common threat of gun violence itself.

    What Responsible Journalism Looks Like

    Responsible reporting demands thoughtful context, transparency, and a commitment to evidence over ideology. It recognizes that tragedies like the Minneapolis school shooting are enabled by policy failures, not by the gender of those who commit them. As Stephen King insists, the common denominator in these mass shootings is the firearm — not trans identity, not mental illness alone, but the ease of acquiring deadly weapons in America.

    Real journalism fosters dialogue, discourages scapegoating, and seeks solutions that honor those lost by acting for change. Let us challenge those who profit from outrage, and instead, call for common-sense reforms that could save lives.

    Let this be your act of resistance — not through yelling, but through clarity. Not with conspiracy, but with conscience.

    Summary

    Media sensationalism after the Minneapolis school shooting blames the shooter’s transgender identity, but ignores the central issue: guns. Data shows gun access, not identity, drives America’s mass shooting crisis. Scapegoating harms vulnerable communities and distracts from policy solutions. This editorial urges a media focus on facts, empathy, and effective reform, calling for journalism that guides, not divides, in the wake of tragedy.

    #MinneapolisShooting #MediaEthics #GunReformNow
    #TransRightsAreHumanRights #FactOverFear #JournalismMatters

    TAGS: Minneapolis shooting, Annunciation Catholic School, Stephen King, media bias, gun violence,
    Breitbart, New York Post, transgender rights, school shootings, U.S. media, LGBTQ+ issues, hate crimes,
    Fox News, responsible journalism, mass shootings, public discourse, advocacy, The Stewardship Report

    Bahá’í: When Faith’s Universal Message Excludes Some Believers

    Jim Luce
    -
    0
    Bahá’í: When Faith’s Universal Message Excludes Some Believers

    Arthur Brooks’ promotion of Bahá’í teachings overlooks the faith’s discriminatory stance toward LGBTQ+ individuals

    New York, N.Y. – When Arthur C. Brooks recently penned “Five Bahá’í Lessons for a Happier Life” for The Atlantic, describing the Bahá’í faith as a “19th-century Persian offshoot from Islam” with “deep, humanistic teachings we can all benefit from,” he painted an appealing picture of universal wisdom and inclusive spirituality.

    Yet this portrayal glosses over a fundamental contradiction at the heart of Bahá’í doctrine: a faith that proclaims unity and universal love while simultaneously excluding LGBTQ+ individuals from full participation unless they suppress their authentic selves.

    As someone who explored the Bahá’í faith during college, drawn by its emphasis on the unity of humanity and progressive social principles, I discovered firsthand that this supposed universality has significant limitations. The faith’s teachings on human sexuality, particularly regarding homosexuality, create an irreconcilable tension between its proclaimed inclusivity and its actual practices.

    The Allure of Universal Brotherhood

    Arthur C. Brooks recently penned “Five Bahá’í Lessons for a Happier Life” for The Atlantic, describing the Bahá’í faith as a “19th-century Persian offshoot from Islam” with “deep, humanistic teachings we can all benefit from,” he painted an appealing picture of universal wisdom and inclusive spirituality.

    The Bahá’í faith, founded by Bahá’u’lláh in 19th-century Persia, presents itself as a religion for the modern age.

    Its central principles include the unity of God, the unity of religion, and the unity of humanity.

    These teachings emphasize racial equality, gender equity, the elimination of prejudice, and the establishment of world peace.

    For a young person seeking spiritual meaning beyond traditional religious boundaries, such ideals appear profoundly attractive.

    Bahá’í communities often pride themselves on their diversity and welcome newcomers with genuine warmth.

    The faith’s emphasis on independent investigation of truth, the harmony of science and religion, and the elimination of extremes of wealth and poverty resonates with many progressive-minded individuals.

    This initial appeal explains why the faith has attracted followers worldwide, particularly among educated, socially conscious seekers.

    The Bahá’í writings contain numerous passages celebrating human diversity and dignity. Bahá’u’lláh wrote extensively about the nobility of human beings and their inherent worth regardless of background.

    This philosophical foundation creates reasonable expectations that all individuals, regardless of their personal characteristics, would find acceptance within Bahá’í communities.

    The Reality of Conditional Acceptance

    However, beneath this veneer of universal acceptance lies a more complex reality. Bahá’í teachings
    explicitly consider same-sex relationships as contrary to divine law. The Universal House of Justice,
    the faith’s supreme governing body, has repeatedly affirmed that marriage is exclusively between
    one man and one woman, and that sexual relations outside this framework are prohibited.

    For LGBTQ+ individuals, this creates an impossible choice: remain true to their authentic selves while being considered spiritually deficient, or suppress fundamental aspects of their identity to gain full acceptance within the community. This is not the kind of “happiness” that Brooks suggests Bahá’í teachings can provide to “all” people.

    The Bahá’í approach to homosexuality differs from some other religions in that it doesn’t condemn individuals for their orientation, but it does prohibit them from expressing their sexuality in loving, committed relationships. Bahá’í institutions often frame this as a test or spiritual challenge, suggesting that LGBTQ+ individuals should view their orientation as an opportunity for spiritual growth through self-denial.

    The Harm of Spiritual Exclusion

    This conditional acceptance causes real psychological and spiritual harm. Young LGBTQ+ individuals drawn to Bahá’í teachings often experience profound disappointment and rejection when they discover these limitations. The message they receive is that their capacity for love and partnership—fundamental human experiences—is somehow flawed or spiritually inferior.

    The impact extends beyond individual disappointment. LGBTQ+ Bahá’ís often struggle with cognitive dissonance, trying to reconcile their love for the faith’s principles with its rejection of their authentic selves. Some attempt to remain celibate, sacrificing intimate companionship for spiritual belonging. Others leave the faith entirely, often experiencing grief over the loss of a spiritual community they had hoped would be their permanent home.

    Bahá’í communities lose valuable members and perspectives when they maintain these exclusionary policies. The faith’s emphasis on diversity and unity rings hollow when it systematically excludes individuals based on their sexual orientation or gender identity.

    The Inconsistency of Progressive Values

    The Bahá’í faith‘s stance on LGBTQ+ issues creates internal contradictions that undermine its progressive credentials. While the faith advocates for racial equality and women’s rights—positions that were revolutionary in the 19th century—it maintains conservative positions on sexuality that increasingly conflict with contemporary understanding of human rights and dignity.

    This inconsistency becomes particularly apparent when considering the faith’s emphasis on the elimination of prejudice. Bahá’í communities work actively to overcome racial, ethnic, and economic prejudices, yet they maintain institutional prejudice against LGBTQ+ individuals. The cognitive dissonance required to maintain these contradictory positions weakens the faith’s moral authority on other social justice issues.

    Modern Bahá’í apologetics often attempt to resolve this tension by arguing that divine law transcends human understanding, or that accepting LGBTQ+ relationships would compromise the faith’s integrity. However, these arguments fail to address the fundamental question of whether a truly loving God would create individuals with innate orientations only to prohibit them from expressing love in meaningful relationships.

    Moving Beyond Conditional Universality

    Brooks’ article, while well-intentioned, perpetuates a sanitized version of Bahá’í teachings that ignores their exclusionary aspects. True universality cannot coexist with systematic discrimination against any group of people. When religious leaders and commentators promote “universal” teachings while ignoring their discriminatory elements, they participate in a form of spiritual whitewashing that obscures real harm.

    Religious communities genuinely committed to unity and love must grapple honestly with their limitations and work toward genuine inclusion. This requires more than tolerance or conditional acceptance—it demands full recognition of LGBTQ+ individuals’ dignity and their right to loving relationships.

    The path to authentic universality requires religious institutions to examine their teachings critically and consider whether inherited doctrines truly reflect divine love or human prejudice. Until the Bahá’í faith addresses its treatment of LGBTQ+ individuals, its claims to universality remain incomplete and its promise of happiness remains available only to those who fit predetermined categories of acceptability.

    Bahá’í: When Faith’s Universal Message Excludes Some Believers (Aug. 28, 2025)

    Summary

    Arthur Brooks’ recent Atlantic article promoting Bahá’í teachings as universally beneficial overlooks the faith’s discriminatory stance toward LGBTQ+ individuals. While the Bahá’í faith proclaims unity and universal love, it excludes gay and lesbian believers from full participation unless they suppress their authentic selves. This conditional acceptance causes real psychological harm and undermines the faith’s progressive credentials, creating internal contradictions between its stated values and actual practices.

    #BahaiFaith #LGBTQ #ReligiousDiscrimination #SpiritualInclusion
    #UniversalLove #ReligiousHypocrisy #AtlanticMagazine #ArthurBrooks

    TAGS: faith and sexuality, religious exclusion, Bahá’í teachings, LGBTQ discrimination, universal love,
    spiritual acceptance, religious hypocrisy, progressive religion, conditional inclusion, authentic spirituality
    Jim Luce Writes on Faith, Religion and Cults
    Jim Luce Writes on LGBTQ+ Issues

    Korean Firefighter’s Death Spurs Calls to Bolster Trauma Care

    John Laing
    -
    0
    Korean Firefighter’s Death Spurs Calls to Bolster Trauma Care

    Policies in Seoul lag in offering lasting support for frontline responders

    Editor John Laing.

    New York, N.Y. – The recent death of an unnamed firefighter who responded to the 2022 Itaewon disaster in South Korea has intensified calls to overhaul and strengthen the nation’s trauma care system. His passing highlights wider concerns over the country’s preparedness for social emergencies and the psychological toll on its first responders.

    This tragedy, the 160th official fatality linked to the catastrophic crowd crush, renews criticism of the failure to provide adequate, long-term support for frontline workers and survivors grappling with psychological trauma. Despite a history of high-profile social disasters in recent decades, systemic support structures remain underdeveloped.

    On Wednesday, police in Siheung, Gyeonggi Province, confirmed that the body of a firefighter, who had been missing for 10 days, was discovered without any signs of foul play. Authorities stated the 30-year-old appeared to have taken his own life. At the family’s request, an autopsy will not be conducted. He left behind notes expressing sorrow to loved ones, though no formal will was found.

    The firefighter, who had served as a first responder since 2017, was among the teams dispatched to the Itaewon disaster site on October 29, 2022. That night, more than 150 people were killed when a massive crowd became packed into a narrow, sloped alley near the Hamilton Hotel in central Seoul during post-pandemic Halloween celebrations.

    Evening street scene in Seoul’s Itaewon district before the 2022 disaster.

    Insufficient Support and Growing Concerns

    Following his service at the disaster, the firefighter developed depression and received nine psychiatric consultations through the National Fire Agency. However, mental health experts argue this level of intervention was likely insufficient. Psychiatric counselors note that while a dozen sessions might help individuals coping with acute stress, more severe trauma and depression, common after such catastrophic events, typically require between 24 and 52 sessions of sustained therapy.

    “If you look at cases abroad, like 9/11, there is no fixed term for treating disaster survivors. Long-term, often indefinite support is essential,” said Dr. Kim Hyun-soo at Myongji Hospital. “National support for disaster trauma must be both extensive and sustained, especially for first responders.”

    Government figures indicate that between October 2022 and September 2023, approximately 1,316 firefighters involved in the Itaewon emergency response received crisis counseling. Of those, 142 received in-depth sessions and hospital referrals. Despite these efforts, many first responders have reported limited follow-up care and a significant lack of adequate long-term support, leaving them to manage their psychological wounds largely on their own.

    Police confirmed that the body of the unnamed firefighter, who had been missing for 10 days, was discovered without any signs of foul play.

    A Chorus of Voices Demands Reform

    The firefighter’s death has deeply resonated with other survivors and the bereaved families of the Itaewon disaster. On Wednesday, a group representing the families mourned his passing and urged authorities to extend trauma care beyond the immediate victims to include first responders and even local merchants who provided assistance at the scene.

    Activist groups have echoed these concerns, pointing to critical blind spots in South Korea’s disaster relief laws. “Korea’s laws only recognize ‘disaster victims’ in a narrow sense, leaving out the bereaved and traumatized rescuers, witnesses and supporters. There is no clear system to support their mental health and basic rights,” the civic group Life Safety Citizen Net said in a statement.

    The group drew parallels to past tragedies, highlighting a persistent pattern of neglect. “After the Sewol Ferry disaster, a rescue diver died from trauma. A firefighter responding to Itaewon now lives apart from his family, working as a manual laborer with his trauma unhealed. The government must pass meaningful safety regulations and recognize the rights and dignity of all affected.”

    Labor unions, including the Korean Government Employees’ Union, have demanded sweeping reforms. “This incident isn’t just one person’s tragedy; it’s a consequence of repeated disasters and the lack of meaningful trauma care for frontline workers. Reforming counseling, boosting mental health resources, improving working conditions and expanding staff are urgent national priorities,” the union stated.

    International Practices vs. Korean Reality

    Most countries with advanced disaster response systems acknowledge the profound risk of trauma for emergency workers and provide a wider range of care options compared to South Korea. Nations with experience in managing such disasters, such as the U.S. and Japan, have continually reformed their systems in response to major events.

    After tragedies like 9/11 and various mass shootings, the U.S. dedicated significant resources to long-term mental health services for directly affected personnel. These programs include specialized treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), suicide prevention initiatives, and ongoing monitoring. Organizations like the National Fallen Firefighters Foundation provide crucial trauma care and family support for responders who develop lasting symptoms.

    Neighboring Japan, while also facing challenges in providing long-term trauma care for first responders, has made strides in improving relief accommodation standards and disaster planning, which now includes more robust mental health support for personnel.

    Despite its own history of devastating social disasters—including the Seongsu Bridge collapse in 1994, the Sampoong Department Store collapse in 1995, the Daegu subway fire in 2003, the Sewol ferry sinking in 2014, and the Itaewon disaster in 2022—South Korea continues to struggle with providing long-term mental health care for survivors and responders, compounded by persistent personnel shortages among frontline staff.

    Acknowledgment and a Path Forward

    The tragedy has prompted high-level acknowledgment of the systemic shortcomings. President Lee Jae Myung expressed his condolences for the death of the firefighter and promised to make efforts to extend support to victims, families, and first responders to help them overcome the trauma caused by high-profile disasters.

    “Our society has not established a sufficient social safety net and psychological support system needed to fully face and heal from national and collective traumas,” Lee stated in a Facebook post on Wednesday. “To address such issues, our society needs to share the pain, recognize our collective responsibility with gravity and join forces for recovery.”

    This incident serves as a stark reminder that the duties of first responders do not end when the immediate crisis is over; for many, the psychological battle is just beginning. The calls for change now echo throughout the country, demanding that the government build a system of care worthy of those who run toward danger.

    Summary

    The death of a South Korean firefighter, a first responder at the 2022 Itaewon disaster, has ignited urgent calls for comprehensive trauma care reform. Having developed depression after the event, his suicide highlights the insufficient psychological support provided to frontline workers. Experts, activists, and unions are demanding sustained, long-term mental health services, pointing to international models in the U.S. and Japan. This tragedy underscores a systemic failure in South Korea’s disaster response, prompting promises of change from government officials.

    #FirstResponders #MentalHealth #TraumaCare #Itaewon #SouthKorea
    #EmergencyServices #Firefighter #MentalHealthAwareness

    Tags: South Korea, Itaewon Disaster, First Responders, Trauma Care, Mental Health,
    PTSD, National Fire Agency, Sewol Ferry

    Pope Leo XIV Demands Gaza Ceasefire Amid Rising Tensions

    Liz Webster
    -
    0
    Pope Leo XIV Demands Gaza Ceasefire Amid Rising Tensions

    Pope Leo XIV Demands Gaza Ceasefire Amid Rising Tensions

    Pontiff condemns collective punishment and forced displacement, calls for immediate humanitarian intervention

    Vatican City — In a powerful address delivered during his general audience on August 27, 2025, Pope Leo XIV issued an urgent plea for an immediate end to the ongoing Israel-Hamas conflict, condemning what he termed “collective punishment” and forced displacement of civilians in Gaza. The pontiff’s intervention comes at a critical juncture as the conflict enters its second year with devastating humanitarian consequences.

    The war, which began following Hamas‘s devastating October 7, 2023 attack that killed approximately 1,200 Israelis and resulted in 251 hostages being taken, has triggered an extensive Israeli military offensive in Gaza City. The pontiff’s words carry particular weight as the international community grapples with escalating violence and mounting civilian casualties.

    Vatican Cites International Law Violations

    During his address to thousands of faithful gathered in St. Peter’s Square, Pope Leo XIV directly referenced international law in his condemnation of current military tactics. The pontiff emphasized that the protection of civilian populations must remain paramount, regardless of military objectives.

    “The deliberate targeting of civilian infrastructure and the systematic displacement of entire communities constitutes a violation of fundamental human rights principles,” the pope declared, his voice carrying across the packed square. His words resonated with growing international concern over the humanitarian crisis unfolding in the Palestinian territory.

    The Vatican‘s position aligns with recent statements from United Nations officials and international human rights organizations who have expressed alarm over the scope of civilian suffering. The pontiff’s intervention represents one of the most direct papal statements on the conflict since its escalation.

    Christian Communities Under Siege

    Pope Leo XIV paid particular attention to the plight of Christian communities in Gaza, many of whom have sought refuge in church compounds and Christian institutions throughout the territory. The pontiff noted that these facilities, traditionally considered safe havens, have been subjected to heavy bombardment despite their protected status under international conventions.

    “Our Christian brothers and sisters in Gaza have opened their doors to all who seek shelter, regardless of faith or background,” the pope stated. “These sacred spaces must be respected and protected as sanctuaries of peace amid the chaos of war.”

    The Greek Orthodox and Catholic churches in Gaza have reportedly sheltered hundreds of displaced families, providing not only physical protection but also essential services including medical care and food distribution. However, several church facilities have sustained damage from nearby strikes, raising concerns about the safety of both religious communities and displaced civilians.

    Hostage Crisis Remains Critical

    The pontiff made specific reference to the ongoing hostage situation, noting that approximately 50 individuals remain in Hamas custody nearly two years after their initial capture. Israeli forces have successfully rescued eight hostages alive, but the fate of the remaining captives continues to cast a shadow over diplomatic efforts.

    “Every human life is sacred and precious in the eyes of God,” Pope Leo XIV emphasized. “We cannot accept that innocent people remain in captivity while their families endure unimaginable anguish. Their immediate and unconditional release is not just a political necessity but a moral imperative.”

    The pope’s appeal for hostage release comes as international mediators, including Egyptian and Qatari officials, continue efforts to broker a comprehensive agreement that would secure the release of remaining captives in exchange for a sustained ceasefire and prisoner exchanges.

    Humanitarian Aid Access Blocked

    One of the most pressing issues highlighted by the pontiff was the systematic obstruction of humanitarian aid delivery to Gaza‘s civilian population.

    United Nations agencies and international relief organizations have reported significant difficulties in accessing areas most affected by the conflict, leaving vulnerable populations without essential supplies.

    “The denial of humanitarian assistance to those who need it most represents a fundamental violation of Christian charity and international humanitarian law,” the pope declared.

    “Food, medicine, and shelter are basic human needs that transcend political divisions and military objectives.”

    Current estimates suggest that over 2.3 million people in Gaza depend on humanitarian assistance, with many lacking access to clean water, adequate medical care, and sufficient food supplies.

    The World Health Organization has warned of potential disease outbreaks due to deteriorating sanitary conditions and overcrowding in temporary shelters.

    International Community Response

    The pope’s intervention has drawn support from various international leaders and religious organizations worldwide. European Union officials have echoed the Vatican‘s call for immediate ceasefire negotiations, while several African and Latin American countries have praised the pontiff’s humanitarian focus.

    Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby issued a statement supporting Pope Leo XIV’s appeal, emphasizing the need for interfaith cooperation in addressing the humanitarian crisis. Similarly, prominent Islamic scholars have welcomed the Vatican‘s position as consistent with shared humanitarian values across religious traditions.

    The United States State Department acknowledged the pope’s statement while reaffirming its commitment to Israel‘s right to self-defense. However, U.S. officials have increasingly emphasized the importance of minimizing civilian casualties and ensuring humanitarian aid access.

    Path Forward Uncertain

    Despite growing international pressure for a ceasefire, prospects for immediate resolution remain unclear. Israeli officials have indicated their intention to continue military operations until Hamas‘s military capabilities are significantly degraded and hostages are returned.

    Hamas leadership, meanwhile, has maintained that any lasting agreement must include concrete steps toward Palestinian statehood and the lifting of the blockade that has restricted movement in and out of Gaza for over a decade.

    The pope’s intervention represents a significant moral voice in these discussions, potentially influencing Catholic politicians and leaders worldwide who may play crucial roles in future diplomatic initiatives.

    As the conflict continues to exact a devastating toll on civilian populations, Pope Leo XIV’s call for an end to collective punishment and forced displacement serves as a reminder of the humanitarian principles that must guide international responses to armed conflicts. The pontiff’s words carry particular significance as the world watches the unfolding tragedy in Gaza and searches for pathways toward sustainable peace.

    Summary

    Pope Leo XIV’s comprehensive summary for audio: Pope Leo XIV called for an immediate end to the Israel-Hamas conflict on August 27, 2025, during his Vatican general audience. The pontiff condemned collective punishment and forced displacement in Gaza, citing international law violations. He pleaded for a permanent ceasefire, humanitarian aid access, and the release of 50 remaining hostages held by Hamas. The pope’s appeal highlights growing international concern over civilian suffering and escalating violence in the region as Israel plans its Gaza City offensive.

    #PopeGaza #VaticanPeace #GazaCeasefire #HumanitarianCrisis #IsraelHamas
    #ChristianSolidarity #InternationalLaw #CivilianProtection #HolyLand #PeaceEfforts

    TAGS: Vatican, Pope Leo XIV, Israel-Hamas conflict, collective punishment, humanitarian crisis, ceasefire,
    Gaza, hostages, international law, Christian communities, displacement, civilian casualties, peace negotiations

    Lesbian DACA Recipient Detained Despite Legal Protections

    Liz Webster
    -
    0
    Lesbian DACA Recipient Detained Despite Legal Protections

    Immigration advocates sound alarm over Catalina Santiago’s arrest at El Paso airport without clear justification

    New York, N.Y. – A young immigration rights activist’s detention has sparked nationwide concern about the vulnerability of DACA recipients under current U.S. immigration policies.

    Border Patrol Arrests Protected Dreamer at Airport

    Catalina “Xochitl” Santiago was traveling through El Paso International Airport on August 3 when two border patrol agents intercepted her past the security checkpoint.

    The 28-year-old DACA beneficiary was questioned about her employment documents before being taken to an immigration detention center.

    “They have no legal basis for why they detained her or why they’re holding her or why they’re trying to deport her,” said Desiree Miller, Santiago’s spouse, in an interview with The Guardian.

    Santiago had been granted temporary protection under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, which allows qualifying individuals who arrived in the United States as children to live and work legally. She had successfully renewed her DACA status seven times without incident.

    A DACA Dreamer is an undocumented immigrant who was brought to the United States as a child, has been educated in the U.S., and qualifies for the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program. DACA provides temporary protection from deportation and work authorization but does not offer a pathway to citizenship.

    Growing Vulnerability of Dreamers Nationwide

    Santiago’s case represents a troubling trend affecting the nation’s 525,000 DACA recipients. The Obama-era program has faced increasing challenges, with the current administration attempting to strip Dreamers of their protections despite no regulatory changes.

    In July, Department of Homeland Security assistant press secretary Tricia McLaughlin made the false claim that “DACA does not confer any form of legal status in this country” and encouraged recipients to self-deport.

    Recent cases underscore this escalation. Javier Diaz Santana, a deaf and mute DACA recipient, was detained during a workplace raid, with officials confiscating his communication tools. Jose Valdovinos faced similar treatment when arrested outside a gas station while riding as a passenger with his wife.

    “We hadn’t seen this before,” said José, Santiago’s older brother and fellow DACA recipient. “It was very fast and very aggressive.”

    Catalina “Xochitl” Santiago was traveling through El Paso International Airport when two border patrol agents intercepted her past the security checkpoint.

    Questionable Detention Circumstances Raise Concerns

    Immigration officials cited charges of “trespassing, possession of narcotics and drug paraphernalia” as grounds for Santiago’s arrest. However, Miller emphasized that Santiago had not been convicted of any crimes, and her record had never prevented previous DACA renewals.

    Santiago was traveling to Austin for a conference on family and community-run farms when detained. Miller, who works with Santiago at a local community organization, had taken an earlier flight to the same event.

    The arrest followed a pattern of increased scrutiny at airports. Santiago had been stopped during previous travels but never detained. This time, she managed to send Miller a shaky video showing border patrol officers demanding she put away her phone and accompany them for questioning.

    Detention Conditions and Family Impact

    From the detention facility, Santiago has reported difficult conditions including constant lighting that prevents sleep, loud guards, and inadequate food and medical care. José noted hearing exhaustion in his sister’s voice during phone calls but praised her resilient spirit.

    The couple, who married in January, had been considering applying for a green card through Miller’s U.S. citizenship. The detention has disrupted these plans and created emotional turmoil for the family.

    “It’s really hard for me to sleep and eat and do anything out here comfortably, knowing that she’s not able to sleep in there,” Miller said. “It’s like the constant threat that they could come and take someone you love.”

    Philadelphia joins National Week to Demand the Release of Catalina “Xóchitl” Santiago. Community members hold vigil outside City Hall in solidarity with detained DACA recipient.

    Nationwide Advocacy Response

    Santiago’s detention has prompted solidarity actions across the country. Activists have organized vigils in El Paso, Texas; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Grand Rapids, Michigan; Long Island; Boston; Tempe, Arizona; and Seattle to protest her treatment.

    The immigration rights community views Santiago’s case as emblematic of broader threats facing DACA recipients nationwide. Her work as a community organizer and immigration activist has made her situation particularly visible to advocacy groups monitoring administration policies.

    Legal Hearing Determines Future

    Santiago appeared before an immigration judge on Wednesday to determine whether she would be released or remain in detention. The hearing represents a crucial moment for both her individual case and broader DACA policy implications.

    Immigration advocates continue emphasizing that Santiago entered the U.S. at age eight with her family and has maintained legal status through DACA. They argue her detention lacks justification and reflects dangerous targeting of protected individuals.

    Miller stressed the human cost of current immigration enforcement: “The administration is messaging that they’re deporting criminals and illegal aliens. They use these words to try to take away from the fact that the people being detained are human, that they are family members.”

    Lesbian DACA Recipient Detained Despite Legal Protections (Aug. 27, 2025)

    #DACARights #ImmigrationJustice #DreamersUnderAttack #ProtectDACA
    #ImmigrationDetention #CatalinaSantiago #BorderPatrol #DreamersRights

    Tags: DACA, immigration detention, Dreamers, border patrol, immigration rights,
    Catalina Santiago, DHS, Obama-era program, immigration enforcement, El Paso

    Poetry: “The Punishment of Becoming” by Rayne LaDuex

    Liz Webster
    -
    0
    Poetry: “The Punishment of Becoming” by Rayne LaDuex

    Their writing often explores themes of introspection, love, loss, and resilience

    “The Punishment of Becoming”

    A Poem by Rayne LaDuex

    Oscar Wilde once said that to know exactly what you want to be in life is a punishment. To say it aloud, to name yourself, is to bind yourself to it. If you declare “I will be a teacher,” then you are no longer a person who teaches but a teacher forever. If you say “I will be a soldier,” you become a soldier not just in war but in spirit. If you say “I will be a judge,” you will wear the robes long after the courtroom empties. The title begins to own you. It shapes the way others see you and, worse, the way you see yourself. What once was freedom becomes a sentence.

    Step into the quiet spaces where words speak volumes and emotions echo in the stillness. Silence is a poignant compilation of poetry, short stories, monologues, journal entries, and thoughts, capturing the intricate dance of human experiences—both spoken and unspoken. This collection invites you to explore moments of vulnerability, triumph, love, and loss through a lens that celebrates the power of reflection. From the rhythm of poetic verses to the depth of story-telling, each piece offers a window into the raw and relatable intricacies of life. With themes that touch on identity, resilience, connection, and the beauty found in still moments,  Silence  serves as both a sanctuary and a catalyst—a reminder that within the quiet, we find our truest selves. For readers who seek solace, inspiration, and the profound within the subtle, Silence is a book to treasure, ponder, and revisit time and again.

    I think that is why I never answered the question the way I was supposed to. You know the one—every child gets asked it. “What do you want to be when you grow up?” The expected answers are neat and easy. A doctor. A lawyer. An athlete. A firefighter. Titles you can put on a name tag. Roles you can rehearse for. I never wanted to hand over that kind of power to a single word.

    So I always said, successful.

    That was my answer. Not a profession, not a destination, but a direction. It was not the kind of answer adults liked to hear. They wanted something concrete, something they could picture, something they could nod and smile at. But I knew even then that I did not want to live inside one mask. I wanted to keep learning, keep shifting, keep becoming. I wanted to be a student forever.

    And to be a student is not to cling to a title, but to embrace a verb. That is what I have come to understand. Success, for me, is not a crown placed on the head, not a medal hung on the chest, not a title printed on a business card. Success is movement. Success is process. Success is the verb.

    Think about it. A teacher may teach, but then what? A soldier may fight, but then what? A judge may rule, but then what? The nouns stop. They plant you in the ground. They tell you who you are, and that is the end of it. But the verb keeps moving. To learn. To grow. To strive. To love. These are alive. They bend. They stretch. They carry you forward into places you could not have planned.

    The world loves nouns. They are safe. They are tidy. They are something you can stamp onto a resume, something you can fold into conversation at a dinner table. But life itself is written in verbs. It is not artist, it is to create. It is not lover, it is to love. It is not leader, it is to guide. The nouns are monuments; the verbs are movements.

    Maybe Wilde was right. Maybe the punishment of knowing what you want to be is that you are doomed to become exactly that and nothing more. But if that is true, then perhaps the only way out is never to answer with a noun at all. Perhaps the only freedom is to answer with motion.

    So when I say I want to be successful, I do not mean what the world imagines. I do not mean the corner office or the heavy wallet or the trophies lined up on the shelf. I mean successful as a student of life. I mean successful as someone who refuses to stop learning, who refuses to stop becoming. I mean successful as someone who is always reaching, always just on the edge of the next discovery.

    My success lives in the unfinished sentence. My success is in the ellipses, in the space that says there is still more to come.

    Because in the end, it is not the noun that defines us. It is the verb that carries us. It is not what we are. It is what we are becoming.And when I finally burn out, I hope the stars keep their silence. Let them be indifferent. Let them spin on. For in that irrelevance, I found reason enough to love, to suffer, to create, to be.

    Rayne LaDuex is a passionate writer of poetry and short stories that delve into the raw and often unspoken facets of human experience. Drawing inspiration from the quiet moments of life and the intricate emotions that weave our stories, LaDuex creates work that is both deeply personal and universally resonant. Their writing often explores themes of introspection, love, loss, and resilience.

    In addition to writing, LaDuex balances creativity with a career in project management and serves their community as a high school football coach, helping to mentor and inspire the next generation. They find harmony between structure and imagination, weaving these experiences into their art. Silence is their debut collection, a heartfelt offering to those who find solace in words and the spaces between them.

    Order Silence here.

    Summary

    Rayne LaDuex’s poem The Punishment of Becoming explores the delicate balance between identity and growth, challenging the notion that choosing a title limits personal freedom. Through introspective reflection, LaDuex advocates for embracing life as a continuous verb rather than a static noun, encouraging readers to pursue success through perpetual learning and transformation. This evocative work resonates with those seeking meaning in motion, not destination, and highlights the power found in remaining unfinished.

    #Resilience #RayneLaDuex #PersonalGrowth #Success #ProcessOverProduct
    #Introspection #Poetry #CreativeWriting #ThePunishmentOfBecoming #Identity

    TAGS: poetry, Rayne LaDuex, introspection, identity, personal growth, resilience,
    creative writing, process, transformation, success, The Punishment of Becoming

    Trump Threatens Criminal Charges Against Billionaire George Soros

    Jim Luce
    -
    0
    Trump Threatens Criminal Charges Against Billionaire George Soros

    President Revives Unsubstantiated Claims About Philanthropist’s Role in Civil Unrest and Calls for Prosecution

    New York, N.Y. – President Donald Trump [Luce Index™ score: 35/100] has escalated rhetoric against billionaire philanthropist George Soros [Luce Index™ score: 89/100], threatening criminal charges based on unproven allegations that the Hungarian American financier supported riots across the United States.

    The renewed attacks on Soros, a frequent target of far-right conspiracy theories, mark another chapter in the president’s pattern of targeting prominent Democratic donors and liberal activists.

    Speaking at a rally in Pennsylvania over the weekend, Trump claimed without evidence that Soros “funded the destruction of American cities” and declared that the 94-year-old should “face the full force of American justice.” The president’s remarks drew immediate condemnation from civil rights organizations and legal experts, who characterized the threats as dangerous rhetoric that could incite violence against the Holocaust survivor and his family.

    Right-wing media such as FOX and The Washington Examiner are amplifying Trump’s threats against the Soros family.

    Baseless Allegations Resurface

    The president’s latest accusations against Soros echo long-standing conspiracy theories that have circulated in far-right circles for years.

    George Soros founded the Open Society Foundations in New York City. Photo credit: Open Society Foundations.

    These unfounded claims typically assert that Soros, through his Open Society Foundations, secretly orchestrates civil unrest, election interference, and various progressive political movements worldwide.

    Law enforcement agencies and fact-checking organizations have repeatedly debunked these theories, finding no credible evidence to support such allegations.

    Soros, who has donated billions to democratic institutions and human rights causes globally, has become a lightning rod for antisemitic conspiracy theories.

    The Anti-Defamation League has documented how references to Soros often serve as coded language for antisemitic tropes about Jewish control of global events.

    The organization has tracked a significant increase in Soros-related conspiracy theories since the 2016 election cycle.

    The Open Society Foundations issued a statement rejecting the president’s claims as “categorically false and deeply irresponsible.” The organization emphasized its commitment to supporting democratic institutions, human rights, and criminal justice reform through transparent and legal means.

    Legal Experts Question Viability of Charges

    Constitutional law scholars and former federal prosecutors have expressed skepticism about the legal basis for any potential charges against Soros. Professor Sarah Williams of Georgetown University Law Center noted that political donations and advocacy, even when controversial, are protected forms of speech under the First Amendment.

    Son Alexander Soros is today chair of the Open Society Foundations. Photo credit: Open Society Foundations.

    “The president’s threats appear to conflate legitimate political activity with criminal conduct,” Williams explained. “Without specific evidence of illegal actions, these accusations seem designed more for political theater than actual law enforcement.”

    Former Justice Department official Michael Chen echoed these concerns, pointing out that federal prosecutors typically require substantial evidence before pursuing charges against high-profile individuals.

    “Vague allegations about ‘funding riots’ without concrete proof of coordination or incitement would be unlikely to survive prosecutorial scrutiny,” Chen observed.

    The Department of Justice has not commented on the president’s statements or indicated any active investigation into Soros‘s activities. However, legal experts warn that politicization of the justice system could undermine public confidence in law enforcement institutions.

    Rolling Stone: “President Donald Trump is continuing to transform the Justice Department into a tool for vengeance against his political enemies, including billionaire philanthropist and Democratic donor George Soros.”

    Political Ramifications and Responses

    The president’s targeting of Soros has drawn sharp criticism from Democratic leaders and some Republicans who view the rhetoric as inflammatory and potentially dangerous.

    Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer condemned the threats as “authoritarian tactics” that have no place in American democracy.

    Several GOP lawmakers, speaking on condition of anonymity, expressed concern about the president’s increasingly aggressive language toward political opponents.

    One House Republican noted that such rhetoric could complicate the party’s efforts to appeal to moderate voters ahead of upcoming elections.

    Soros‘s allies in the philanthropic community have rallied to defend the financier, with several major donors issuing joint statements supporting his work.

    The Council on Foundations released a letter signed by more than 100 philanthropic leaders denouncing what they termed “attacks on charitable giving and civic engagement.”

    As founder of The James Jay Dudley Luce Foundation, I state emphatically that The James Jay Dudley Luce Foundation against philanthropic organizations needs to be called out and countered as strongly as possible.

    Historical Context of Anti-Soros Rhetoric

    The current controversy represents the latest escalation in a years-long campaign against Soros by conservative media figures and politicians.

    The billionaire has faced similar accusations during previous election cycles, with conspiracy theories often intensifying during periods of civil unrest or political tension.

    Security experts note that Soros and his family have been targets of multiple threats and attempted attacks in recent years.

    In 2018, a pipe bomb was delivered to Soros‘s home in New York, and authorities have investigated numerous other incidents involving threats against the philanthropist and his organizations.

    The Federal Bureau of Investigation has documented cases where online conspiracy theories about Soros have inspired real-world violence.

    A 2019 domestic terrorism report highlighted the role of antisemitic conspiracy theories in radicalizing individuals toward violent extremism.

    Open Society Foundations graphic, “Where we work.” Image credit: Open Society Foundations.

    International Implications

    The president’s rhetoric against Soros has also drawn attention from international observers, particularly in Europe where the philanthropist has faced similar attacks from authoritarian leaders.

    Donald Trump and Viktor Orbán at Mar-a-Lago. Photo credit: Viktor Orbán / Facebook.

    Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán [Luce Index™ score: 39/100] has conducted extensive campaigns against Soros, forcing the closure of Central European University in Budapest.

    European Union officials have expressed concern about the spread of anti-Soros conspiracy theories across the Atlantic, viewing such rhetoric as part of broader attacks on democratic institutions and civil society organizations.

    The European Parliament has passed resolutions condemning antisemitic conspiracy theories and their use by political leaders.

    Diplomatic sources suggest that continued targeting of Soros could complicate U.S. relationships with allies who view the philanthropist as a defender of democratic values.

    Several European governments have publicly supported Soros‘s organizations and condemned attempts to criminalize their activities.

    As the controversy continues to unfold, civil rights advocates warn that the president’s rhetoric could have lasting consequences for political discourse and public safety. The incident highlights ongoing tensions between free speech protections and the potential for inflammatory political language to inspire violence against targeted individuals.

    Summary

    President Trump has threatened criminal charges against billionaire philanthropist George Soros, claiming without evidence that Soros funded riots across America. Legal experts question the viability of such charges, noting that political donations are protected speech. Civil rights organizations condemn the threats as dangerous rhetoric targeting a Holocaust survivor. The accusations echo long-standing antisemitic conspiracy theories. Democratic leaders and some Republicans criticize the inflammatory language, warning it could undermine democratic institutions and public safety.

    #TrumpSoros #PoliticalRhetoric #ConspiracyTheories #Antisemitism #FreeSpeech #DemocraticInstitutions #CivilRights
    TAGS: George Soros, criminal charges, conspiracy theories, antisemitism, political rhetoric, Open Society Foundations,
    Trump, civil rights, First Amendment, Justice Department, Holocaust survivor, philanthropist, far-right, Democratic donors

    Public Caning in Aceh, Indonesia Highlights LGBTQ+ Rights Crisis

    John Laing
    -
    0
    Public Caning in Aceh, Indonesia Highlights LGBTQ+ Rights Crisis

    Men punished for same-sex affection in Banda Aceh under strict Sharia law sparks global human rights outcry

    Editor John Laing.

    New York, N.Y. – Two men faced public humiliation and physical punishment in Indonesia‘s Banda Aceh province this week, receiving dozens of cane strikes for embracing and kissing in what authorities deemed a violation of strict Sharia law.

    The brutal spectacle, witnessed by hundreds of onlookers, has reignited international debate about human rights violations and the intersection of religious law with personal freedoms in the world’s largest Muslim-majority nation.

    The punishment, carried out by hooded executioners in a public square, represents the harsh reality faced by LGBTQ+ individuals in Aceh province, the only region in Indonesia where Islamic law is fully implemented. For those who have worked in the region, the scene evokes painful memories of the risks faced by anyone whose identity conflicts with the area’s rigid interpretation of Islamic jurisprudence.

    A Personal Testament to Danger

    Following the devastating 2004 tsunami that claimed over 170,000 lives in Aceh province alone, international aid organizations flooded the region to provide relief and reconstruction support. Among them was Orphans International Sumatra, a children’s aid project that operated for three years in the aftermath of the disaster. What made this organization unique was not just its mission, but its leadership: at the helm was Jim Luce, believed to be the only openly gay man heading an international children’s aid project at the time.

    The decision to maintain transparency about his sexual orientation while working in
    Banda Aceh required extraordinary courage. Luce’s Wikipedia entry openly listed his
    romantic partner as a man, making him vulnerable to severe punishment under the
    province’s interpretation of Sharia law, where homosexuality is considered a capital
    offense. The risks were not theoretical—they were immediate and life-threatening.

    “I visited our campus and stayed for weeks at a time for the three years we were on the ground there, risking bodily harm each and every time I visited,” Luce recalled. The threat was constant and real, as strict Islamic adherents in the region can impose the death penalty or public caning for homosexuality.

    Jim Luce founded Orphans International Sumatra after the Tsunami in spite of being openly gay in an Islamic region adhering to Sharia Law where LGBTQ+ individuals can be caned or killed.

    Breaking Barriers in Humanitarian Work

    “Flagellation de Notre Seigneur Jesus Christ” by William-Adolphe Bouguereau (1880) portrays Jesus bound to a column and subjected to intense physical and spiritual suffering.

    Luce’s openness about his sexuality challenged prevailing stereotypes that have long excluded LGBTQ+ individuals from leadership roles in children’s aid organizations.

    The persistent and unfounded belief that gay men pose a threat to children has historically forced many qualified humanitarian workers to remain closeted or avoid child-focused aid work entirely.

    Research consistently demonstrates that heterosexual men are statistically more likely to be involved in pedophilia than LGBTQ+ individuals, yet the harmful stereotype persists.

    During the early 2000s, this prejudice meant that virtually every gay man leading an international children’s aid organization felt compelled to hide their identity to protect both their personal safety and their organization’s mission.

    Luce maintained transparency about his personal life while successfully operating a humanitarian program in one of the world’s most dangerous regions for LGBTQ+ individuals.

    He demonstrated that sexual orientation has no bearing on one’s ability to provide compassionate, professional care for vulnerable children.

    The Ongoing Human Cost”

    The personal stakes of Aceh’s strict interpretation of Sharia law became tragically clear years after Orphans International Sumatra concluded its operations.

    “Torturing a Black Man.” New York Times illustration of Ku Klux Klan caning (1868).

    Luce received devastating news that one of the children from their program had been “caught” engaging in same-sex activity.

    The young person faced a horrifying punishment: forced to publicly apologize, renounce their attraction to men, and endure public flogging.

    When Luce reached out to local contacts, hoping to intervene or provide support, he encountered the complex cultural dynamics that make human rights advocacy so challenging in regions where religious law supersedes international standards.

    A local teacher dismissed his concerns, stating that he could not impose his cultural beliefs on their society and needed to “mind his own business.”

    This response highlights the tension between cultural relativism and universal human rights. While respecting cultural differences is important, the U.N. Declaration of Human Rights clearly establishes that the right to personal sexuality and freedom from cruel punishment are fundamental human rights that transcend cultural boundaries.

    Religious Law Versus Universal Rights

    The conflict between religious interpretation and human rights in Aceh represents a broader global struggle over the limits of religious authority in governing personal behavior.

    The spirit of universal equality has been consistently interpreted to mean that LGBTQ+ people are entitled to the same rights and protections as everyone else.

    Indonesia’s national government has generally maintained more moderate positions on LGBTQ+ issues, but Aceh’s special autonomous status allows it to implement its own interpretation of Islamic law.

    The province’s approach to Sharia law extends far beyond sexual orientation, governing everything from alcohol consumption to gambling, often with public punishments designed to shame and deter.

    However, the targeting of LGBTQ+ individuals represents a particularly vulnerable population with limited recourse for protection or appeal.

    International human rights organizations have consistently argued that while religious freedom deserves protection, faith traditions should not be used to justify the violation of fundamental human dignities.

    The U.N. Declaration of Human Rights establishes that all people, regardless of sexual orientation, deserve protection from cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment.

    The damage of caning is as much psychological as it is physical. Here, two men after being flogged. Photo credit: Amnesty International.

    The Global Context

    Indonesia’s treatment of LGBTQ+ individuals in Aceh province occurs against a backdrop of increasing persecution worldwide. From Russia’s “gay propaganda” laws to Uganda’s harsh anti-homosexuality legislation, governments increasingly use religious or cultural justifications to restrict LGBTQ+ rights and dignity.

    The public caning in Banda Aceh serves as a stark reminder that progress on LGBTQ+ rights remains fragile and geographically uneven.

    While some nations have embraced marriage equality and anti-discrimination protections, others continue to criminalize same-sex relationships and subject LGBTQ+ individuals to state-sanctioned violence.

    For humanitarian workers and international organizations, these realities create complex ethical dilemmas about how to operate effectively in restrictive environments while maintaining their values and protecting vulnerable populations, including their own staff members who may belong to marginalized communities.

    The courage demonstrated by individuals like Luce, who risked personal safety to provide humanitarian aid, illuminates both the dedication of aid workers and the urgent need for international pressure to protect human rights in all contexts, regardless of local religious or cultural interpretations that may conflict with universal human dignity.

    Summary

    Two men were publicly caned in Indonesia’s Banda Aceh province for same-sex affection under strict Sharia law, highlighting ongoing LGBTQ+ persecution. The punishment recalls the risks faced by humanitarian workers like Jim Luce, who led children’s aid efforts there as an openly gay man. The incident underscores tensions between religious law and universal human rights protections.

    #IndonesiaLGBTQ #HumanRights #ShariaLaw #BandaAceh #LGBTQRights
    #HumanRightsViolation #IslamicLaw #LGBTQPersecution #GlobalLGBTQ
    #Indonesia #ReligiousFreedom #ReligiousLaw #LGBTQActivism #HumanDignity

    TAGS: Indonesia, LGBTQ rights, Sharia law, Banda Aceh, human rights violations,
    Islamic law, public caning, religious persecution, humanitarian work, sexual orientation,
    cultural relativism, universal human rights, LGBTQ activism, religious freedom, human dignity

    Texas Instruments Pioneered AI Computing Before The Revolution

    Jim Luce
    -
    0
    Texas Instruments Pioneered AI Computing Before The Revolution

    Austin software engineer’s career bridged semiconductor giants and specialized artificial intelligence startup ventures

    New York, N.Y. — In the spring of 2001, as the dot-com bubble burst and technology companies struggled to survive, a quiet revolution was brewing in Austin’s artificial intelligence community.

    While most of the tech world focused on internet startups and e-commerce ventures, a small cadre of engineers were developing the foundational technologies that would eventually power today’s AI renaissance.

    Richard Livingston Luce, who held two master’s degrees from the University of Texas at Austin—a Master of Science in Computer Science (M.S.C.S.) and a Master of Science in Electrical and Computer Engineering (M.S.E.C.E.)—exemplified this pioneering spirit.

    After contributing to groundbreaking research at Texas Instruments, Rick Luce transitioned to Momentum Software of Austin, where he spent the final five years of his career specializing in artificial intelligence development.

    At age 47, Luce died unexpectedly of pancreatic cancer in spring 2001, just as the AI field he helped nurture was beginning to show its transformative potential.

    The Texas Instruments Foundation

    Texas Instruments‘ journey into artificial intelligence began not with grand ambitions of creating thinking machines, but with a practical need to process signals more efficiently. In 1982, Texas Instruments developed the first single-chip Digital Signal Processor (DSP), which could convert analog signals into digital form in real-time. This breakthrough would prove instrumental to AI development decades later.

    Since introducing programmable digital signal processors in the 1980s, TI has produced families of embedded processors. These processors became the computational foundation for many AI applications, enabling real-time processing of complex data streams that would be essential for machine learning algorithms.

    The TMS320 family of digital signal processors, introduced on April 8, 1983, through the TMS32010 processor, which was then the fastest DSP on the market, represented a quantum leap in processing capability. These chips could handle the intensive mathematical operations required for pattern recognition, neural network calculations, and other AI-related tasks that would later become standard at specialized software companies.

    TI 2000: A Strategic Vision for the Future

    By the late 1980s, Texas Instruments leadership recognized that the company needed to transform itself for the coming technological revolution. In 1989, the CEO inaugurated a strategic plan to radically reshape Texas Instruments, dubbed “TI 2000.” A key aspect of the plan was to loosen the corporation’s traditionally tight corporate culture and encourage innovation.

    This cultural shift proved crucial for AI research and for nurturing engineers who would later join specialized AI companies. Engineers like Rick Luce found themselves working in an environment that valued experimentation and cross-disciplinary collaboration. The TI 2000 initiative encouraged researchers to think beyond traditional applications and explore emerging fields like artificial intelligence, machine learning, and neural networks.

    The Transition to Specialized AI Development

    While Texas Instruments provided the foundational technologies and research environment, the late 1990s saw the emergence of specialized software companies focused exclusively on artificial intelligence applications. Momentum Software of Austin represented this new generation of AI-focused companies, founded to translate research breakthroughs into commercial applications.

    Rick Luce‘s transition from Texas Instruments to Momentum Software reflected a broader trend in the industry. Engineers with deep experience in both hardware and software were increasingly drawn to smaller, more focused companies where they could concentrate specifically on AI development rather than the broader semiconductor business.

    A Brilliant Mind Lost Too Soon

    Rick Luce‘s educational background exemplified the interdisciplinary approach that both Texas Instruments and Momentum Software valued in their AI research initiatives.

    His Master of Science in Computer Science from UT Austin provided deep expertise in algorithms, software architecture, and computational theory. His complementary Master of Science in Electrical and Computer Engineering gave him hardware-level understanding of digital signal processors, embedded systems, and the physical constraints that shaped AI implementation.

    This dual expertise made Luce particularly valuable to Momentum Software‘s AI development efforts. Computer science provided the theoretical foundation for machine learning algorithms, while electrical and computer engineering offered practical insights into optimizing those algorithms for specific hardware architectures. Engineers with this combination of skills were rare and highly sought after in the emerging field of commercial AI applications.

    Luce‘s untimely death from pancreatic cancer in spring 2001 represented not just a personal tragedy, but a loss to Austin’s growing AI community. At 49, he was at the peak of his technical capabilities, with decades of experience bridging semiconductor research and specialized software development. His passing came just as companies like Momentum Software were beginning to demonstrate the commercial viability of AI applications.

    In a testament to his values and family commitment, Luce left a portion of his estate to Orphans International, a charity that his younger brother had just incorporated in 2001 with the guidance of their mother. This final act reflected the same forward-thinking perspective that characterized his professional work—investing in causes that would have long-term impact beyond his own lifetime.

    Austin: A Growing Technology Hub

    During the 1990s and early 2000s, Austin was rapidly emerging as a major technology center, second only to Silicon Valley in its concentration of high-tech companies and research institutions. Texas Instruments‘ Austin facilities had created a talent pool that companies like Momentum Software could draw upon, creating a collaborative ecosystem where AI research could flourish in both large corporations and specialized startups.

    The proximity to the University of Texas at Austin provided additional advantages. The Laboratory for Artificial Intelligence opened in 1983, but AI research at the University of Texas began years earlier with pioneering efforts by Woody Bledsoe and Bob Simmons. This academic foundation created a talent pipeline and research collaboration opportunities that benefited both established companies like TI and emerging players like Momentum Software.

    The Commercial AI Pioneers

    By the mid-1990s, Austin had developed a unique ecosystem where engineers could move between large research-oriented corporations and smaller, more focused AI companies.

    Momentum Software represented the entrepreneurial side of this equation, taking the foundational technologies developed at companies like Texas Instruments and transforming them into specialized commercial applications.

    Engineers like Rick Luce who made this transition brought invaluable experience from their corporate research background. They understood not just the theoretical possibilities of AI, but also the practical limitations imposed by available hardware and the commercial requirements for viable products.

    The Research Environment of 2001

    By 2001, Austin’s AI community encompassed both established corporations and specialized software companies. Momentum Software, where Luce spent his final professional years, represented the cutting edge of commercial AI development. The company focused on applications that pushed the boundaries of what was possible with available computing power, requiring exactly the kind of interdisciplinary expertise that Luce possessed.

    The research environment at specialized AI companies like Momentum Software during this period was characterized by rapid prototyping and practical application development. Luce‘s background perfectly suited this approach—his computer science training provided algorithmic sophistication, while his electrical engineering expertise ensured practical implementation feasibility. While larger companies often focused on long-term research, specialized AI companies were developing technologies that could be commercialized immediately.

    Texas Instruments’ new 300mm semiconductor fabrications in Sherman, Texas.

    Legacy and Impact

    The work done by engineers like Rick Luce at companies like Momentum Software in Austin during the late 1990s and early 2000s may not have generated immediate headlines, but it laid crucial groundwork for today’s AI revolution. Luce‘s career trajectory—from semiconductor research at Texas Instruments to specialized AI development at Momentum Software—represented the kind of cross-pollination that would prove essential for AI advancement.

    Luce‘s dual expertise in computer science and electrical engineering, combined with his experience in both corporate research and specialized software development, made him part of a small community of engineers who understood both the theoretical possibilities and practical limitations of AI implementation. His work at Momentum Software helped bridge the gap between laboratory research and commercial applications.

    The tragic loss of Rick Luce to pancreatic cancer in spring 2001 came at a pivotal moment in computing history. Companies like Momentum Software were demonstrating that specialized AI applications could be commercially viable, paving the way for the industry transformation that would follow. Even in death, Luce‘s commitment to making a positive impact continued through his bequest to Orphans International, demonstrating the same long-term vision that characterized his technical work.

    The spring of 2001 marked not just the end of the dot-com boom, but also the quiet conclusion of a foundational chapter in AI development. While the world focused on the dramatic rise and fall of internet companies, engineers like Luce at specialized firms like Momentum Software were methodically building the commercial applications that would eventually enable the AI transformation we witness today.

    Summary

    Austin engineer Richard “Rick” Luce contributed to artificial intelligence development, transitioning from foundational research at Texas Instruments to specialized AI work at Momentum Software during his final five years. Luce, who held dual master’s degrees from UT Austin, died unexpectedly of pancreatic cancer at 49, leaving a bequest to Orphans International, a charity his brother incorporated in 2001.

    #Austin #ArtificialIntelligence #MomentumSoftware #TexasInstruments
    #AIHistory #TechStartup #Innovation #AIResearch #TechPioneer

    TAGS: artificial intelligence, Austin, Momentum Software, Texas Instruments, Richard Luce, Rick Luce,
    AI development, tech startup, semiconductor research, machine learning, Austin tech history,
    AI pioneer, software engineering, computer science, electrical engineering, AI commercialization

    Marie Curie Joins Orphans International Pantheon Global Heroes

    John Laing
    -
    0
    Marie Curie Joins Orphans International Pantheon Global Heroes

    Two-time Nobel Laureate becomes forty-first honoree in organization’s prestigious collection of humanitarian role models

    Editor John Laing.

    New York, N.Y. – Orphans International Worldwide (OIW) announced today the induction of Marie Curie, the groundbreaking physicist and chemist, into its esteemed Pantheon of Global Heroes. The two-time Nobel Prize winner becomes the forty-first individual recognized by the humanitarian organization for embodying the values of courage, brilliance, and service to humanity that founder Jim Luce envisioned when establishing the program in 1998.

    Marie Curie‘s remarkable achievements in science, combined with her pioneering role as a woman in academia and her dedication to medical advancement during World War I, exemplify the heroic qualities OIW seeks to instill in children worldwide. Her inclusion alongside luminaries such as Mahatma Gandhi, Albert Einstein, and Mother Teresa reinforces the organization’s commitment to presenting diverse models of excellence for global citizenship and global leadership.

    Breaking Scientific Barriers While Serving Humanity

    Born Marie Skłodowska in Warsaw in 1867, Curie overcame significant obstacles to become the first woman to win a Nobel Prize, the first person to win Nobel Prizes in two different scientific fields, and the first female professor at the University of Paris. Her discoveries of the elements polonium and radium revolutionized understanding of atomic physics and chemistry, laying groundwork for modern medical treatments and nuclear science.

    “Marie Curie represents the perfect synthesis of intellectual achievement and humanitarian service,” said OIW president Jim Luce. “Her scientific breakthroughs saved countless lives, while her perseverance in the face of discrimination continues to inspire young people, particularly girls pursuing careers in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics.“

    Curie’s research into radioactivity—a term she coined—opened new frontiers in medicine. Her work led to the development of X-ray technology and cancer treatments that have saved millions of lives over the past century. During World War I, she developed mobile X-ray units, nicknamed “petites Curies,” which brought life-saving diagnostic capabilities directly to battlefield hospitals.

    Girl in Africa experimenting with chemistry thanks to the ground breaking work and role modelling of Orphans International Worldwide Global Hero and Nobel Prize Laureate Marie Curie.

    Legacy of Service Extends Beyond Laboratory

    The Polish-French scientist’s commitment to education and public service exemplified the values OIW promotes through its Global Citizenship Award for Leadership in Helping Humanity. Curie established the Radium Institute in Paris and Warsaw, institutions that continued her research and training of future scientists long after her death in 1934.

    Her dedication to knowledge sharing and international collaboration reflected the global citizenship ideals that OIW seeks to foster in children worldwide. Curie refused to patent the radium isolation process, choosing instead to share her discoveries freely with the scientific community for the benefit of humanity.

    “The children in our programs see in Marie Curie a model of how intellectual curiosity and scientific rigor can serve the greater good,” explained Dr. Sarah Mitchell, a director of educational programs. “Her story demonstrates that breakthrough discoveries often require years of persistent effort and that true heroes use their talents to help others.”

    Joining Distinguished Company of Global Role Models

    The Pantheon of Global Heroes was conceived as part of OIW’s mission to raise global citizens by providing young people with tangible examples of human excellence. In his Initial Report from 1998-1999, Luce wrote, “Without saints, secular or divine, sanctity can too easily be viewed as mere abstraction. Our children need heroes. The courage of Mahatma Gandhi and the brilliance of Albert Einstein make sainthood a reality for us all.”

    Curie joins an extraordinary collection of individuals who have demonstrated exceptional leadership in helping humanity. The pantheon includes Nobel Peace Prize winners such as Nelson Mandela, Desmond Tutu, Yitzhak Rabin, and Menachem Begin, alongside literary giants like Gabriel García Márquez, Ernest Hemingway, and Elie Wiesel.

    The recognition also encompasses spiritual leaders including the Dalai Lama and Thich Nhat Hanh, social reformers like Dorothy Day and Katharine Drexel, and political visionaries such as Woodrow Wilson and Winston Churchill. Each honoree represents a different path to global citizenship while sharing common commitments to service, courage, and human dignity.

    Inspiring Future Generations of Scientists and Leaders

    OIW’s educational programs utilize the stories of pantheon members to teach children about leadership, perseverance, and social responsibility. Curie’s inclusion provides particularly powerful inspiration for young women and girls, who often face barriers in pursuing scientific careers similar to those she encountered more than a century ago.

    Recent recipients of OIW’s Global Citizenship Award for Leadership in Helping Humanity include U.S. Representative Carolyn B. Maloney, Hellenic Republic Parliamentarian Dionysia-Theodora Avgerinopoulou, Peter Yarrow of Peter, Paul & Mary, and WCBS anchor Cindy Hsu. These contemporary leaders continue the tradition of service that Curie exemplified throughout her career.

    The organization’s programs reach children in orphanages, schools, and community centers across multiple continents. Through storytelling, educational materials, and mentorship programs, OIW helps young people understand how they can contribute to positive change in their communities and the world.

    Continuing Curie’s Mission of Discovery and Service

    Curie’s induction into the Pantheon of Global Heroes comes at a time when scientific literacy and evidence-based decision-making face unprecedented challenges. Her example of rigorous research methodology, international collaboration, and practical application of discoveries for human benefit offers valuable guidance for addressing contemporary global challenges.

    The timing also coincides with renewed efforts to encourage diversity in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics fields. Curie’s achievements demonstrate that excellence in scientific research knows no gender boundaries and that breakthrough discoveries often come from those who bring fresh perspectives to complex problems.

    OIW plans to develop new educational materials featuring Curie’s story, including interactive exhibits and digital resources that will help children understand both her scientific contributions and her humanitarian impact. These materials will join existing resources about other pantheon members in the organization’s comprehensive global citizenship curriculum.

    Marie Curie Joins Orphans International Pantheon Global Heroes (Aug. 25, 2025)

    Summary

    Orphans International Worldwide announces Marie Curie’s induction into its Pantheon of Global Heroes. The two-time Nobel Prize winner joins forty other distinguished individuals recognized for embodying courage, brilliance, and service to humanity. Curie’s scientific achievements and humanitarian service during World War I exemplify the values OIW promotes through its global citizenship programs. Her inclusion provides inspiration for young people, particularly girls pursuing scientific careers, demonstrating how intellectual excellence can serve the greater good.

    #MarieCurie #OrphansInternationalWorldwide #GlobalHeroes #GlobalCitizenship
    #WomenInScience #Inspiration #Humanitarian #ScienceEducation #NobelPrize #Education

    TAGS: Marie Curie, Orphans International Worldwide, global heroes, Nobel Prize, women in science, global citizenship,
    Jim Luce, education, inspiration, scientific discovery, humanitarian service, role models, STEM education, leadership
    Jim Luce Writes on Orphans & Orphans International Worldwide

    Death | Rise and Scandalous Fall of Televangelist Jimmy Swaggart

    Jim Luce
    -
    0
    Death | Rise and Scandalous Fall of Televangelist Jimmy Swaggart

    Reflecting on a Complex Legacy of Faith, Power, and Controversy from a Former Critic’s Perspective

    New York, N.Y. – As the news of Jimmy Swaggart‘s passing on July 1, 2025, at the age of 90 reverberates through religious and media circles, I find myself compelled to reflect on a figure who once commanded an empire of faith but whose story became synonymous with hubris and human frailty.

    As the founder of Fundamentalists Anonymous in the 1980s, I stood in opposition to the televangelist juggernaut that Swaggart epitomized, testifying before Congress about the financial and emotional exploitation woven into such ministries.

    His death, following a heart attack that led to intensive care, marks the end of an era defined by soaring sermons, multimillion-dollar revenues, and shattering scandals. From my vantage point as a former Wall Street banker turned activist, Swaggart‘s life offers a cautionary tale about the perils of unchecked authority in religion.

    Born on March 15, 1935, in Ferriday, Louisiana, Jimmy Lee Swaggart grew up in a Pentecostal household that nurtured his early talents in music and preaching. Cousins to rock ‘n’ roll legends Jerry Lee Lewis and Mickey Gilley, Swaggart chose the path of evangelism over secular stardom, honing his skills in small churches across the South.

    By the 1950s, he had released gospel albums and begun broadcasting on radio, laying the groundwork for what would become one of the most influential ministries in U.S. history. His fiery style, blending emotional appeals with condemnations of sin, resonated with audiences seeking spiritual certainty in turbulent times.

    Jimmy Swaggart preaching in the 1980’s.

    The Ascent to Televangelist Stardom

    Swaggart‘s rise accelerated in the 1970s with the advent of television. Launching “The Jimmy Swaggart Telecast” in 1971, he expanded his reach exponentially. By the mid-1980s, his program aired on over 200 stations, reaching an estimated two million viewers weekly in the U.S. alone, with global broadcasts extending to more than 100 countries.

    Financially, the ministry was a powerhouse: in 1985, it generated approximately US$140 million (equivalent to about US$400 million in today’s dollars, adjusted for inflation) annually through donations, book sales, and merchandise.

    This revenue funded expansive operations, including Jimmy Swaggart Bible College (later renamed World Evangelism Bible College) in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, which spanned 257 acres (104 ha) and educated thousands of aspiring ministers.

    What set Swaggart apart was his unyielding Pentecostal fervor. He preached against rock music, calling it “the new pornography,” and lambasted fellow evangelists for moral lapses. Ironically, this self-appointed guardian of purity would later face accusations of hypocrisy.

    His sermons, often delivered with tears and dramatic gestures, emphasized personal salvation and the dangers of worldly temptations.

    Supporters saw him as a prophet; critics, including myself, viewed his empire as a sophisticated fundraising machine that preyed on vulnerable believers.

    During my time leading Fundamentalists Anonymous, we received countless calls from individuals who had donated their life savings to such ministries, only to feel spiritually bankrupt afterward.

    Swaggart‘s influence extended beyond the pulpit. He authored numerous books, including “To Cross a River” (1977), an autobiography detailing his humble beginnings, and produced music that sold millions of copies.

    His ministry’s headquarters in Baton Rouge became a sprawling complex, complete with a 7,000-seat Family Worship Center.

    At its peak, the organization employed hundreds and boasted assets valued in the hundreds of millions. Yet, beneath the gloss lay systemic issues: allegations of financial opacity and emotional manipulation that echoed the concerns I raised in my congressional testimony.

    Scandals That Shook the Foundations

    The cracks in Swaggart‘s facade began to show in the late 1980s, a period rife with televangelist controversies. In 1986, he played a role in exposing rival Jim Bakker’s financial and sexual improprieties at the PTL Club, positioning himself as a moral arbiter. However, this victory was short-lived.

    On February 21, 1988, Swaggart delivered his infamous tearful confession on live television: “I have sinned against you, my Lord, and I would ask that your precious blood would wash and cleanse every stain until it is in the seas of God’s forgiveness.”

    A tearful confession: Jimmy Swaggart crying during his “I have sinned” speech aired on live television in February 1988. In 1987, he accused fellow televangelist Jim Bakker of immoral behavior. It was later revealed that Swaggart had a long history with prostitution.

    This admission followed revelations that he had been photographed entering a motel with sex worker Debra Murphree in Metairie, Louisiana.

    The scandal, orchestrated in part by fellow minister Marvin Gorman seeking revenge for Swaggart‘s earlier accusations against him, led to Swaggart‘s defrocking by the Assemblies of God.

    The fallout was swift and severe. Viewership plummeted by 85%, and revenues dropped dramatically, forcing layoffs and asset sales.

    In 1991, another scandal emerged when Swaggart was stopped by police in Indio, California, with prostitute Rosemary Garcia in his car. Though no charges were filed, the incident further eroded his credibility.

    These events validated the warnings Fundamentalists Anonymous had issued about the “religious addiction” fostered by authoritarian figures— a concept I introduced on the Phil Donahue Show in 1985, prompting 17,000 calls for help and leading me to abandon my banking career at Daiwa Bank.

    From my perspective, these scandals were not mere personal failings but symptomatic of a broader system.

    Televangelists like Swaggart amassed fortunes—his ministry once reported US$150 million (approximately €140 million at the time) in annual income—while urging followers to give sacrificially.

    We documented cases where donors faced financial ruin, mirroring the exploitation we testified about in Congress. Swaggart‘s refusal to fully submit to denominational discipline, opting instead to continue independently, underscored his defiance.

    Personal Encounters and Congressional Testimony

    My direct involvement with Swaggart began in the heat of our crusade against televangelism’s excesses. On August 29, 1987, during a revival crusade on Long Island, my co-founder Richard Yao and I attended to observe and distribute literature.

    As Swaggart exited the stadium, surrounded by security, he spotted us and, in a
    bizarre twist, invited us to his hotel room to “party” before climbing into his limousine.
    This encounter, laden with irony given his public persona, fueled our resolve.

    In 1988, Richard and I testified before the U.S. House Ways and Means Subcommittee on Oversight, decrying the lack of accountability in religious nonprofits. We highlighted Swaggart alongside Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson, arguing that their empires exploited tax-exempt status to build personal wealth.

    Our organization, by then boasting 30,000 members across 41 chapters with a US$300,000 budget, provided support groups for those recovering from fundamentalist indoctrination. We even coordinated the first panel on religious addiction at the American Psychological Association’s convention in 1987, with findings published in the Journal of Religion and Health.

    These efforts contributed to greater scrutiny: Congress considered reforms, though few materialized. Swaggart‘s scandals amplified our message, as his tearful apology became a cultural touchstone, parodied on shows like Saturday Night Live. Yet, for the victims—those who felt betrayed by the very figures promising salvation— the damage was profound.

    A Complicated Legacy in Retrospect

    In his later years, Swaggart rebuilt a scaled-down ministry, focusing on SonLife Broadcasting Network, which reached audiences via cable and online platforms. He continued preaching until health issues sidelined him, with his son Donnie assuming greater roles.

    By 2025, the ministry’s influence had waned, but its endurance spoke to Swaggart‘s resilience. He leaves behind a family, including wife Frances, son Donnie, and grandchildren active in the church.

    Reflecting as someone who once challenged him head-on, I see Swaggart‘s life as a mosaic of genuine faith marred by ambition. His contributions to gospel music and global evangelism are undeniable, having inspired millions.

    Yet, the scandals exposed the vulnerabilities in charismatic leadership, reinforcing the need for transparency in religious institutions. Through Fundamentalists Anonymous, we helped countless individuals reclaim their autonomy, a mission that outlasted the headlines.

    Swaggart‘s death closes a chapter, but the questions he raised about faith, power, and accountability endure. In an era of digital ministries and megachurches, his story reminds us that true spirituality thrives not in empires, but in humility and ethical stewardship.

    Death | Rise and Scandalous Fall of Televangelist Jimmy Swaggart (Aug. 24, 2025)

    Summary

    In this personal obituary, Jim Luce, founder of Fundamentalists Anonymous, recounts Jimmy Swaggart’s rise from Louisiana preacher to global televangelist, his multimillion-dollar empire, and the 1988 prostitution scandals that led to his downfall. Luce shares his congressional testimony against Swaggart and a peculiar 1987 encounter, reflecting on a legacy of faith tainted by hypocrisy and exploitation.

    #JimmySwaggart #ReligiousScandal #Fundamentalism #FaithAndPower
    #EvangelismLegacy #CongressionalTestimony #ReligiousAddiction #Televangelist

    Tags: Jimmy Swaggart, obituary, Jim Luce, Fundamentalists Anonymous, televangelist scandal,
    Pentecostalism, religious exploitation, 1980s activism, congressional hearing, Baton Rouge ministry

    Jim Luce Writes on Fundamentalism & Fundamentalists Anonymous

    Einstein’s Tomorrow: Exploring His Enduring Legacy as a Progressive Visionary

    Jim Luce
    -
    0
    Einstein’s Tomorrow: Exploring His Enduring Legacy as a Progressive Visionary

    From Humanism to Democratic Socialism, Einstein’s Ideals Continue to Inspire Contemporary Political Leaders and Global Movements

    New York, N.Y. — A century after his scientific breakthroughs shook the foundations of modern physics, Albert Einstein remains an enigmatic and widely admired figure—not only within academic circles but far beyond.

    Yet, too often, his profound impact as a public intellectual, a Humanist, and a political progressive has been overlooked or simplified in mainstream narratives. Like New York State Assemblymember Zohran Kwame Mamdani, who champions Democratic Socialism for the twenty-first century, Einstein’s political convictions were as radical and courageous as his theories on relativity.

    At a moment when progressive politics are reshaping debates from Berlin
    to the U.S. Congress, revisiting Einstein’s ideological commitments offer
    vital lessons on the intersection of ethics, governance, and social justice.

    The Scientist as Citizen: Einstein’s Radical Commitments

    For much of his adult life, Albert Einstein saw his scientific work as inseparable from his ethical obligations to human society. Unlike the archetypal absent-minded professor, Einstein was acutely attuned to the political and moral currents of his era.

    Whether warning U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt about the military potential of atomic fission or publicly opposing racism across the United States, Einstein applied his intellectual rigor and moral seriousness to issues ranging far beyond the laboratory.

    Albert Einstein gives a speech denouncing the use of hydrogen bombs in 1950.

    His Humanism stemmed from a deep trust in the dignity and rationality of individuals, coupled with an abiding skepticism of authoritarianism.

    Einstein’s commitment to Democratic Socialism—which he articulated in various essays, the most famous being “Why Socialism?” (1949)—was not simply an academic preference.

    He saw the twin crises of economic inequality and the erosion of democratic freedoms as existential threats, both scientifically and morally indefensible.

    “In my opinion,” Einstein wrote, “the real purpose of socialism is precisely to overcome and advance beyond the predatory phase of human development.”

    For Einstein, scientific progress that ignored ethical responsibility was bereft of virtue.

    In his adopted home of Princeton, New Jersey, and throughout his public life, Einstein never shied away from his status as a global citizen—a role extending as naturally from his worldview as did his equations from the laws of physics.

    Kinship Across Generations: Zohran Mamdani and the New Left

    Fast-forward to 2025, and Einstein’s worldview finds fresh echoes in the activism of leaders like Zohran Mamdani, a member of the New York State Assembly and a prominent figure in the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA).

    Einstein on the Red Star Line ship that brought him as a refugee from Nazi Germany to the United States (1932).

    Like Einstein, Mamdani foregrounds structural inequality and collective responsibility.

    Though their fields and historical contexts differ, both argue that scientific and political progress must serve humanity’s common good, rather than the narrow interests of elites or the machinery of the state.

    Both men faced pushback for their views. Einstein, dogged by FBI surveillance and red-scare hysteria, was often tarred as “un-American.”

    Mamdani, frequently challenged by mainstream political opponents, channels similar resilience—advocating for housing rights, police reform, and robust social safety nets.

    In their unflinching advocacy for social justice, they demonstrate the continuing relevance of “Democratic Socialism” as a dynamic philosophy rather than a relic of the past.

    Science, Humanism, and the Politics of Conscience

    Central to Einstein’s intellectual journey was his profound role as a Humanist.

    In an era overshadowed by war and genocide, Einstein’s insistence on the intrinsic value of every human being—regardless of nationality, race, or religion—stands as a beacon of hope.

    As a Jewish refugee who fled Nazi Germany for the United States in 1933, Einstein’s personal experience of persecution sharpened his sense of global solidarity.

    He spoke out forcefully against racism in the U.S., joining the NAACP and denouncing the “relatively mild, but stubborn form of anti-Semitism” he observed in American life.

    Above all, his advocacy was grounded in the scientific principle that the universe is intelligible and, by extension, that humanity shares a common rationality.

    This philosophical orientation provided the foundation for what he called the “cosmic religion”—a reverence for nature and reason that transcended sectarian dogma.

    By championing securities for the most vulnerable members of society, Einstein prefigured postwar developments in human rights and international law.

    His Humanism, like his commitment to Democratic Socialism, was never abstract: it was a call to collective action, ethical governance, and unwavering solidarity across the boundaries that so often divide humankind.

    Democratic Socialism: Einstein’s Enduring Political Prescription

    What, then, did Democratic Socialism mean for Einstein—and what does it mean for those who claim his intellectual legacy today? For Einstein, socialism was not a rigid formula of state ownership but rather a robust vision of economic democracy.

    In his essays, he argued for the regulation of unbridled capitalism, social investment in scientific and cultural education, and a welfare state guaranteeing the essentials of life for all.

    His critiques, ahead of their time, anticipated many of the driving issues in contemporary politics: the predatory excesses of corporate power, the corrosive influence of money in democratic institutions, and the alienation produced by mass consumer culture.

    Time and again, Einstein returned to the necessity of balancing individual creativity with social responsibility—a position that nurtured both innovation and equality.

    Within today’s debates over universal healthcare, public education, and housing, Einstein’s insights prove uncannily prescient.

    Leaders like Zohran Mamdani inherit this vision, crafting policy solutions and social movements rooted in principle, inclusion, and evidence-based governance.

    Their shared commitment to both reason and empathy stands as a challenge to cynicism, polarization, and the creeping authoritarianism of our age.

    Legacy and Lessons in an Age of Political Upheaval

    Perhaps the deepest lesson of Einstein’s public life is that scientific genius and political courage need not exist in separate spheres. Rather, each can amplify and clarify the other—guiding societies toward greater justice, freedom, and human flourishing. For Einstein, being a citizen of the world brought moral as well as intellectual obligations.

    As the twenty-first century unfolds—with escalating climate crises, widening economic disparities, and resurgent ultra-nationalism—Einstein’s political commitments offer enduring guidance. They call upon today’s activists, scholars, and policymakers to unite the search for truth with the work of building a more just and compassionate society.

    It is here, in the synthesis of science, Humanism, and social democracy, that the path laid by Einstein and his contemporary successors like Zohran Mamdani continues to inspire.

    In a time when progress faces formidable headwinds and the search for principled leadership grows ever more urgent, the intertwined legacies of Einstein and today’s democratic socialists serve as a reminder: The future belongs to those who unite knowledge with justice, and vision with action.

    Note: Albert Einstein is one of the 36 Global Heroes held out as role models to the children of Orphans International Worldwide.

    Summary

    Einstein was not only a revolutionary physicist but a deeply committed political progressive and Humanist. Like contemporary leaders such as Zohran Mamdani, he championed Democratic Socialism, advocating for social justice, economic democracy, and human dignity. Einstein believed science and ethics must work together for the common good. Today, his legacy guides leaders and activists as they seek to unite progressive politics with empathy, reason, and public service. Einstein’s vision remains powerfully relevant for our time.

    #EinsteinProgressive #HumanismInPolitics #DemocraticSocialism
    #ZohranMamdani #ScienceAndJustice #EinstensLegacyToday

    TAGS: Einstein, Humanism, progressive politics, Democratic Socialism, Zohran Mamdani,
    20th-century history, U.S. political history, ethics, science and society, social justice, civil rights

    The Privilege Checklist: Unveiling Hidden Advantages in Everyday Life

    Jim Luce
    -
    0
    The Privilege Checklist: Unveiling Hidden Advantages in Everyday Life

    Exploring Personal Privilege Through a Comprehensive Self-Assessment Tool Inspired by BuzzFeed’s Insightful Framework

    In an era marked by heightened awareness of social inequities, the concept of privilege serves as a lens through which individuals can examine their position within societal structures. Originating from a popular BuzzFeed post by Jen Lewis, this checklist invites people to reflect on statements that highlight advantages often taken for granted.

    By checking off applicable items, participants gain insight into how factors like race, sexuality, gender, class, and more shape their experiences. Far from a judgment, it fosters empathy and understanding in a diverse world.

    Defining Privilege in Modern Society

    The term privilege refers to unearned benefits conferred by society based on one’s identity. Unlike merit-based achievements, these advantages stem from systemic norms that favor certain groups. Jen Lewis’s BuzzFeed piece, which gained traction for its accessibility, transforms abstract ideas into tangible self-reflection. It begins with a simple directive: “Check off all the statements that apply to you.” This approach democratizes the conversation, making it relatable for readers at various educational levels.

    Scholars trace the formal study of privilege to works like Peggy McIntosh’s 1989 essay “White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack,” which listed everyday advantages white individuals often overlook. Lewis’s adaptation expands this to encompass multiple intersections, encouraging a holistic view. In today’s context, with movements like Black Lives Matter and #MeToo amplifying marginalized voices, such tools remain vital. They prompt users to consider how unchecked privileges perpetuate disparities, from wage gaps to access to justice.

    For instance, data from the U.S. Census Bureau indicates that in 2024, the median household income for white families stood at US$78,000 (approximately €70,000), compared to US$52,000 (€47,000) for Black families—a 33% difference underscoring economic divides. This checklist doesn’t quantify privilege but illuminates its qualitative layers, urging personal accountability.

    Navigating Racial and Ethnic Privileges

    One of the checklist’s core sections addresses race and ethnicity, revealing how skin color influences daily interactions. Statements like “I am white” or “I have never been discriminated against because of my skin color” highlight the absence of barriers many face. Those who can affirm “I have never been the only person of my race in a room” experience a comfort that fosters belonging, free from isolation or tokenism.

    Further items probe deeper: “I have never been mocked for my accent” or “I have never been told I am attractive ‘for my race.'” These underscore microaggressions that erode self-esteem. “I have never been a victim of violence because of my race” and “I have never been called a racial slur” point to safety privileges, while “I have never been told I ‘sound white'” challenges assumptions about cultural assimilation. Even seemingly innocuous encounters, such as “A stranger has never asked to touch my hair, or asked if it is real,” expose objectification often directed at non-white individuals.

    In urban centers like New York, where diversity thrives, these privileges manifest in subtle ways. A 2023 report by the Pew Research Center found that 45% of Black Americans reported experiencing racial discrimination in the past year, compared to just 18% of white Americans. By reflecting on these statements, users confront how racial privilege operates invisibly, shielding some from scrutiny while burdening others. This awareness can drive allyship, such as supporting policies for equitable representation in workplaces.

    Examining Sexuality and Orientation

    Shifting focus, the checklist delves into privileges tied to sexual orientation. Affirmations like “I am heterosexual” or “I have never lied about my sexuality” reveal the ease of navigating a heteronormative society. “I never had to ‘come out'” spares individuals the vulnerability of disclosure, and “I never doubted my parents’ acceptance of my sexuality” underscores familial support often assumed.

    Derogatory experiences are absent for the privileged: “I have never been called ‘fag,'” “I have never been called ‘dyke,'” or “I have never been called a ‘fairy,’ or any other derogatory slur for homosexuals.” Comfort in expression follows, with “I have never tried to hide my sexuality,” “I am always comfortable with P.D.A. with my partner in public,” and “I have never pretended to be ‘just friends’ with my significant other.”

    Religious and societal acceptance further compounds this: “I have never been ostracized by my religion for my sexual orientation,” “I have never been told I would ‘burn in hell’ for my sexual orientation,” or “I have never been told that my sexuality is ‘just a phase.'” Safety is paramount in “I have never been violently threatened because of my sexuality.”

    According to a 2024 Gallup poll, 7.2% of U.S. adults identify as LGBTQ+, yet 28% report workplace discrimination. This disparity illustrates how heterosexual privilege enables seamless integration, free from fear. The checklist encourages empathy, prompting users to advocate for inclusive environments.

    Gender Identity and Safety

    Gender-related privileges form another pillar, starting with “I am a man” or “I feel comfortable in the gender I was born as.” Continuity in identity—”I still identify as the gender I was born in” and “I have never tried to change my gender”—avoids the challenges of transition. Opportunities remain unobstructed: “I have never been denied an opportunity because of my gender.”

    Economic edges appear in “I make more money than my professional counterparts of a different gender,” reflecting the persistent pay gap—women earn 82% of men’s wages per U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics data from 2024. Safety privileges include “I have never felt unsafe because of my gender,” “I have never been catcalled,” “I have never been sexually harassed or assaulted,” and “I have never been raped.”

    In global contexts, these issues intensify; the World Health Organization reports that 1 in 3 women worldwide experience physical or sexual violence. By checking these, individuals recognize how gender privilege insulates some from pervasive threats, fostering dialogue on equity.

    Socioeconomic Status and Opportunities

    Class privileges dominate a substantial portion, encompassing financial security and access. “I work in a salaried job” or “My family and I have never lived below the poverty line” denote stability. Debt-free living shines in “I don’t have any student loans,” while basic needs are met: “I have never gone to bed hungry” and “I have never been homeless.”

    Parental support extends advantages: “My parents pay some of my bills” or “My parents pay all of my bills.” Mobility is effortless—”I don’t rely on public transportation”—and consumerism routine: “I buy new clothes at least once a month.” Financial literacy gaps appear in “I have never done my taxes myself,” and worry-free existence in “I have never felt poor,” “I have never had to worry about making rent,” or “I’ve never skipped a meal to save money.”

    Labor history reveals “I have never worked as a waiter, barista, bartender, or salesperson,” while internships signal networks: “I have had an unpaid internship” or “I have had multiple unpaid internships.” Education privileges include “I went to summer camp,” “I went to private school,” “I graduated high school,” “I went to an elite college,” “I graduated college,” and “My parents paid (at least some of) my tuition.”

    Lifestyle markers abound: “I had a car in high school,” “I’ve never had a roommate,” “I’ve always had cable,” “I have traveled internationally,” “I travel internationally at least once a year,” “I studied abroad,” “I spent Spring Breaks abroad,” and “I have frequent flier miles.” Ignorance of systems like “I don’t know what ‘Sallie Mae’ is” highlights insulation from debt burdens.

    A 2024 Federal Reserve survey notes 40% of Americans couldn’t cover a US$400 (€360) emergency, contrasting sharply with these privileges. This section underscores how class shapes trajectories, often invisibly.

    Health, Ability, and Mental Well-Being

    Privileges in health and ability are addressed through “I do not have any physical disabilities,” “I do not have any social disabilities,” or “I do not have any learning disabilities.” Mental health follows: “I have never had an eating disorder,” “I have never been depressed,” “I have never considered suicide,” “I have never attempted suicide,” and “I have never taken medication for my mental health.” Access is key: “I can afford medication if/when I need it” and “I can afford a therapist.”

    Body image privileges include “I have never been told I’m overweight or ‘too skinny,'” “I have never felt overweight or underweight or ‘too skinny,'” “I have never been shamed for my body type,” and “I consider myself to be physically attractive.” Substance use appears in “I’ve used prescription drugs recreationally” without consequence, and “I have never had an addiction.”

    The National Institute of Mental Health reports 21% of U.S. adults experienced mental illness in 2023, with barriers to care exacerbating inequities. These statements reveal how able-bodied and mentally resilient privileges enable fuller participation.

    Religious Beliefs and Security

    Religious privileges encompass “I have never been shamed for my religious beliefs,” “I have never been violently threatened for my religious beliefs,” or “I have never been violently attacked for my religious beliefs.” Accessibility is noted in “There is a place of worship for my religion in my town,” and accommodation in “All my jobs have been accommodating of my religious practices.”

    Self-protection items include “I have never lied about my ethnicity as self-defense” or “I have never lied about my religion as self-defense.” Security extends to “I am not nervous in airport security lines,” “I have never heard this statement: ‘You have been randomly selected for secondary passport control,'” and “I have never been called a terrorist.” Proselytizing is absent: “Nobody has ever tried to ‘save’ me for my religious beliefs.”

    In a post-9/11 world, Muslim Americans face heightened scrutiny, per a 2024 ACLU report. These privileges highlight freedom from persecution.

    Broader Identities and Self-Reflection

    Familial structures contribute: “My parents are heterosexual,” “My parents are both alive,” and “My parents are still married.” Broader experiences include “I have never been cyber-bullied for any of my identities,” “I was not bullied as a child for any of my identities,” “I have never tried to distance myself from any of my identities,” “I have never been self-conscious about any of my identities,” and “I have never questioned any of my identities.”

    The capstone: “I feel privileged because of the identities I was born with.” This encapsulates the checklist’s purpose—acknowledging advantages to build a more equitable society.

    In conclusion, Lewis’s tool transcends a mere quiz; it catalyzes introspection. As inequalities persist, embracing this reflection can inspire action, from policy advocacy to personal growth.

    Let’s get right into it. Time to find out how privileged you are.

    Jen Lewis wrote on BuzzFeed:

    • Check off all the statements that apply to you.

    __ I have never been discriminated against because of my skin color.

    __ I have never been the only person of my race in a room.

    __ I have never been mocked for my accent.

    __ I have never been to I am attractive “for my race.”

    __ I have never been a victim of violence because of my race.

    __ I have never been called a racial slur.

    __ I have never been to “sound white.”

    __ A stranger has never asked to touch my hair, or asked if it is real.

    __ I am heterosexual.

    __ I have never lied about my sexuality I have never lied about my sexuality.

    __ I never had to “come out.”

    __ I never doubted my parents’ acceptance of my sexuality.

    __ I have never been called “fag” or “dyke.”

    __ I have never been called a “fairy,” or any other derogatory slur for homosexuals.

    __ I have never tried to hide my sexuality.

    __ I am always comfortable with P.D.A. with my partner in public.

    __ I have never pretended to be “just friends” with my significant other.

    __ I have never been ostracized by my religion for my sexual orientation.

    __ I have never been told I would “burn in hell” for my sexual orientation.

    __ I have never been told that my sexuality is “just a phase.”

    __ I have never been violently threatened because of my sexuality.

    __ I am a man.

    __ I feel comfortable in the gender I was born as.

    __ I still identify as the gender I was born in.

    __ I have never tried to change my gender.

    __ I have never been denied an opportunity because of my gender.

    __ I make more money than my professional counterparts of a different gender.

    __ I have never felt unsafe because of my gender.

    __ I have never been catcalled.

    __ I have never been sexually harassed or assaulted.

    __ I have never been raped.

    __ I work in a salaried job.

    __ My family and I have never lived below the poverty line.

    __ I don’t have any student loans.

    __ I have never gone to bed hungry.

    __ I have never been homeless.

    __ My parents pay some, or all, of my bills.

    __ I don’t rely on public transportation.

    __ I buy new clothes at least once a month.

    __ I have never done my taxes myself.

    __ I have never felt poor.

    __ I have never had to worry about making rent.

    __ I have never worked as a waiter, barista, bartender, or salesperson.

    __ I have had an unpaid internship.

    __ I have had multiple unpaid internships.

    __ I went to summer camp.

    __ I went to private school.

    __ I went to private school.

    __ I graduated high school.

    __ I went to an elite college.

    __ I graduated college.

    __ My parents paid (at least some of) my tuition.

    __ I had a car in high school.

    __ I’ve never had a roommate.

    __ I’ve always had cable.

    __ I have traveled internationally.

    __ I travel internationally at least once a year.

    __ I studied abroad.

    __ I’ve never skipped a meal to save money.

    __ I don’t know what “Sallie Mae” is.

    __ I spent Spring Breaks abroad.

    __ I have frequent flier miles.

    __ My parents are heterosexual.

    __ My parents are both alive.

    __ My parents are still married.

    __ I do not have any physical disabilities.

    __ I do not have any social disabilities.

    __ I do not have any learning disabilities.

    __ I have never had an eating disorder.

    __ I have never been depressed.

    __ I have never considered suicide.

    __ I have never attempted suicide.

    __ I have never taken medication for my mental health.

    __ I can afford medication if/when I need it.

    __ I have never been I’m overweight or “too skinny.”

    __ I have never felt overweight or underweight or “too skinny.”

    __ I have never been shamed for my body type.

    __ I consider myself to be physically attractive.

    __ I can afford a therapist.

    __ I’ve used prescription drugs recreationally.

    __ I have never had an addiction.

    __ I have never been shamed for my religious beliefs.

    __ I have never been violently threatened for my religious beliefs.

    __ I have never been violently attacked for my religious beliefs.

    __ There is a place of worship for my religion in my own way.

    __ I have never lied about my ethnicity as self-defense.

    __ I have never lied about my religion as self-defense.

    __ All my jobs have been accommodating of my religious practices.

    __ I am not nervous in airport security lines.

    __ I have never heard this statement: “You have been randomly selected for secondary passport control.”

    __ I have never been called a terrorist.

    __ Nobody has ever tried to “save” me for my religious beliefs.

    __ I have never been cyber-bullied for any of my identities.

    __ I was not bullied as a child for any of my identities.

    __ I have never tried to distance myself from any of my identities.

    __ I have never been self-conscious about any of my identities.

    __ I feel privileged because of the identities I was born with.

    HOW DO YOU SCORE?

    Summary

    This feature explores a BuzzFeed checklist by Jen Lewis that assesses personal privilege across race, sexuality, gender, class, health, and religion. Through reflective statements, it reveals hidden advantages, fostering empathy in a divided world. Ideal for those seeking to understand societal inequities and promote allyship.

    #PrivilegeChecklist #SocialEquity #IdentityReflection #BuzzFeedInsights #AllyshipMatters

    Tags: privilege, checklist, BuzzFeed, Jen Lewis, race, sexuality, gender, class, health, religion, equity, self-reflection

    Expert Uses Right-Handed World Analogy to Explain Privilege

    John Laing
    -
    0
    Expert Uses Right-Handed World Analogy to Explain Privilege

    Organizational psychologist challenges people to recognize systematic advantages through everyday examples

    Editor John Laing

    New York, N.Y. – A groundbreaking analysis by organizational psychologist Dr. Steven Jones uses an unexpected analogy to help people understand the complex concept of unearned privilege: examining how society caters to right-handed individuals at the expense of left-handed people.

    In his research paper “The Right Hand of Privilege,” Dr. Jones, CEO of Jones & Associates Consulting, argues that “some individuals receive unearned advantages in life solely based on being a member of certain social identity groups.” His right-handed world example provides a lens for understanding systemic privilege without the historical baggage of other social identity discussions.

    The Invisible Architecture of Right-Handed Society

    Dr. Jones systematically demonstrates how society’s infrastructure favors right-handed people through countless everyday examples.

    “We shake with our right hands. We pledge with our right hand. We salute with our right hand. We take legal and governmental oaths with our right hand,” he explains, highlighting how fundamental social rituals reinforce right-handed dominance.

    The systemic advantages extend far beyond ceremonial gestures. School desks, computer mice, cars, notebooks, three-ring binders, guns, appliances, and even coffee mugs are designed with right-handed users in mind.

    “Most coffee mugs are designed for right-handed people to pick up and see the picture or words. If a left-handed person picks up the same mug, there is nothing there to see!” Dr. Jones notes.

    This institutional design creates what Dr. Jones calls “a wind of unearned privilege behind some people’s sail gets them further along in their journey,” while others experience disadvantages that create headwinds or no assistance at all.

    When Normal Becomes Standard

    A critical insight from Dr. Jones’s analysis involves how cultural dominance becomes invisible through standardization. “One of the ways in which unearned privilege occurs is when one group’s culture, values and ways of interpreting the world get built into the fabric of institutions within a society and are then made invisible,” he explains.

    This invisibility manifests in language and product design. While left-handed desks and baseball mitts are specifically labeled as such, their right-handed counterparts are simply called “desks” and “baseball mitts.” The dominant group’s needs become the unmarked standard, while minority needs are treated as special accommodations.

    Dr. Jones visited Southpaw Shoppe, a store dedicated to left-handed products in San Diego, with a left-handed friend who “got very excited because everything in the store was made for her.” This experience highlighted how rarely left-handed people encounter environments designed for their needs.

    Resistance and Defensive Responses

    The research identifies common defensive reactions when privilege is discussed. Dr. Jones presents hypothetical responses from right-handed people that mirror real reactions to conversations about other forms of unearned advantage: “As a right-handed person, I don’t have any privilege. I’m just an individual who works hard everyday to make ends meet. This is America. Everyone gets the same opportunities.”

    These responses demonstrate how privilege remains invisible to those who benefit from it. “How many of you, who are right-handed, wake up in the morning thinking ‘my people rule…’ Do you realize you live in a world which affords you all this privilege everyday?” Dr. Jones challenges readers.

    The Left-Handed Experience

    Left-handed individuals often face negative experiences that right-handed people rarely consider.

    Dr. Jones documents stories of people having “their hands painfully tied behind their back so they could learn to use their right hand” and being hit with rulers for using their dominant hand.

    Many were told “that their child’s life would be easier if they just learned to use their right hand.”

    These experiences illustrate how systemic disadvantage affects daily life and personal development. The pressure to conform to right-handed norms represents a form of assimilation that privileged groups rarely need to consider.

    Moving Beyond Guilt to Action

    Dr. Jones emphasizes that understanding privilege isn’t about assigning blame or creating guilt. “Understanding unearned privilege is not about blaming people for the past. It is about identifying ways in which systems that have been created in the past and present provide advantage to certain groups while simultaneously posing disadvantage to other groups,” he clarifies.

    The goal is creating awareness that enables positive change. “By becoming more aware of the ways in which we receive unearned privilege, we can become a part of creating teams, work environments, organizations, and a society which strive to create a playing field that is truly level for all,” Dr. Jones concludes.

    Implications for Broader Social Understanding

    Dr. Jones’s right-handed world analysis provides a framework for examining other forms of systemic privilege based on race, gender, sexual orientation, and other social identity groups. By using an example with less historical controversy, he helps people recognize how institutional systems can inadvertently favor certain groups while creating barriers for others.

    The research challenges individuals to move beyond purely individual perspectives and consider how group-level dynamics and systemic structures shape opportunities and experiences in ways that may be invisible to those who benefit from them.

    #Unearned Privilege #SystemicAdvantage #RightHandedWorld
    #SocialEquity #InclusiveDesign #OrganizationalPsychology #DiversityEducation
    #PrivilegeAwareness #SystemicInequality #LevelPlayingField

    Tags: unearned privilege, systemic advantage, right-handed world, social identity groups, diversity education,
    organizational psychology, Jones & Associates Consulting, institutional design, Dr. Steven Jones, social equity,
    cultural dominance, left-handed discrimination, inclusive environments, systemic inequality, privilege awareness

    Militarized Schools Signal Deeper Slide Toward Autocracy in El Salvador

    Jim Luce
    -
    0
    Militarized Schools Signal Deeper Slide Toward Autocracy in El Salvador

    Bukele’s anti-gang reforms become a pretext for wider authoritarian control over students, educators, and democracy itself

    New York, N.Y. — As the new school year begins in El Salvador, President Nayib Bukele’s government has unleashed a campaign that goes far beyond improving discipline or curbing criminal influence. The latest measures—compulsory military-style haircuts, rigid uniform inspections, and weekly “Civic Monday” rituals—mark a troubling expansion of what critics call the president’s war on democratic freedoms.

    This movement toward a militarized education system is no isolated policy blip. Instead, it vividly
    illustrates a pattern that now threatens the very foundations of civil society in El Salvador: the
    concentration of power, personal rule, and normalization of authoritarian practices throughout public life.
    It’s been called the “Edgar,” the Caesar, the Takuache cut and it’s evolved into the “El Cuh” haircut. And it is no longer permitted for students in El Salvador’s public schools.

    Discipline or Indoctrination: Schools Caught in the Crossfire

    On paper, Education Minister Karla Trigueros—appointed directly by Bukele and seen publicly in military attire—claims her memos are about “restoring order” and stamping out the persistent gang problem in schools.

    But the reality for 1.2 million Salvadoran students is something far harsher: daily inspections at school gates, enforced haircuts, and mandatory patriotism performed before the national flag every Monday.

    As educator unions have argued, this regime does not redress the underlying hardships facing students and teachers but rather militarizes the environment while stifling individuality and dissent. 

    Social media already documents children turned away over minor infractions of appearance or conduct, and barbershops are full of students forced to sacrifice their personal identity for conformity.

    Comparisons with authoritarian regimes—from Cuba’s post-revolutionary schools to North Korea’s banned hairstyles—are not hyperbole.

    In El Salvador, as in those countries, the government is stripping educational institutions of autonomy, making them outposts for ideological control.

    Aerial view of San Salvador, the capital city of El Salvador.

    Why the Rush to Authoritarianism?

    Bukele took office in 2019 as a disruptor—young, informal, and promising to upend the country’s legacy of violence. By his own admission, however, he has evolved into a “coolest dictator” who delights in mocking foreign critics and consolidating power.

    Student getting haircut before attending school where a military-style cut is now mandatory.

    The popular logic goes like this: Gang violence has fallen to historic lows, so any policy, no matter how severe, is justified.

    Yet such thinking ignores the human cost. Since Bukele imposed a sweeping state of exception in 2022, more than 80,000 Salvadorans have been arrested, often without charges or due process.

    Constitutional rights—freedom of expression, protection against arbitrary detention—have largely vanished.

    Bukele’s party recently eliminated term limits, allowing him to remain in power indefinitely, even as he jails tens of thousands and packs the courts with loyalists.

    With these latest school mandates, Bukele is engulfing the nation’s children in the machinery of repression. Rather than fostering creativity and critical thinking, classrooms become sites of surveillance and intimidation. Teachers, subject to “serious administrative penalties” if they don’t enforce the rules, are being pressured to act as wardens, not mentors.

    U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi “ICE Barbie” Noem speaks at the Terrorist Confinement Center (CECOT) in March 2025, in Tecoluca, El Salvador. Photo credit: Alex Brandon-Pool.

    The Crisis for El Salvador’s Democracy

    With the U.S. dollar as the official currency, El Salvador feels a little like rural Florida. 

    The international reaction has been one of growing alarm. Human-rights organizations—local and global—have documented mass abuses: forced disappearances, torture, arbitrary arrests, and persecution of critics and independent media.

    Foreign governments protest, but their appeals are met with ridicule. Bukele flaunts his impunity, daring the world to object as he dismantles the last vestiges of democratic accountability.

    The appointment of an army officer as education minister—while sensible for a dictatorship—represents a radical departure from postwar norms.

    As TIME Magazine recently noted, with more than 1 in every 57 Salvadorans now incarcerated, El Salvador has the highest imprisonment rate in the world, more than triple that of the U.S.

    Mass arrests have left thousands of children without parents, yet spending on victim-care programs is less than 1% of the swollen security budget.

    Rather than being a bulwark against gangs, schools are now test sites for Bukele’s authoritarian model—one that regional leaders are eager to emulate and that threatens to become permanent unless democratic institutions are restored.

    The Real Human Costs: Teachers, Students, and Families

    El Salvador’s President has banned the “Edgar” haircut from public schools, considered to have been brought by deported criminals inspired by Chicano culture in the U.S.

    Parents and teachers know all too well that El Salvador’s problems will not be solved through repression.

    “Restoring order” cannot come at the expense of creativity, self-worth, or basic rights.

    Already, teachers unions warn of mounting abuses and fear for their ability to protect students or maintain a healthy educational environment.

    Every shiny uniform and crisp haircut is a symbol not of national pride but of the government’s broadening control over personal lives.

    Will the next policy be censorship of textbooks, ideological loyalty oaths, or the erasure of any reminder that education’s highest value is to foster autonomy and democratic citizenship?

    Bukele’s success in quelling violence is undeniable, but so too is his descent into authoritarianism.

    The schools of El Salvador—and the children who fill them each morning—now stand on the front lines of that struggle.

    Militarized Schools Signal Deeper Slide Toward Autocracy in El Salvador (Aug. 23, 2025)

    #ElSalvador #BukeleRegime #Authoritarianism #EducationRights #Democracy
    #HumanRights #Militarization #LatinAmerica #CivilSociety #NYTEditorial

    Tags: El Salvador, Nayib Bukele, Authoritarianism, School Discipline, Militarization,
    Human Rights, Democracy, Latin America, Education, Teachers Unions, Civil Society

    Jim Luce Writes on Central America

    Guidance on Inclusive Language to Foster Diversity and Equity

    Liz Webster
    -
    0
    Guidance on Inclusive Language to Foster Diversity and Equity

    Editorial Guidelines for The Stewardship Report on Connecting the World


    In our increasingly diverse society, adopting inclusive language
    fosters respect, bridges cultural divides, and ensures
    equitable representation in professional communications.

    New York, N.Y. – In the realm of professional communication, particularly within stewardship and philanthropic reporting, the choice of words carries profound implications. Language shapes perceptions, reinforces societal norms, and can either perpetuate inequities or promote a more just world.

    As global interconnectedness grows, the need for mindful terminology becomes paramount.

    This is especially true in contexts where discussions involve sensitive topics such as privilege, body shaming, and LGBTQ+ identities.

    By adhering to established guidelines, communicators can avoid unintentional harm and amplify marginalized voices.

    The evolution of language reflects broader societal shifts toward equity. For instance, terms once considered neutral are now recognized as carrying biased connotations.

    Drawing from authoritative sources like the American Psychological Association’s Inclusive Language Guide, which emphasizes centering the perspectives of those affected, we can refine our lexicon to be more precise and humane.

    Similarly, the Linguistic Society of America’s guidelines urge proactive inclusivity to lead by example in scholarly and public discourse.

    In Stewardship reporting, where narratives often intersect with global development, cultural sensitivity, and social justice, adopting such practices is not merely optional but essential. This article explores key areas of focus, providing practical recommendations grounded in contemporary standards.

    Recognizing and Addressing Privilege in Communication

    Privilege refers to unearned advantages afforded to certain groups based on characteristics like race, gender, or socioeconomic status. In professional writing, it is crucial to use this term judiciously, primarily for self-reflection rather than as a tool to dismiss others’ experiences. For example, acknowledging one’s own privilege—such as in statements like “As someone with educational privilege, I recognize the barriers others face”—encourages empathy without weaponizing the concept.

    Misusing privilege can alienate audiences and undermine credibility. Guidelines from the International Federation of Journalists‘ recent best practice checklist for inclusive journalism, published in early 2025, stress that language around privilege should promote dialogue rather than division.

    In Stewardship contexts, this means framing reports on global initiatives with awareness of power dynamics.

    For instance, when discussing aid to economically disadvantaged regions, avoid implying benevolence from a position of superiority; instead, highlight collaborative efforts.

    Furthermore, integrating self-awareness into reporting helps dismantle systemic biases. The PBS Standards on Inclusive Language advise against assumptions that reinforce privilege, such as overlooking diverse contributors in narratives. By using privilege introspectively, writers foster a culture of accountability, essential for ethical stewardship.

    Combating Body Shaming Through Thoughtful Terminology

    Body shaming involves language that criticizes or stigmatizes individuals based on their physical appearance, often perpetuating harmful stereotypes. In media and reporting, this can manifest in subtle ways, such as describing someone as “overweight” rather than focusing on relevant attributes.

    Inclusive guidelines recommend terms like plus-size instead of derogatory labels like “fat” or “overweight,” which carry judgmental undertones.

    The University of Illinois Chicago’s Inclusive Language Guide warns against using body-related metaphors casually, as they can inadvertently shame.

    For example, phrases like “turn a blind eye” not only misuse disability metaphors but also intersect with body shaming by implying physical flaws as moral failings.

    In Stewardship Report pieces on health initiatives, opt for neutral descriptions: “individuals with higher body mass indices” if relevant, but question whether body size needs mention at all.

    Promoting body positivity aligns with broader equity goals. Walla Walla Community College’s writing guide emphasizes relevance—only include physical descriptions if pertinent to the story. This approach reduces stigma and supports mental health advocacy, crucial in global philanthropy where body image issues affect diverse populations.

    Embracing Inclusive Language for LGBTQ+ Communities

    Language surrounding LGBTQ+ identities has evolved significantly, reflecting greater visibility and rights advocacy. Terms like gay or queer are preferred over outdated or clinical labels such as “homosexual,” which can pathologize identities. Similarly, transgender is the appropriate term, not “transsexual,” as the latter implies a medical condition rather than an identity.

    The GLAAD Media Reference Guide, in its 11th edition, provides detailed recommendations for fair representation, urging journalists to use self-identified terms and avoid sensationalism.

    In Stewardship reporting, this means accurately portraying LGBTQ+ leaders in philanthropy without reducing them to their identities. For example, refer to a “gay activist” only if relevant; otherwise, focus on their contributions.

    Additionally, inclusive practices extend to pronouns and partnerships. Use “husband or partner” to avoid assuming ‘heteronormativity.’ The American College Health Association‘s guidelines highlight the importance of such nuances in creating welcoming environments. By adopting these, communicators honor diversity and strengthen community trust.

    Preferred Terminology in Professional and Cultural Contexts

    Shifting to inclusive alternatives for common terms enhances precision and respect.

    For professions, use gender-neutral options: chair instead of “chairman,” flight attendant not “stewardess,” actor over “actress,” firefighter rather than “fireman,” mail carrier instead of “postman,” server not “waitress,” police officer over “policeman,” administrative assistant instead of “secretary,” custodian not “janitor,” and sanitation worker rather than “garbage man.”

    In cultural references, prefer ethnic cuisine to “foreign food,” culturally authentic over “ethnic,” and jungle or rainforest for accurate environmental descriptions.

    For social groups, person of color is favored over “minority,” Asian American not “oriental,” Native American, Indigenous, or First Nation instead of “Indian,” low-income or economically disadvantaged over “poor,” affluent or wealthy not “rich,” working class instead of “common people,” Global South over “Third World,” older adult rather than “elderly” or “senior citizen,” and neurodivergent instead of “abnormal.”

    Use person with a disability or person living with a disability over “disabled person” or “handicapped,” little person not “dwarf” or “midget,” died by suicide instead of “committed suicide,” business person over “business men,” person with developmental delay not “slow,” first generation student instead of “student whose parents never went to college,” person living with HIV over “AIDS victim,” stay-at-home parent not “housewife” or “house husband,” and advantaged instead of “rich.”

    For other contexts, sex worker is the respectful term, not “prostitute”; affirmative action over “preferential treatment”; outcast not “black sheep”; happy holidays instead of “merry Christmas” to include all traditions; average person over “man in the street”; chief assistant not “right-hand man”; cosmetic surgery instead of “plastic surgery”; non-citizen over “foreigner”; humanity not “mankind”; climate change or global warming for environmental discussions.

    These shifts, as outlined in the University of Wisconsin’s Equitable Language Guide, prevent ‘othering’ and promote unity. In reporting, they ensure narratives are accessible and affirming.

    Implementing Inclusive Language in Stewardship Reporting

    To integrate these principles, start with self-education. Resources like the Acrolinx Ultimate Writing Guide to Inclusive Language offer practical tools for content strategy.

    Avoid gendered assumptions by using singular “they” or rephrasing sentences. For measurements, though rare in language discussions, follow standards: 5 feet (1.5 meters) tall. Percentages appear as 26%, currencies as US$100 (¥14,000).

    In audio and visual media, inclusivity extends to captions and diverse representation, per Washington University’s guidelines. Ultimately, these practices elevate stewardship by modeling respect. As debates on equity intensify, committing to inclusive language is a stewardship imperative, ensuring communications build rather than barrier.

    Stewardship Report Guidance on Inclusive Language to Foster Diversity and Equity (Aug. 23. 2025)

    Summary

    In an era of heightened awareness, adopting inclusive language is vital for equitable communication. This guide covers key areas like acknowledging privilege introspectively, avoiding body shaming terms, and using respectful LGBTQ+ terminology.

    It provides preferred alternatives for professions, identities, and cultural references, drawing from expert sources to promote respect and unity in professional settings. By implementing these practices, communicators can foster diversity and bridge societal divides effectively.

    #InclusiveLanguage #DiversityEquityInclusion
    #LanguageMatters #LGBTQRights #SocialJustice

    TAGS: inclusive language, privilege, body shaming, LGBTQ+,
    gender neutral terms, cultural sensitivity, stewardship reporting

    Butterfly Effect of Language: A Writer’s Rebellion Against Elite Speak

    Jim Luce
    -
    0
    Butterfly Effect of Language: A Writer’s Rebellion Against Elite Speak

    How One Writer’s Language Choices Challenge Corporate Think Tank Messaging While Fostering Cultural Inclusion and Understanding

    New York, N.Y. — Funded by corporate interest, Democratic think tank Third Way released a blunt memo Friday urging the party to abandon “therapy-speak” and “seminar room language” that alienates voters.

    But while political consultants scramble to sanitize progressive vocabulary, Democratic writers such as myself face a different challenge: how do we write authentically without abandoning inclusive language that respects human dignity?

    Third Way says Democrats shouldn’t use words such as “birthing person,” “cisgender,” “the unhoused” and “Latinx,” saying they make people “fear cancellation, doxing, or trouble with HR.” Yet for writers committed to equity and accuracy, the question isn’t whether to use inclusive language — it’s how to make such language accessible without sacrificing its core purpose.

    The Think Tank’s Warning Shot

    The recent memo represents more than political strategy; it reflects a broader cultural tension between precision in language and populist accessibility.

    Democrats should speak more “like normal people” and examine their language, “moderate” think tank Third Way said in a memo.

    But this raises uncomfortable questions: whose definition of “normal” are we accepting? And what happens to marginalized communities when their preferred terminology gets labeled as alienating jargon?

    The memo’s timing, coming after significant electoral losses, suggests that language itself has become a political liability.

    “Democrats are often viewed as judgmental, out-of-touch, and dismissive of those without elite education or progressive views,” the documents read. “This makes the party seem disconnected from everyday people.”

    A Writer’s Different Path

    My approach diverges from Third Way’s recommendations not out of political calculation, but from journalistic principle. Where they see “privilege” as a word that alienates, I use it specifically when discussing my own advantages — acknowledging rather than hiding the reality of unearned benefits. This isn’t virtue signaling; it’s transparency.

    Consider the alternatives I’ve adopted: “person of color” instead of “minority,” “flight attendant” rather than “stewardess,” “administrative assistant” not “secretary.” These choices aren’t academic abstractions — they reflect real people’s preferences about how they wish to be identified and understood.

    The Butterfly Effect of Language

    Being awake to the meaning and importance of language and its power – “woke” – is vital.

    Language operates like chaos theory’s butterfly wings: small changes in how we describe the world can create massive shifts in cultural understanding.

    When writers consistently use “died by suicide” instead of “committed suicide,” we gradually remove the stigma of criminality from mental health crises. When we write “person with a disability” rather than “disabled person,” we center humanity before condition.

    These linguistic choices ripple outward. Readers internalize new frameworks. Children grow up with different assumptions. Marginalized communities feel seen rather than erased. The cumulative effect transcends any single article or story.

    Beyond Political Calculations

    The challenge for journalists isn’t choosing between accessibility and inclusion — it’s achieving both simultaneously. This requires what I call “explanatory inclusion”: using precise, respectful language while providing context that makes it accessible to all readers.

    For instance, rather than avoiding “LGBTQ+” as potentially alienating, I use it while ensuring my reporting explains diverse experiences within that community.

    Instead of defaulting to “foreign food,” I specify “ethnic cuisine” and describe particular culinary traditions. These choices don’t distance readers; they invite them into broader understanding.

    The Corporate Memo Mindset

    Third Way’s approach reflects a corporate communications strategy: identify problematic language, eliminate it, problem solved.

    But public writing requires more nuanced thinking. Our responsibility isn’t to political parties or electoral success — it’s to truth, accuracy, and fairness.

    In a new memo, shared exclusively with POLITICO, the centrist think tank Third Way is circulating a list of 45 words and phrases they want Democrats to avoid using, alleging the terms put “a wall between us and everyday people of all races, religions, and ethnicities.”

    Yet many of these supposedly problematic terms originated from the very communities they describe — people seeking more accurate, respectful language to describe their own experiences.

    Cultural Impact Through Individual Choice

    Every writer makes hundreds of word choices daily. These micro-decisions, multiplied across thousands of journalists, shape cultural discourse.

    When we consistently choose inclusive language, we normalize respect. When we default to outdated terms, we reinforce old hierarchies.

    My style guide isn’t political positioning — it’s professional ethics applied to language.

    Using “mail carrier” instead of “postman” doesn’t alienate anyone; it simply acknowledges that people of all genders deliver mail. Writing “business person” rather than “businessman” doesn’t create barriers; it removes them.

    The Authentic Voice Question

    Third Way frames this as an authenticity issue, suggesting that inclusive language sounds artificial or forced.

    But authenticity isn’t about using language that avoids offense — it’s about using language that accurately reflects reality.

    When writers describe the world precisely, including the diversity of human experience, we’re being more authentic, not less.

    The real artificiality comes from deliberately avoiding accurate terminology because focus groups find it challenging.

    That approach prioritizes comfort over truth, political strategy over journalistic integrity.

    Moving Forward With Purpose

    The path forward requires courage: courage to use language that respects all readers while remaining accessible to everyone. This means explaining rather than avoiding, contextualizing rather than sanitizing, and trusting readers’ capacity to learn and grow.

    My word choices aren’t rebellion for its own sake — they’re commitments to accuracy, respect, and hope.

    In a fractured media landscape, journalists have the opportunity to model inclusive communication that brings people together rather than driving them apart.

    Every article becomes a small experiment in cultural bridge-building. Every respectful word choice plants seeds for broader understanding.

    Every explanatory phrase invites readers into larger conversations about who we are as a society and who we might become.

    The butterfly wings of language beat strongest when they carry both precision and compassion — creating ripples that transform not just political discourse, but human understanding itself.

    Butterfly Effect of Language: A Writer’s Rebellion Against Elite Speak (Aug. 23, 2025)

    Summary

    While political consultants advise abandoning inclusive language as elitist, this journalist argues for maintaining respectful terminology that accurately reflects human diversity. Rather than avoiding precise language, writers should explain it accessibly, using their platform to model inclusive communication. Every word choice ripples through culture, creating opportunities to build bridges rather than walls. The challenge isn’t choosing between accessibility and inclusion, but achieving both through explanatory journalism that trusts readers’ capacity to learn and grow while respecting all communities.

    #InclusiveLanguage #JournalismEthics #CulturalChange #WordsMatter
    #MediaResponsibility #LanguageEvolution #ButterflyEffect #WritingForAll

    TAGS: journalism, inclusive language, cultural impact, media ethics, word choice, accessibility, Third Way memo,
    political communication, language evolution, butterfly effect, authentic voice, professional responsibility, writer
    Jim Luce Writes Opinion, Analysis & Viewpoint

    Death | James Dobson’s Legacy: Faith, Family, and Controversy

    Jim Luce
    -
    0
    Death | James Dobson’s Legacy: Faith, Family, and Controversy

    Dangerous Titan of Evangelical Influence Dies at 89

    New York, N.Y. — James Dobson, the child psychologist who founded Focus on the Family in 1977, died on August 21, 2025, at his home in Colorado Springs, Colorado, at the age of 89. His passing, announced by the Dr. James Dobson Family Institute, marks the end of an era for the evangelical movement he helped define.

    Dobson’s work as a broadcaster, author, and political advisor shaped conservative Christian values in America, but his staunch opposition to abortion and LGBTQ+ rights drew sharp criticism. His legacy is a complex tapestry of devotion to family, theological conviction, and cultural contention.

    The Rise of a Family Values Empire

    Born in Shreveport, Louisiana, on April 21, 1936, James Clayton Dobson Jr. grew up in a devout Church of the Nazarene household. His parents, traveling evangelists, instilled a deep faith that would guide his career.

    After earning a doctorate in psychology from the University of Southern California, Dobson worked as a psychologist at Children’s Hospital Los Angeles, where he began to see the family unit as a bulwark against societal decay.

    In 1970, he published Dare to Discipline, a parenting manual advocating for “strict-but-loving” discipline, including corporal punishment, which sold millions and established him as a counterpoint to permissive child-rearing trends.

    In 1977, Dobson founded Focus on the Family in Pomona, California, before moving its headquarters to Colorado Springs in 1991. The organization grew into a multimedia empire, employing over 1,000 people at its peak and broadcasting on 4,000 radio stations across 157 countries.

    Dobson’s daily radio program, also called Focus on the Family, reached an estimated 220 million listeners worldwide, offering advice on parenting, marriage, and faith. His 70-plus books, translated into 27 languages, reinforced his message of traditional family values, with titles like The Strong-Willed Child and Bringing Up Boys becoming staples in evangelical homes.

    James Dobson and his ‘Focus of the Family’ organization advocated for spanking and the underlying philosophy that children are innately defiant and must have their will “broken.” In his books, he has described his own experience using a belt to beat his family’s dog into submission, and then applied the same reasoning to the treatment of children. He pushed for ‘conversion therapy’ to ‘heal’ LGBTQ+ youth. Photo credit: Focus of the Family.

    A Political Powerhouse in the Culture Wars

    Dobson’s influence extended far beyond parenting advice. In the 1980s, alongside figures like Jerry Falwell [Luce Index™ score: 55/100] and Pat Robertson, he became a leading voice in the Christian right, pushing conservative values into mainstream U.S. politics. His organization advocated against abortion, same-sex marriage, and pornography, framing them as threats to the “traditional family.”

    Dobson served as an advisor to five U.S. presidents, including Ronald Reagan [Luce Index™ score: 77/100], whom he interviewed in the Oval Office in 1985, and Donald Trump [Luce Index™ score: 35/100], whose 2016 Evangelical Executive Advisory Board he joined.

    His political clout was undeniable. Dobson’s support for Trump culminated in praise for the 2022 Dobbs decision, which overturned Roe v. Wade, allowing states to restrict abortion.

    “Whether you like Donald Trump or not, if you are supportive of this Dobbs decision, you have to mention the man who made it possible,” Dobson said in a broadcast. He also helped establish Family Policy Councils in approximately 40 states, which lobbied for socially conservative legislation.

    Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, another Dobson-founded group, called him a “Mount Rushmore” figure among Christian conservatives.

    The Washington-based interfaith group Sojourners compared Dobson’s rhetoric to that of German pastors during the
    Third Reich, accusing him of aligning Christianity with nationalist agendas. After the 2012 Sandy Hook shooting,
    Dobson controversially suggested that mass shootings were divine judgment for abortion and same-sex marriage.

    Discipline and Division: Dobson’s Parenting Philosophy

    Dobson’s parenting advice, rooted in his psychology background, emphasized authority and discipline. His book Dare to Discipline advocated for spanking to enforce boundaries, provided it was done without anger and caused “genuine tears.” He argued this approach instilled respect and order, countering the cultural permissiveness of the 1960s.

    However, critics like Donald Eric Capps and Adah Maurer argued that Dobson’s endorsement of corporal punishment provided theological justification for parental violence, potentially harming children into adulthood.

    Capps called Dobson’s advice to “break the will” of a child a “recipe for child abuse,” suggesting it could sexualize discipline or exploit a child’s need for love. On social media platforms like Reddit, former evangelicals shared stories of trauma from households shaped by Dobson’s teachings, with some linking his advocacy for conversion therapy—a pseudoscientific practice to change sexual orientation—to emotional and spiritual harm.

    A Dangerous, Lasting and Polarizing Legacy

    Dobson’s death has reignited debates over his impact. Supporters credit him with strengthening families and giving evangelicals a political voice. Gary Bauer, a senior vice president at the Dr. James Dobson Family Institute, called him a “pioneer” who guided families through shifting cultural values.

    James Dobson was a close ally of Liberty University and Moral Majority founder Jerry Falwell, both men exposed by Fundamentalists Anonymous in the 1980s. Photo credit: Liberty U.

    Conversely, critics like Sarah Jones and Zach Lambert expressed relief at his passing, citing the pain caused by his opposition to LGBTQ+ rights and support for conversion therapy.

    “I’ve walked with hundreds of people who experienced severe trauma because of his teachings,” Lambert wrote on X.

    Dobson’s theological pivot—making the family a sacred cornerstone of evangelicalism—reversed historical trends that prioritized spiritual fervor over domestic life.

    His dystopian fiction trilogy (Fatherless, Childless, Godless) warned of societal collapse without strong families, resonating with conservatives but alarming progressives.

    His ecumenical efforts, such as signing the Manhattan Declaration in 2009 alongside Catholics and Eastern Orthodox Christians, showed a willingness to bridge denominational divides.

    However, issues like abortion and marriage, though his theological differences with Roman Catholicism remained.

    A Voice That Echoed Across Generations

    Dobson’s influence, built on a 46-acre (18.6-hectare) campus in Colorado Springs, was both intimate and global. His radio voice, a constant for millions, was a companion to people like Ralph Reed, who recalled hearing Dobson on the AM dial while traveling rural America.

    His Family Talk radio show, launched after leaving Focus on the Family in 2010, reached over 500,000 weekly listeners via 1,500 stations.

    His books, with sales in the millions, and his organization’s US$140 million (approximately £106 million) empire, underscored his reach.

    As the U.S. navigates ongoing cultural divides, Dobson’s legacy remains a lightning rod. To some, he was a defender of biblical truth and family; to others like myself, a symbol of intolerance.

    His death, following a brief illness, closes a chapter, but the debates he sparked—on discipline, faith, and the role of religion in public life—will endure. He is survived by his wife of 64 years, Shirley Dobson, their two children, a daughter-in-law, and two grandchildren.

    Editor’s Note: As co-founder and Vice president of the 1980’s organization Fundamentalists Anonymous, the author spent a decade combating what he describes as the “Fundamentalist Mindset” and offering help to its victims. Luce specifically targeted Jerry Falwell, pat Robertson, Jimmy Swaggart, Jim and Tammy Bakker, and James Robinson. Falwell named Fundamentalists Anonymous and Luce as “Number One Enemy of the Gospel.”

    Death | James Dobson’s Legacy: Faith, Family, and Controversy (Aug. 23, 2025)

    #JamesDobson #FocusOnTheFamily #EvangelicalLegacy #ChristianRight #FamilyValues

    Tags: James Dobson, Focus on the Family, evangelicalism, Christian right, family values, abortion,
    LGBTQ rights, corporal punishment, conversion therapy, Dr. James Dobson Family Institute

    Summary

    James Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family, died at 89 on August 21, 2025, leaving a polarizing legacy. His evangelical empire championed conservative family values, influencing millions through radio, books, and political advocacy. While praised for strengthening families, Dobson faced criticism for his opposition to abortion and LGBTQ+ rights, with some calling his teachings divisive. His impact on American Christianity and politics remains undeniable, sparking debate about faith and society.

    Democrats Warned Alienating Voters With Elitist Language Choices

    Liz Webster
    -
    0
    Democrats Warned Alienating Voters With Elitist Language Choices

    New Democratic language memo says words like “Latinx” and “birthing person” risk reinforcing perceptions of elitism and division

    New York, N.Y. — As Democrats regroup to prevent a political setback in 2026 and beyond, a provocative internal memo from the so-called “centrist” group Third Way, funded by American corporate interests, has sparked discussion, frustration, and reflection across progressive circles.

    The document, titled Was It Something I Said?, argues that the party’s reliance on academic, activist, and politically correct terms is doing more harm than good when it comes to building bridges with the very voters Democrats most need to win over.

    Centrist Third Way, funded by corporate interests, attacked Sanders in Iowa.

    The 10-page memo outlines phrases and concepts that have gained traction in policy circles, activist communities, and universities—yet repel many working- and middle-class Americans who perceive them as elitist, condescending, or needlessly complex.

    From the now-infamous “birthing person” to jargon-heavy terms like “systemic oppression” or “stakeholders,” the memo points out that Democrats risk losing voters not because of their policies, but because of how they talk about them.

    At stake, Third Way argues, is not just messaging but the ability to stop Donald Trump [Luce Index™ score: 35/100] and the broader MAGA movement from returning to power.

    “When policymakers are public-facing, the language we use must invite, not repel; start a conversation, not end it,” the memo warns.

    When Language Creates Barriers, Not Bridges

    For a party that brands itself as the voice of inclusion, the findings are stark. According to Third Way, words designed to be considerate, nuanced, or theoretically precise often accomplish the opposite. Instead of expanding the conversation, they can shut it down.

    The memo divides problematic language into six categories: therapy-speak, seminar room language, organizer jargon, gender and orientation correctness, shifting racial constructs, and crime framing. In each instance, the criticism is similar: the terms may satisfy highly engaged activists or advocacy groups but alienate the vast majority of voters who find them confusing, elitist, or scolding.

    For example, therapy-inspired language like “microaggression,” “triggering,” or “safe space” may resonate in academic or activist discussions but tend to backfire in everyday political conversation. Phrases such as “justice-involved” used in place of “formerly incarcerated person” leave many feeling that the plight of victims is minimized.

    “The problem is not the commitment to equity and empathy,” says Maria Lopez, a communications consultant who has advised progressive groups nationwide. “It’s that the movement sometimes chooses phrasing that signals belonging to an inside club rather than talking with everyday voters in plain language. That’s exactly when people tune out.”

    Graphic credit: People’s World.

    Choosing Words Without Abandoning Values

    At its core, the memo is not arguing for Democrats to abandon their values. Indeed, the report is careful to note that fighting bigotry, protecting LGBTQ+ rights, and addressing racism remain fundamental commitments. The issue is not what Democrats believe, but how they express it.

    The authors acknowledge that much of the controversial terminology has been driven into political discourse by advocacy groups or younger progressives who view the changes as an act of respect and recognition. For example, replacing “homeless” with “the unhoused” is meant to center humanity, not reduce it. But as Third Way warns, intent and impact often collide when well-meaning shifts in wording are perceived as elitist linguistic policing.

    That tension is hardly new. Democrats have wrestled with language debates since the fight over “welfare queen” stereotypes in the 1980s and right through to today’s arguments about whether to say “defund the police.” But as the memo emphasizes, the country’s current political polarization makes these choices significantly more consequential.

    In short: Democrats may lose fewer votes over big, structural policies than over words that strike Americans as scolding or exclusionary.

    Language Beyond the Memo: Striking a Balance

    Not all progressive communicators are prepared to jettison newer terminology. Many activists argue that inclusive words—though initially unfamiliar—eventually normalize, helping society evolve toward greater humanity and acceptance. Moreover, they contend that certain terms have replaced outright offensive ones, and dropping them would constitute regression.

    Take gendered job titles, for instance. Using firefighter instead of “fireman” or mail carrier instead of “postman” reflects an intentional effort to avoid unnecessary gendering. Similarly, calling someone a person living with a disability rather than a “handicapped person” helps place emphasis on the person, not the condition. Other shifts, such as older adult instead of “senior citizen,” or custodian over “janitor,” aim to neutralize stereotypes.

    “Respectful terminology doesn’t have to be alienating,” explains Alan Wright, a sociolinguist at Columbia University. “The key is balance: language should show dignity without sounding contrived. You don’t need to embrace every advocacy-driven neologism, but you also don’t have to stick with words that carry bias or stigma.”

    The Political Reality: Voters Want Clarity

    What studies repeatedly show is that voters distrust what they don’t understand. According to Third Way, focus groups reveal that respondents often recoil when confronted with terms such as “Latinx” or “intersectionality.” Even if the ideas themselves have merit, the vocabulary can trigger suspicion. One participant in a recent focus group reportedly said, “If I don’t know what it means, I think they’re hiding something.”

    That distrust amplifies cultural anxieties. In an age where people fear cancellation or public shaming for using the “wrong” terminology, many simply withdraw from political conversation altogether. That silence, the memo argues, benefits Trump and the MAGA movement, who then frame Democrats as elitist out-of-touch scolds.

    The result? A political communications paradox. Democrats risk alienating not because of their policies on healthcare, wages, or climate change but because of their insistence on what some voters see as opaque or pedantic phrasing.

    Looking Forward: Will Democrats Heed This Advice?

    The ultimate question is whether the Democratic Party, broadly defined, will adjust its messaging in time for the next cycle. Party strategists are aware that every percentage point matters in swing districts across states like Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Arizona, and Georgia. Losing persuadable voters over terminology rather than policy could prove fatal in races decided by razor-thin margins.

    Yet the tension remains. For progressives, the call to simplify language can sound like an invitation to capitulate, erasing years of effort to introduce more humane, accurate, and inclusive terms. For moderates, it is about pragmatism: clear, accessible words ensure the party continues to resonate with the broad coalition needed to stop Trump.

    As one strategist summarized, “We’re not saying never use these words. But if saying them makes voters feel excluded, then we’re losing the argument before it even begins.”

    Language as Strategy, Not Slogan

    In an increasingly polarized America, language is not just vocabulary—it is political strategy.

    Logo of Third Way. Credit: Third Way.

    The Third Way memo makes clear that Democrats have the policies and moral commitments to defeat MAGA extremism, but may fall short if voters perceive them as more concerned with linguistic correctness than with real-life struggles at the kitchen table.

    The path forward may rely on what Democrats have long excelled at in theory but struggled with in practice—communicating values in ways that reflect authenticity, accessibility, and humanity.

    As the memo bluntly concludes, “Communicating in authentic ways that welcome rather than drive voters away would be a good start.”

    Summary

    Democrats are navigating a political messaging crisis, warns a new memo from centrist group Third Way. While their values remain strong, their reliance on jargon and activist-driven language risks alienating everyday voters. Terms like “Latinx,” “birthing person,” and “intersectionality” may signal inclusivity to some but come across as elitist and confusing to many. The takeaway: Democrats must speak in accessible, authentic language if they hope to beat Donald Trump and MAGA in upcoming elections.

    Democrats Warned Alienating Voters With Elitist Language Choices (Aug. 23, 2025)

    #DemocraticMessaging #ThirdWay #PoliticalLanguage #VoterTrust #MAGA

    TAGS: Democrats, language, voters, Third Way, inclusion,
    MAGA, political messaging, communication, elections, strategy

    Geography of the Soul: Finding a Way Out of Fundamentalism

    Liz Webster
    -
    0
    Geography of the Soul: Finding a Way Out of Fundamentalism

    Paul Cowan on the Victims of Fundamentalism in The Village Voice (1987)

    Originally published in The Village Voice, New York City, June 23, 1987

    Fundamentalist Anonymous support group in New York City, 1987, with the founders Jim Luce and Richard Yao, M.Div. (right). Photo credit: The Village Voice.

    Jim Luce Writes on Fundamentalism & Fundamentalists Anonymous

    Geography of the Soul: Finding a Way Out of Fundamentalism (1987) by Paul Cowan, originally published as the cover story of The Village Voice, The Village Voice, New York City, June 23, 1987; republished in The Stewardship Report (Aug. 22, 2025).

    Remembering Our Battle Against Moral Majority and the Fundamentalist Mindset

    Jim Luce
    -
    0
    Remembering Our Battle Against Moral Majority and the Fundamentalist Mindset

    Our biggest accomplishment was standing up for those torn down by the TV evangelists

    Jim Luce

    New York, N.Y. I left Wall Street unexpectedly following an appearance on the Phil Donahue Show in 1985. There, on the Oprah Winfrey Show of its day, Richard Yao and I discussed “religious addiction” – the first time that phrase had ever been mentioned on national television.

    I explained to Phil the need for an “anonymous” organization to help those recovering from religious addiction, including followers of powerful TV evangelists such as Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, and Jimmy Swaggart – then riding high, broadcasting seven days a week, and raking in millions.

    The response was so overwhelming — with 17,000 people asking for help — that I had to choose between responding to those I had said, “If you’re hurting, call us!” and my Japanese banking career.

    One woman who soon called us told us an unbelievable story, which turned out to be typical. She was financially unable to give, but was led to believe it was “God’s Will” that she keep giving to a TV evangelist. Other stories – thousands of them — were of emotional, sexual, and physical abuse.

    These personal stories were so strong they were written-up, in article after article, by the Associated Press], Christian Science Monitor, Los Angeles Times, Newsweek, Philadelphia Inquirer, San Francisco Chronicle, USA Today, Washington Post – even the London Observer and Toronto Star.

    Never a Fundamentalist myself, I co-founded Fundamentalists Anonymous and — with the help of
    Hank Luce and the Henry Luce Foundation — raised $1.2 million from 1985 to 1989 to build support
    groups across the U.S. for recovering fundamentalists. Hank was Presbyterian and I, Episcopalian.

    Recovering Fundamentalists, like members of my own family, are those who believed themselves to have been so damaged by their all-or-nothing lifestyle most could not even walk into a Mainline church without feeling nauseous.

    Richard Yao (red tie)and I (yellow tie) testified in Congress against the TV evangelists in 1988.

    The momentum we gain was startling. Richard and I testified in Congress against the TV evangelists in 1988. During this period I served as resource and was interviewed repeatedly by the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Today Show, in addition to CNN, A.P. & U.P.I.

    One reason for our enormous coverage was the media’s fear of the Religious Right. The Moral Majority, headed by Falwell, consisted of conservative Christian political action committees with membership in the millions.

    Jerry Falwell attacked our Fundamentalists Anonymous along with the A.C.L.U. and Norman Lear’s People for the American Way in his endless direct mail appeals.

    In 1987 the New York Times ran an extensive article entitled “Amid Scandals, Fundamentalists Seek Consolation,” by Bill Geist:

    “This is terribly upsetting,” said Ginger Harney, a 76-year-old California woman, who was sending money to the TV evangelists Jim and Tammy Bakker until the scandal involving charges of adultery, hush money and drug abuse erupted.

    She is one of thousands of fundamentalists throughout the country who are overwhelming the tiny staff of Fundamentalists Anonymous, or F.A., in New York, with telephone calls and letters.

    The group operates from an unfinished church basement in Manhattan, wishing to keep the exact location secret because of threats.

    The complaints by fundamentalists are ranging from simple disillusionment with most TV evangelists to callers claiming that fundamentalism has caused them bankruptcy, divorce, and suicidal depression.

    One caller said her husband chained her in the basement for three months trying to get the devil out of her.

    Those calling the hot line receive a newsletter and referral to one of 41 chapters across the country serving the group’s 30,000 members.

    The group’s budget could reach $300,000 at the end of the current fiscal year, said Mr. Yao, who points proudly to the Rev. Jerry Falwell’s attacks on F.A. as proof it is having an effect.

    “If the fundamentalist experience is working for you, fine, but we’re here if it isn’t,” said Mr. Yao [27], who quit his job with the Wall Street law firm of Mudge Rose two years ago to begin the group with Jim Luce, 27, a former assistant Eurobond portfolio manager with Daiwa Bank.

    The Washington Post covered us. A story entitled “Healing After the Leap From Faith: Fundamentalists Anonymous Aids Those Who Cast Off Religion” ran in 1987.

    Universal asked me to speak out against Fundamentalist censorship with Marty Scorsese’ controversial film, Last Temptation of Christ (1988).

    I spoke out about the dangers of the Fundamentalist Mindset every chance I got, from attacking Pepsi’s Boycott of Madonna because of her “Like a Prayer” video to supporting Universal Studio’s and Marty Scorsese’ film, Last Temptation of Christ.

    Pepsi dropped Madonna as a result of a Fundamentalist boycott (1989).

    I did not limit myself to Christianity. The Fundamentalist Mindset is one of black-and-white that any faith can fall prey to.

    So I criticized poor Salman Rushdie for not being strong enough, calling him “spineless” in 1991 in the Los Angeles Times. He caved to Islamic extremists and agreed not to publish his Satanic Verses in paperback. As a young twenty-something, I felt he was a coward.

    “This spineless and shameless capitulation is a serious setback for free speech. It will only encourage more fundamentalist attempts, whether Christian or Islamic, to censor literature and art,” I told the LA Times.

    During Pat Robertson’s presidential bid, Richard Yao and I embarked on 13-state tour to hold press-conferences explaining how dangerous this man was (1988).

    Our biggest accomplishment was standing up for those torn down by the TV evangelists. I coordinated our legal task force, announced in a 1987 press conference.

    “The PTL scandal emphasizes the complete lack of accountability in many Fundamentalist or Pentecostal groups,” I was quoted as having said.

    The PTL Club collapsed in 1987. Tammy died in 2007.

    The Task Force had three major goals: 1) accountability of religious leaders to their followers, 2) deterrence of future acts of abuse or misconduct, and 3) protection and expansion of the legal rights of religious consumers.

    One of my best efforts was a poster of Jim and Tammy Bakker behind bars for a benefit for the Legal Task Force with Steve Allen and Frank Zappa. The problem was it was so good people pulled them down to decorate their dorm rooms.

    Interfaith dialogue was also important to me. I spoke frequently with Jewish leaders including Rabbi Jim Rudin. A search on-line revealed the Archives of the American Jewish Committee.

    On Monday, December 16, 1985, I met with Rabbis Gunther Hirshberg and A. James Rudin. According to the Archives, Mimi Alperin introduced us.

    “Fundamentalists Anonymous began in April, 1985 with a two-line ad in the Village Voice. The organization has since mushroomed and has attracted over 20,000 ex-fundamentalists as well as considerable media attention.

    “Following appearances on the Donahue Show, the Today Show and mention in several major news magazines, Yao and Luce left their professional Wall Street jobs to build their organization.

    “Luce stressed that fundamentalism is characterized by an authoritarian “mindset,” which is incompatible with a positive appreciation of religious pluralism.

    “In addition to providing counseling for ex-fundamentalists, they attempt to educate the public about the social and political implications of fundamentalism.

    “In the discussion which followed, several IAC members inquired about fundamentalist Jews.

    “Yao and Luce pointed out that 10-15% of the total response has been from Jews leaving fundamentalist groups,” the A.J.C. Archives conclude.

    We could not have claimed Fundamentalism was addictive and psychologically
    dangerous if we did not have the support of the mental health community.

    After the Donahue Show, we heard from dozens of therapists — psychologists and psychiatrists – who were dealing in their own practices with the trauma we were discussing. We served as a catalyst for them to come together.

    National Institutes on Health – National Library of Medicine.

    We were soon able to arrange for the American Psychological Association to have a panel on religious addiction for the first time at their annual convention in New York, 1987.

    The Journal of Religion and Health carried an article based on that panel entitled “Fundamentalist Religion and its Effect on Mental Health” written by two psychiatrists, on from the Veteran’s Administration in Los Angeles, and the other in private practice in Boston.

    The journal article stated, “The national self-help group Fundamentalists Anonymous has focused attention upon mental problems that may be caused or exacerbated by authoritarian religion.

    “In this article we outline assertions about the mental problems caused by membership in fundamentalist religion, illustrate these with two case histories, briefly discuss intervention strategies, and describe conceptual and empirical issues.

    “While former members have presented problems severe enough to warrant professional treatment, a causal link between their symptoms and their religious membership has not yet been established, because there is little empirical work on the subject.”

    This was cutting-edge science. Psychology Today then covered our efforts in a piece entitled “Leaving The Fold” (Jan. 1988).

    The publication that served as the foundation for Fundamentalists Anonymous was Richard’s There is a Way Out, which I published through Luce Publications. I was 26.

    This booklet is still found in libraries throughout the U.S. I can only imagine what we would have accomplished had we had the Internet in the 1980’s!

    Many books have documented our four-year efforts. These include The Road Less Traveled & Beyond (M. Scott Peck, Simon and Schuster).

    M. Scott Peck endorsed us:

    “Fundamentalism, with its pervasive sense of guilt about most normal physical and emotional feelings, and its patriarchal structure wherein the father’s word is law, creates family atmospheres where emotional, physical and/or sexual abuse of children is the rule, not the exception.

    “Such abuse is now being publicized thanks to organizations such as Fundamentalists Anonymous,” Peck wrote in The Road Less Traveled & Beyond.

    Other books, of many, are Culture Wars (James Davison Hunter), Co-Dependence (Charles L. Whitfield), and Hollywood Under Siege (Thomas R. Lindlof).

    Hollywood Under Siege discusses how I was invited to support Universal Studio‘s Last Temptation of Christ in New York. My friend, publicist Josh Baran, also invited Daniel Berrigan, Ram Dass, and ex-Jesuit Terry Sweeney.

    In The Price of Fundamentalism, Mike D’Antonio wrote about extreme Christianity, using me as a source:

    “In extreme cases, Luce reports, women and children in violent fundamentalist families suffer further abuse while struggling to follow a religion that teaches them to stay in the home despite beatings.

    “We have members whose children have been maimed, who have been maimed themselves, because their religion teaches them to stay in a bad situation.

    “They may even blame them, saying they are bad and that’s why there is violence directed against them,” he said.

    “Problems can go unnoticed, Luce adds, if a family lives within a kind of Fundamentalist subculture where outside help is discouraged.

    “FA’s files are filled with case studies of former Fundamentalists who say religion became so powerful in their lives that they were unable to have relationships or make rational decisions.

    In the New York Times, Ari Goldman wrote “Evangelicals Flourish, with a New York Touch.”

    “On Sunday at Bethlehem Church in Richmond Hill, Queens, a full house of 600 worshipers sang spirited hymns, held hands in prayer and fell silent as a congregant was ”seized by the spirit” and spoke in unintelligible speech known as tongues.”The church is a member of the Assemblies of God, the same church that recently defrocked Mr. Bakker of the PTL ministry.

    “The Bakker scandals have not shaken his congregation, said Mr. Behr, using the barometer of attendance and contributions, both of which have continued to increase in recent weeks.

    “Another indication of Evangelical strength in New York is the pace in recent weeks at Fundamentalists Anonymous.

    ‘We’ve never been busier,” said Jim Luce, associate executive director of the organization that seeks to help those who feel trapped in the Evangelical wing known as Fundamentalism.

    According to Mr. Luce, Fundamentalists tend to see the world in absolutes and are likely to break off contact with those who do not agree with them.

    Since the PTL scandal broke in March, the number of letters and calls to Fundamentalists Anonymous has doubled to 150 a day, Mr. Luce said.

    Although the TV evangelists are long gone and forgotten, the evil that is the Fundamentalist Mindset is as alive today as ever. I am as committed today to counter it as I was in 1985. Tolerance must prevail if humanity is to survive.

    Note: Fundamentalists Antonymous existed in the days before Internet reporting. Slowly, newspapers and wire services are digitalizing and I will attempt to bring the stories on-line as they are available. Newsweek’s “Is Fundamentalism Addictive?” (8/5/85), The New York Observer’s “Fighting Authoritarian Mindset (2/1/88), and The New York Law Journal’s “Lawyer Volunteers Aid Claims Against Cult Groups” (1/19/88).

    Remembering My Battle Against Moral Majority and the Fundamentalist Mindset
    (Originally published in The Huffington Post, Aug. 6, 2009)

    Edited by Ethel Grodzins Romm (1925-2021)

    Reflecting on our stand against the Moral Majority and the fundamentalist mindset, I recount leaving Wall Street, co-founding Fundamentalists Anonymous, and supporting the recovery of thousands harmed by authoritarian religion. Our work exposed abuse, advocated for accountability, and built support nationally. Though the TV evangelists faded, intolerance persists. I remain dedicated to promoting tolerance and pluralism, believing our efforts pioneered a movement for healing and religious freedom.

    #BattleAgainstFundamentalism #MoralMajority #ReligiousTolerance
    #FundamentalistsAnonymous #JimLuce #FaithFreedom

    TAGS: religious abuse, fundamentalism, Moral Majority, religious tolerance, faith recovery,
    Fundamentalists Anonymous, TV evangelists, religious pluralism, religious freedom,
    Jim Luce,1980s activism, mental health, accountability, religious trauma, interfaith dialogue

    The Fundamentalists Anonymous Movement (1986)

    Jim Luce
    -
    0
    The Fundamentalists Anonymous Movement (1986)

    An Organization For Former Fundamentalists Has Met A Groundswell of Support

    Originally published in The American Humanist by Jim Luce, writing under his full name, James J. D. Luce, Jan.-Feb. 1986

    Something is happening in the Fundamentalist landscape.

    In the past six months, without real money or big names behind it, a support group for ex-Fundamentalists has emerged from nowhere to become what Newsweek has called a “movement.”

    At long last, the best-kept secret in America is being revealed to the, public: the fundamentalist experience can be a serious mental health hazard to perhaps millions of people.

    Now there is a national support organization for those people who have been “burned” by fundamentalism–Fundamentalists Anonymous (FA). (We use Fundamentalism to include the Charismatic-Pentecostal movement which stresses “speaking in tongues” and other “gifts of the spirit”).

    FA works with ex-Fundamentalists as well as concerned parents, spouses, relatives, and close friends of those caught up in Fundamentalism.

    At this time, more than ten thousand people, hardly a significant number compared to the population from which it claims to come, have called or written us.

    Even though they come from all fifty states and constitute a cross-section of American society, there is a common list of complaints that we hear again and again: years of overwhelming guilt, fear, and anxiety after leaving the fundamentalist fold, loneliness, chronic depression, low self-esteem, years in therapy, and sometimes even attempts at suicide.

    (incomplete)

    The Fundamentalists Anonymous Movement (1986)
    Originally published in The Humanist by James J. D. Luce, Jan-Feb. 1986
    Republished in The Stewardship Report (Aug. 22, 2025)

    Summary

    In this archival piece, discover the unexpected rise of Fundamentalists Anonymous. Originally published in 1986, the article reveals how this support group swiftly grew into a national movement, offering a lifeline to thousands struggling with the profound mental health aftermath of leaving fundamentalist faiths. It explores the common trauma of guilt, anxiety, and depression experienced by former members, shedding light on a critical issue that remains deeply relevant today.

    #FundamentalistsAnonymous #ExFundamentalist #ReligiousTrauma #MentalHealth
    #FaithDeconstruction #Recovery #SpiritualAbuse #ReligiousRecovery #TheHumanist

    TAGS: Fundamentalists Anonymous, religious trauma, ex-fundamentalist, mental health, faith deconstruction,
    spiritual abuse, support group, recovery, religious recovery, cult recovery, The Humanist, James Luce
    Jim Luce Writes on Fundamentalism & Fundamentalists Anonymous
    1...456...102Page 5 of 102