In Search of a More Compassionate Nation

Fighting for the Soul of America

Ideology vs. one-upmanship

Photo by Quilia on Unsplash

Sometimes, truth is indeed stranger than fiction.

On June 14th, there will be a UFC fight on the South Lawn of the White House. Construction of the Claw is underway, and since I know little to nothing about this sport or the professional athletes who compete in it, and I am appalled by the barbaric nature of fighting in general, I thought: Why not write about the real fight going on in America?

ROUND ONE: Abundance vs. Scarcity

The White House is being transformed into a gold palace. The East Wing has been demolished in an attempt to build a ballroom — the finest money can buy. It will be an ornately designed and carefully crafted 90,000-square-foot space with a seating capacity of 650 (up from the current capacity of 200). This ballroom’s fate, however, is in the hands of a federal appeals court judge, who will determine if Congressional approval is necessary to move forward. If this project comes to fruition, it will be funded by wealthy donors, with a little help from the taxpayers ($1 billion) to cover the security measures necessary to keep the venue safe.

Meanwhile, back in my home state of New Jersey, Detainees at Delaney Hall, a privately-operated detention center in Newark, are going on a hunger strike to protest inhumane conditions, alleging spoiled or rotten food and a lack of access to basic hygiene products such as toilet paper, menstrual products, or toothpaste. The Governor’s office is seeking full transparency after health inspectors were refused full access to the facility. A U.S. Senator and other advocates were recently caught in a cloud of pepper spray and treated for eye irritation after ICE agents used the chemical for crowd control measures.

Let’s use our wealth to support those who are in need. They, too, are fathers, mothers, and children whose stories matter. Sometimes they just don’t have the resources to tell it.

ROUND TWO: Free Speech vs. Censorship

There has been no shortage of hate speech and mean-spiritedness in America over the last ten years. Nasty accusations are everywhere, name-calling has become the norm, and the media is blamed for taking sides and fueling the fire. Serious journalists are competing for our attention with culture-war commentators.

News arrives at a relentless pace, only to be forgotten as the next outrage captures our attention.

Just a few months ago, the Vice President was under fire for brushing off offensive texts in a Young Republicans’ group chat that got the press’s attention. Comments, including calling rape “epic” and “I love Hitler,” were deemed normal youth banter. Vance defended a boys-will-be-boys mentality, even though some of the group were closer in age to him than school-aged children.

Vance scolded Democrats and the media for paying too much attention to “what a bunch of young people, a bunch of kids, say in a group chat, however offensive”.

I also haven’t forgotten the Access Hollywood tapes or the commentary that there are good people on both sides, after the Unite The Right rally took place in Charlottesville, Virginia.

Free speech isn’t comfortable. I may strongly disagree with these sentiments being acceptable, but no one appointed me the moral police of our democracy, last I checked.

Yet, I always enjoyed winding down with a recorded episode of The Late Show with Stephen Colbert. To say this late-night comedian was not a fan of the current President is an understatement. But the feeling was mutual, and the President basked in the success of the show’s cancellation.

Paramount, the parent company of CBS, claims the cancellation was for financial reasons, but I’ve seen a pattern of retribution that makes me doubt that claim, going back to the President’s first term, when he banned certain reporters from White House briefings. The political implications connected to the Paramount takeover of Warner Brothers are beyond the scope of this piece, but suffice it to say that the current state of network majority-versus-Fox News dynamic is mild in comparison to what seems to be coming down the pike.

The recent firing of 60 Minutes correspondent Scott Pelley supports my suspicions, and I find it difficult to dismiss what I’m seeing as mere political bias.

No one person should have the ability to determine that the only right speech is the one that supports their position.

ROUND THREE: Equity vs. exclusion

Early in his second term, President Trump signed an Executive Order to end Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) practices across the Federal Government, deeming the policies create radical political agendas.

The administration claims that DEI initiatives resulted in unqualified hires and supports ending illegal discrimination to restore merit-based opportunity.

Merit-based opportunity.

I interpret that to mean opening the door for qualified candidates based on their experience and what they can bring to the table, regardless of their race, religion, ethnicity, sexual orientation, or gender.

Yet one need look no further than the current Presidential administration to find many unqualified hires, where merit appears to have taken a back seat to loyalty.

There is an unspoken (okay, sometimes spoken) division between those who feel DEI practices went too far and penalized the majority (white male), and those who feel it hasn’t gone far enough to even the playing field for those who were shortchanged on opportunity for advancement.

Abandoning DEI programs has resulted in real people being harmed by ego-centric policies and talking points.

And voices in Higher Education are being stifled.

Demonizing the “other” has once again taken center stage in our country. For example, Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee and Indiana Gov. Mike Braun declared June Nuclear Family Month. Can anyone honestly say this wasn’t in direct retaliation for June being designated Pride month?

Once, we aspired to widen the path to equality for all, but today that same path feels narrower. Not long ago, we celebrated our differences. Today, a homogeneous society appears to be the goal.

And discrimination and hate speech are, once again, in vogue.

No American stands above another in worth or dignity, and, like it or not, we have a shared history of discrimination and prejudice. Trying to reestablish a 1950’s mentality is not the way forward.

It is time to get back to issues of principles and policies and stop buying into hate rhetoric, gotchas, and division.

My fear is that we are headed toward a knockout if we refuse to change our approach. The courts and our justice system are not just another contender in the fight; they are what keep the contest fair and our democracy intact, and their authority is in jeopardy as well. The most important fight in America is not taking place on the South Lawn. It is taking place everywhere we turn.

As a Nation, we must decide who we want to be. After all, A house divided against itself cannot stand. We may never agree on every issue, but democracy cannot thrive when one side seeks to completely dismiss the concerns of the other.