JOBS POLICIES, ANALYSIS, AND RESOURCES
Latest Jobs Posts
Navigating Global Governance in a Multipolar World: U.S. Strategy Amid Changing Power Dynamics
40% of the U.S. population line our coasts. That equates to approximately 130 million people residing in coastal counties. In addition to those who retire seaside, entire economies are integrated into the coastal industries of fishing, tourism, energy, shipbuilding, and recreation. Even a cursory glance using google maps shows how tightly clustered the built space is, all on only 10% of the total U.S. land mass. Shoreline communities have five times the population density as compared to the U.S. average.
UCI World Championships in Rwanda
The International Cycling Union (UCI) is the governing-body of cycling throughout the world. This year’s World Championships, held every four years, will take place in and around Kigali, Rwanda. The previous edition of the World Championships was held in the cycling-rich region of Flanders in Belgium. According to Velo, the planned route in Kigali is set to be the hardest course ever for a UCI World Championships. The men’s course is set to be a 268 kilometer slog through the Rwandan mountains (with more climbing than previous World Championships set in the European Alps) and the women’s race will be a similar slog through the mountains but a bit shorter at only 165 kilometers.
The End of DEI in the Federal Government: Who’s Really Affected? (Social Justice Policy Brief #172)
Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) policies in the United States trace their roots back to the civil rights movements of the 1960s, particularly through the enactment of Affirmative Action programs.
No shortage of Canaries in our Coastlines Signaling Catastrophe (Environmental Policy Brief #178)
40% of the U.S. population line our coasts. That equates to approximately 130 million people residing in coastal counties. In addition to those who retire seaside, entire economies are integrated into the coastal industries of fishing, tourism, energy, shipbuilding, and recreation. Even a cursory glance using google maps shows how tightly clustered the built space is, all on only 10% of the total U.S. land mass. Shoreline communities have five times the population density as compared to the U.S. average.
Elon Musk, Destroyer of U.S. Government Agencies and Bureaucratic Careers, Has Serious Unchecked Conflicts of Interest
Unelected tech multibillionaire Elon Musk is heavily involved in government actions that impact his personal finances. As head of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), Musk has been dismantling U.S. government institutions and slashing staff at nearly a dozen federal agencies that have more than 30 ongoing investigations into Musk’s six companies.
Trump Leaves the WHO: A Dangerous Era for Our Health
No one in this world deserves to get sick. It is a condition that ranges from a day-long tedium to the unfortunate conclusion of one’s life. From both extremes and everything in between, illness is a state of being humanity could live without, or at least with a reduced frequency.
Week That Was: Global News in Review
US-Russia Talks in Saudi Arabia, Civil War in Sudan Nears Two Year Anniversary, China Restricts Certain Ethnic Groups from Leaving the Country, and Argetina’s Crypto Scandal
Federal judiciary changes over the past 8 years
Over the past 8 years, the federal judiciary system has changed drastically. Landmark rulings, overturning past precedents, and a dramatic shift in the makeup of justices in the Supreme Court have significantly changed the judiciary system as a whole. This Brief explores how this change in composition has affected the judiciary system and policy action and will for years to come.
Gazans Face a Precarious and Uncertain Future
Israel’s assault on Gaza has decimated its people and infrastructure. Rebuilding will take decades, and in the meantime, the population remains dependent on international aid. Not only has Israel put drastic new restrictions on United Nations aid, but Donald Trump is pulling US funding for UN aid programs, suggesting that Palestinians should be forced out, the US take over and “build a Middle East Riviera there.
TikTok CEO Is Trump’s Latest Billionaire Buddy
TikTok CEO Is Trump’s Latest Billionaire Buddy
Technology Policy Brief #125 | By: Mindy Spatt | January 24, 2025
__________________________________
Summary
Predictably, a law banning TikTok was in effect for only a few hours on January 19. The Biden administration’s case against the app as a security threat was weak, but that’s not why the ban didn’t materialize. Even before taking office, Donald Trump rescinded it. He will try to broker a deal for a partial sale of the app, most likely to one of his billionaire buddies.
Analysis
Whether you like TikTok or not- I don’t- the swiftness with which Donald Trump, even before taking office, ignored the decisions of Congress and the Supreme Court doesn’t bode well for the future.
Trump took advantage of a giant loophole in the law passed by Congress requiring Tik Tok to sell part ownership or shut down, allowing the company a 90-day reprieve if negotiations for such a sale were in progress. TikTok’s owner, ByteDance, has repeatedly said it is not open to such a sale.
Despite that, Trump granted a sale reprieve for 75 days, parting ways with some of his right-wing republican allies. Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas, chairman of the Senate’s Intelligence Committee, urged the ban to go forward. In a press statement on January 17, he said “ByteDance and its Chinese Communist masters had nine months to sell TikTok before the Sunday deadline. The very fact that Communist China refuses to permit its sale reveals exactly what TikTok is: a communist spy app. On the 19th another release, jointly issued with Senator Pete Ricketts (R-Nebraska) stated that once the law has taken effect, there was “no legal basis for any kind of ‘extension’ of its effective date.”
In his first term, Trump tried to ban TikTok and another Chinese-owned app, WeChat, but lawsuits succeeded in stopping those efforts. Still, when a ban started gaining traction in Congress during the Biden administration, Trump didn’t get on board. Commentators have speculated this gained him points with young voters, but do TikTok aficionados follow the news that closely or care that much? More likely Trump realized his support of the company could be profitable.
Byte Dance has so far been silent on Trump’s proposal for a shared ownership model. But TikTok CEO Shou Chew has visited Trump at Mar A Lago and was proudly front and center at his inauguration. On January 19 TikTok praised the (then) former president and credited him with its triumphant return after 15 hours offline. All users saw this message: “As a result of President Trump’s efforts, TikTok is back in the U.S.!,”
The brief shutdown sparked some whining among users, but also some relief. Comments included:
I kind of internally panicked for a bit before a wave of calm descended.
I already knew how addictive, toxic, and wasteful it can be, but would still find myself mindlessly scrolling. This was a forced reckoning of sorts.
I’m going to delete it, stop consuming short-form content, and limit my consumption of long-form content.
A few potential buyers have been mentioned in press reports. One is billionaire businessman and real estate mogul Frank McCourt, former owner of the LA Dodgers, who, along with Shark Tank investor Kevin O’Leary, made an offer.
Former Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin has also announced his interest and is putting together an investment group. When Mnuchin was Treasury Secretary he tried to force the sale of a large stake in TikTok to US companies.
Several other names have been floated as possible buyers, including Tesla CEO and Trump BFF Elon Musk. Others who would likely be able to afford to buy the app, estimated to be worth well over $100 billion, might include Trump donors and crypto billionaires the Winklevoss brothers or perhaps Mark Zuckerberg who has lambasted TikTok’s Chinese ownership as a security threat even while Meta’s apps have routinely sold user data to foreign companies, including Chinese ones.
Read more on the real dangers of TikTok below.
Resources:
- TikTok executives know about app’s effect on teens, lawsuit documents allege, by Bobby Allyn, Sylvia Goodman and Dara Kerr, National Public Radio, Oct.11, 2024
- The Dangers of TikTok That Are Worth Your Attention By Johanna Neeson, Readers Digest, May 17, 2024
- US: TikTok Ban Won’t Solve Big Tech Harms, Amnesty International, Jan. 17, 2025
Stay in-the-know! Always get the latest updates from our reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist News Weekly Newsletter. Your support is crucial in safeguarding fearless independent journalism. If you appreciate our content, please consider donating today to help protect democracy and empower citizenship.
Understanding Trump’s Expansionist Threats
Understanding Trump’s Expansionist Threats
Foreign Policy Brief #174 | By: Abran C | January 20, 2025
__________________________________
Since his election victory, Donald Trump has made international headlines with a series of comments suggesting possible annexation and military action against neighbors and allies of the United States. Although the international rules based order established by the US at the end of World War II sought to end illegal land grabs and territorial annexations, President Trump has shown interest in returning to a time of territorial expansion. The countries caught in the crosshairs of Trump’s threats include Canada, Panama, Greenland, and Mexico.
As is often the case with Trump, his comments have sparked division. Some dismiss his suggestions as mere hyperbole, while others see them as a clear demonstration of his disregard for international norms. Leaders from Panama, Canada, Mexico, and Denmark have publicly rejected the notions of ceding territory or allowing military intervention in their territories.
Trump’s threats include using military force to seize control of the Panama Canal and Greenland, incorporating Canada as the 51st state of the U.S., and deploying American troops to Mexico to combat drug cartels. Below is a closer examination of these threats and the relationships between the US and the targeted countries.
Panama
President Trump has threatened to use the US military to take control of the Panama Canal. The canal, constructed between 1904 and 1914, was funded and organized by the US, which controlled a six-mile zone on either side until 1999. The canal’s transfer to Panama followed a 1978 agreement brokered by President Jimmy Carter.
The construction of the canal involved the labor of roughly 150,000 workers, many of whom were of African descent from the Caribbean. Most came from Jamaica and Barbados, but others hailed from islands such as St. Lucia and Grenada.
Trump’s grievances appear to stem from what he called “ridiculous” fees charged to U.S. vessels. In reality, these fees are calculated based on vessel type, size, and cargo, and have increased for all international ships due to a severe drought in Panama beginning in late 2022. By early 2024, the drought was described as the worst in the canal’s history, leading to bottlenecks and reduced vessel transits to conserve water. Far from the “Chinese-controlled conspiracy” Trump alleges, the increased fees reflect logistical challenges rather than actions against the US.
Greenland
Trump has repeatedly claimed that the US should acquire Greenland, describing the move as “absolutely necessary for national security and global freedom.” Although geographically part of North America, Greenland is politically linked to Europe, as a territory of Denmark.
European leaders, including those in Denmark, have expressed their dismay at Trump’s remarks, emphasizing that annexing an ally’s territory by force would violate international law. The US has maintained a presence in Greenland for decades; in 1946 President Harry Truman offered to purchase the island for $100 million, a proposal Denmark rejected. Years later though a deal was made to allow the US military to retain permanent installations there.
Notably, Moscow has used Trump’s rhetoric to justify its own actions in Ukraine. Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov pointed to Trump’s comments as a precedent, suggesting that Greenland’s population should decide its own fate over joining the US— citing the widely discredited referendums held in Russian-occupied regions of Ukraine as an example of self determination for territory sought after by another state.
Canada
Trump has suggested using “economic force” to pressure Canada into becoming the 51st state of the US. After only recently meeting with the now outgoing Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, at Mar-a-Lago, Trump has mocked Trudeau by referring to him as “Governor Trudeau”. Trudeau, who recently announced his resignation as Prime Minister, responded via X , saying, “There isn’t a snowball’s chance in hell that Canada would become part of the United States.”
Trump has also floated the idea of imposing 25% tariffs on Canadian goods to force compliance, a move that drew widespread criticism from Canadian leaders and citizens alike. Such economic threats have only served to deepen the rift between the two neighbors.
Mexico
Perhaps unsurprisingly, Mexico remains a frequent target of Trump’s antagonism. From his initial campaign remarks labeling Mexican immigrants as criminals and rapists to his promise to build a southern border wall, Trump’s rhetoric has consistently strained relations with the US’ southern neighbor.
Recently, Trump proposed designating Mexican cartels as Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTOs) and threatened military intervention to combat them. While such a designation would not authorize military action, it raises fears of escalating tensions. Trump has also suggested bombing drug labs and deploying special forces to eliminate cartel leaders.
Trump has also proposed renaming the Gulf of Mexico to the “Gulf of America,” calling the idea “beautiful”. Mexico’s President, Claudia Sheinbaum, rebuked Trump’s threats, promising retaliatory measures against any trade war tactics. She also countered Trump’s naming proposal by suggesting that North America be renamed “América Mexicana” or Mexican America.
Conclusion
Trump’s expansionist rhetoric has caused an uproar in the international community. If any of these threats were acted upon, they could destabilize the already fragile international rules based order. Such actions would also set dangerous precedents, undermining global norms against territorial annexation.
Ironically, the isolationist, anti-immigrant, “America First” president and his supporters now entertain ideas of expansion that would bring more diverse populations, more people of varied backgrounds, races, and beliefs within the United States. This contradiction exemplifies the arrogance and hypocrisy of far-right nationalism, which seeks to deport millions to keep the country pure, while simultaneously laying claim to foreign lands and their people.
Stay in-the-know! Always get the latest updates from our reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist Democracy Weekly Newsletter, and please consider contributing to ‘Keeping Democracy Alive’ by donating today! We depend on support from readers like you to aide in protecting fearless independent journalism.
Why is LA on Fire? (Environment Policy #178)
Why is LA on Fire?
Environment Policy #178 | By: Arvind Salem | Submitted: January 13, 2025
Photo Credit: LAFD Photo | Cody Weireter
__________________________________
Policy Summary
The latest round of fires, something that has been plaguing Los Angeles, is a scary combination of three smaller fires that together are ravaging Los Angeles: The Palisades Fire, The Eaton Fire, and The Hurst Fire. Beyond these three, there are additional smaller fires.
The exact cause of the fires is still unknown. Investigators and officials have been able to rule out certain common causes that often cause fires, including lightning, arson, and utility lines. While the cause of the initial fire is uncertain, California’s abundance of kindling wood helped the fire spread (California also had an abundance of rain followed by an exceptional dry spell in L.A., meaning that there is a lot of dry vegetation to feed a fire). Additionally, there were strong winds during this period that helped the fire spread. However, while these short-term causes garner attention, experts also point out that climate change is a key factor that has created extreme wet and dry spells, which allow fires to spread. In Southern California, fires are largely expected from May to October, but climate change is extending that window throughout the year.
In terms of damages, the fires have burned nearly 40,000 acres of land so far, with the bulk of the damage coming from the Palisades fire burning 23,713.4 acres. Even worse, that fire is only 14 percent contained, meaning that it will likely continue to rage on and damage more land. Over 150,000 people are under evacuation notices, and that number has stretched to nearly 200,000 during intense periods of the fire. Sadly, there have already been 24 victims of this series of fires. The fires have ravished high-end, densely populated areas in LA, burning over 12,000 structures. A preliminary AccuWeather estimate of the likely damages was between $250 to $275 billion, with this number likely to grow as the fires still rage on. The exact breakdown of the methodology and estimates is proprietary, but AccuWeather included variables that are not immediately obvious (such as long-term health effects and the effect of fires on company valuations in the LA area).
For comparison, the final AccuWeather damage estimate for Hurricane Helene was $225 to $250 billion. The fact that the LA fires exceed the damages of a Hurricane that ravaged multiple states, while being confined to “only” a single city demonstrates its debilitating economic impact on the LA area. With such damages, this will likely be the costliest wildfire in modern California, and U.S., history.
Policy Analysis:
The governor asked the legislature to provide $2.5 billion, with $1 billion for immediate responses and $1.5 billion for greater wildfire preparedness in the future. This comes amid renewed criticism for the governor famously spending money on the homeless population, while wildfire prevention received less money. Newsom also waived certain environmental regulations to help speed up the fire recovery and rebuilding process.
In regards to the long-term future, this is once again a reminder that climate change can lead to more extreme natural disasters. With Hurricane Helene and now these wildfires, the United States is experiencing some of the consequences of climate change, which will likely get more extreme as time goes on. While California cannot change this as just a state, investing in wildfire prevention and firefighters can help create an infrastructure to mitigate the worst damages of future fires. Just as COVID-19 sparked a seminal re-evaluation and renewal of the nation’s public health apparatus, these wildfires need to encourage the same in California.
While the LA wildfires have certainly damaged many expensive properties and high-end areas, they have also had a deep negative impact on minority and low-income areas as well. The poster child for this tragic effect is Altadena, a majority-minority neighborhood that includes houses that minorities have owned for generations, which has been burned to the ground. Even worse, California already has a well-documented problem dealing with homelessness and high housing prices (especially in the L.A. area). These fires raise home insurance rates, pricing the most vulnerable out of the market and leaving them unable to buy a new house after their old house burns down.
In this crisis, the Fire Department has of course been a key factor in the emergency response. As the Department’s response has been closely watched, L.A. Mayor Karen Bass has come under scrutiny for decreasing the budget of the department by $17.6 million ( 2%) from the 2024-2025 year compared to the 2023-2024 fiscal year. LAFD Fire Chief Kristin Crowley wrote a memo outlining how this cut affected parts of their operations, including their capacity to respond to emergencies and brush clearance inspections. California Democratic Rep. Brad Sherman, whose district includes the Palisades, dismissed the cuts as a cause for the issue, noting that the cuts were meant for training in 2025 and did not impact readiness. This is not the only criticism of Mayor Bass, as she’s drawing heavy scrutiny for her travels to Ghana during the fires, especially after promising to not travel internationally (after that was a large part of her life when she was in Congress). This series of either bad optics or gross mismanagement has led to serious discontent, exemplified by an online petition with over 100,000 signatures, demanding Bass’s immediate resignation.
Engagement Resources
The following three sites are relief organizations for the wildfires. We encourage readers to help however they are able and share this link with those in their circle that may be in a position to help:
Stay informed with the latest insights from our dedicated reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist Weekly Newsletter. Your support is crucial in safeguarding fearless, independent journalism. If you appreciate our content, please consider donating today to continue in helping to protect democracy and empower citizenship.
Ski Patrollers Go On Strike
Ski Patrollers Go On Strike
Social Justice Policy Brief #170 | By: Reilly Fitzgerald | January 09, 2025
Park City Mountain base area at 11:00 a.m. on Sunday Dec. 29. Photo: Park City Mountain
__________________________________
Policy Summary
The last week of December and into early January, the holiday season and school vacation weeks, are often some of the busiest days at a ski resort in the United States. Park City Mountain Resort, the United States’ largest ski resort, is no exception. However, on Dec. 27, 2024, over 200 ski patrollers walked off the job in protest of their working conditions at Park City, outside of Salt Lake City, Utah; the resort is owned and managed by Vail Resorts. The Park City Professional Ski Patrollers Association demanded higher wages for their ski patrollers due, largely, to the exorbitant cost of living in Park City. The strike led to tremendously long wait lines for chair lifts, closed terrain, and even nonunion ski patrollers being brought in from other ski resorts. To make a long story short, the strike created a mess that left Park City skiers quite miserable over the holidays.
Analysis
Park City, Utah, is one of the most premier ski areas in the United States. It boasts a tremendous 350 trails with over 40 lifts to move skiers uphill and access the terrain. Park City Mountain Resort is one of over 40 ski resorts owned by Vail Resorts around the world. Other famous resorts owned by Vail Resorts are: Whistler Blackcomb in British Columbia, Canada; Crested Butte in Colorado; Crans-Montana in Switzerland (home to a FIS World Cup alpine ski race); and three ski resorts in Australia (and many others throughout the United States). Vail Resorts, in 2024, did $2.8 billion in net revenue and over $230 million in net income, according to Vail Resorts website.
Ski patrollers are an important group of people in the ski industry. They are, typically, well-trained emergency medical staff that provide aid to injured or hurt skiers and riders on the slopes; they also perform tasks, in areas like Utah, such as firing howitzers at slopes with potential avalanche risk to reduce the likelihood of an avalanche occurring. The Wasatch Mountains in Utah are well-known for their substantial amounts of snow and Utah is known, in the ski world, as a haven for the powder skier. This is all to say, ski patrollers are among the most important employees at a ski resort. The National Ski Patrol Association says that all ski patrollers have been certified in Outdoor Emergency Care (OEC) as a baseline certification, and also take courses in wilderness first aid, avalanche safety, mountain rescue, and more.
However, ski patrollers (and many other seasonal employees at ski areas) have had a history of not being paid very well. This long standing pattern of low pay is what, ultimately, led the Park City Professional Ski Patrollers Association to go on strike on Dec. 27, 2024, and 200 ski patrollers walked off the job.
The union’s largest gripe with the Park City Mountain Resort’s management is regarding pay. The union’s largest complaint being that wages have remained low at the resort for patrollers, and that the cost of living in Park City has increased dramatically – making it very hard for ski patrollers (and other mountain employees) to live in Park City. According to PayScale, the cost of living in Park City, Utah, is 66% higher than the national average; and cost of housing is 268% higher than the national average. Ski patrollers at Park City had been making about $21 per hour to start with the pay scale topping out after five years, according to the Associated Press; the resort also provided ski patrollers with over $1500 for purchasing gear. Vail Resorts says that they increased wages in 2022 from $13 per hour to the rate of $21 per hour. However, negotiators for the mountain wanted to offer a $2 hourly wage increase, while the union says that $27 per hour is the living wage for Park City.
The strike caused a tremendous amount of chaos at the Park City Mountain Resort. It was well reported that chairlift lines were over an hour long, and lots of terrain was closed down due to the lack of ski patrollers to clear the terrain for potential risks. On January 6th, it was reported that 25 out of the 41 lifts were operational (16 lifts closed), and 103 out of 350 trails were open (147 trails closed); and to make matters worse, the mountain received over two feet of new snow through the past week. To cope with the intense and chaotic conditions at the resort, Park City brought in nonunion ski patrollers from other ski areas.
It was announced on January 7th that the union and Park City’s management had come to an agreement to end the strike, and details were not revealed until January 9th. According to The Park Record, entry-level patrollers will be receiving a $2/hour raise (moving the starting wage to $23/hour) and more experienced patrollers would be receiving even higher raises (average wage raise across the union membership was $4 per hour); along with an enhancement of their already existing benefits such as parental leave and professional development. Ski patrollers came back to work on January 9th, marking the end of the strike.
As our country’s financial situation gets more and more expensive amid the rising cost of groceries, costs for housing, rising mortgage rates, and other increasing factors, it will be interesting to see if this strike is a one-off or if more seasonal workers push their employers for wage increases. This will become even more important as many states have exemptions for seasonal workers and their right to earn the federal minimum wage in the United States.
Engagement Resources
- National Ski Patrol Association – https://www.nsp.org/Web/NSPWebsite/Home.aspx
_______________________________________________________________
Wanna stay in-the-know? Always get the latest updates from our reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist News Weekly Newsletter, and please consider contributing to ‘Keeping Democracy Alive’ by donating today! We depend on support from readers like you to aide in protecting fearless independent journalism.
The Fallacy of School Choice
The Fallacy of School Choice
Education Policy Brief #197 | By: Evan Wechman | December 11, 2024
__________________________________
Policy Summary:
President-elect Donald Trump should be content he will take office along with a GOP-controlled House and Senate. If he has his way, the Republicans will have the momentum to make sweeping educational changes.
Whether the entire Department of Education is eliminated or radically transformed, Trump and his allies hope to change the public education system forever. The primary way they intend to do this is through school choice.
Trump has campaigned on providing families more control over how their children are educated. He would offer them school choices in the way of vouchers, tax benefits, and other methods of diverting capital away from the public school system. He has been a tireless critic of the public school system, which he has lambasted for being “woke,” and too liberal.
However, it would serve the President-elect to tread carefully. Though he won the election, the public is not necessarily on his side. This is true even in red states.
For instance, on election night measures to support pro-choice were defeated in Republican states. Both voters in Kentucky and Nebraska voted against providing public money to subsidize private education. Also, a constitutional amendment to establish school choice was defeated in Colorado.
Despite such setbacks, Trump seems likely to push for school choice measures, especially with allies like House Speaker Mike Johnson promising to get it done in the House.
Acclaimed economist Milton Friedman first brought school choice to the public’s attention in the 1950s. It was initially a direct response to school desegregation after the 1954 Brown vs. Board of Education case.
The idea is to allow families to send their children to private schools that align more closely with their beliefs with public money.
Policy Analysis:
During the post-1954 Brown vs. Board of Education era, many parents chose to send their children to segregated white private schools in southern states by utilizing vouchers.
Similarly, many people throughout the country are dissatisfied with the current state of the public education system. Many on the right blame the schools for the “woke” movement, liberal indoctrination, and everything that went wrong during the pandemic.
However, this mindset on the right is not seeing the whole picture. Though many think they would improve their children’s education by selecting a school on their side of the culture war, this isn’t accurate.
In fact, many private schools have strict admission guidelines. The result is that only wealthy and well-educated families can take advantage of these opportunities. The poorer, less advantaged families have a tougher time gaining entry to these schools, which is directly opposite from what the GOP is promising.
Similarly, school choice would also damage public schools. This is because the dollars diverted from public schools due to the drop in enrollment results in a significant decrease in teachers, books, art supplies, and even sports teams. The schools still must pay for fixed expenses such as building maintenance and utilities, but because fewer dollars are coming in, the education of the students suffers.
The school choice paradise promised by the right doesn’t happen. Instead, both public and private schools suffer.
However, a middle ground can still be reached. Proponents of public schools acknowledge that no one educational model fits all students. That is the reason behind the expansion of many different programs within the public school system such as magnet schools. Such schools can focus on certain disciplines like the arts or science, giving students choices within the public system without decreasing funding.
In such situations, we are not throwing out the baby with the bathwater.
Engagement Resources
- National Education Association | NEA: Educators, parents, and supporters of public schools who reject the idea of vouchers and the elimination of the public school system.
- National Parent Teacher Association | National PTA: Association that opposes any private school choice proposal or voucher system that diverts funds away from public schools.
Stay in-the-know! Always get the latest updates from our reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist News Weekly Newsletter. Your support is crucial in safeguarding fearless independent journalism. If you appreciate our content, please consider donating today to help protect democracy and empower citizenship.
Don’t Expect Trump 2.0 to be Climate Friendly
Don’t Expect Trump 2.0 to be Climate Friendly
Environment Policy #177 | By: Todd J. Broadman | January 10, 2025
Photo by Documerica on Unsplash
__________________________________
POLICY SUMMARY
President-elect Trump is set to take office on January 6, 2025 and has promised to “frack, frack, frack and drill, baby, drill.” Although his stance towards climate change has not changed in any way from his debut tenure in office, he has assembled a seasoned team of loyalists who seem to be more adept at cutting through red tape to fast track his agenda to “slash energy costs.” This is the same Donald Trump who characterizes global warming as “one of the great scams of all time.” Among his anticipated initial actions will be to (again) withdraw the U.S. from the Paris Agreement. He is not expected to support any U.S. climate funding to developing nations under the New Collective Quantified Goal on Climate Finance at COP29. And even with Elon Musk on board as White House advisor, Trump asserts that EVs dampen job growth and wants to revive gas-guzzling manufacturing in Detroit.
In terms of energy production, the trend to burn less coal is being reexamined by industry. Coal use for energy production has been reduced 60% over the last two decades and is currently below 20% as a U.S. electricity energy source. Older coal plants slated for closure are now waiting to see how energy policy unfolds under the Trump administration. A spokesperson from Duke Energy, for example, announced their intent to “reexamine plans to burn less coal in Indiana if the Trump administration rescinds power plant emission rules.”
As the federal government is expected to claw-back carbon use regulations, many will look to individual states to enforce and enact regulations limiting carbon use and incentivizing the transition to alternatives. Some states though, like North Carolina, are adapting their rules to allow for added fossil fuel use under the guise of increased demand that cannot be met with alternatives. Many states are sympathetic to companies’ steady plea that customers need affordable and reliable energy (not necessarily clean energy). More ribbon-cuttings for newly constructed gas plants are on the way.
Surprising to some, the state of Texas has the largest installed base of renewable energy in the country – leading in both wind and solar. Driven by demand-side economics, the steady growth of wind, solar, and other renewable energy sources will continue to grow under Trump. Twenty-five states have laws in place that require a transition. In the state of New York, this is taking the form of a requirement that all newly constructed buildings under seven stories tall be all-electric. California is incentivizing the use of heat pumps in commercial buildings throughout the state, and this is in line with their support for zero-emission vehicles. As the consumer price of EV automobiles is lowered, more will make the switch in spite of calls for more fracking from the White House.
Many environmental regulations will be sidestepped at every opportunity by the Trump administration under the banner of reducing government agency interference and effectively addressing the “climate change alarm industry.” This includes lowering restrictions on the transport of liquified natural gas (LNG) as well as safety protocols at chemical plants. Regulations that limit methane release in fracking operations will be removed. Again, the link between carbon concentrations in the air and extreme weather events and patterns will be uncoupled.
Trump’s blueprint for most of what will change along the beltway has been detailed in Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025. The Project’s holy grail is the “dismantling of the unaccountable Deep State.” Certain agencies are at the center of the wrecking ball, among them the Environmental Protection Agency. The EPA cannot be entirely gutted but entire sections such as the office tasked with reducing pollution in minority communities and the department for atmospheric research are to be eliminated. The National Weather Service, air quality monitoring, and offices that support fisheries that fall under the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration are to be no more.
Behind these draconian policies are energy lobbyists such as The American Petroleum Institute (API), who stepped forward to bask in the moment: “Energy was on the ballot, and voters sent a clear signal that they want choices, not mandates, and an all-of-the-above approach that harnesses our nation’s resources and builds on the successes of his first term.” Robert Blue, CEO of Dominion Energy, is re-focused on reliability and sounds a more confident tone under Trump’s endorsement: “We don’t only have a climate law that we have to follow, we have a law that says we’re obligated to serve our customers, and we have a regulatory commission that says we’re obligated to provide reliable electricity.”
On the demand side, the need for electricity will significantly increase driven by large data centers. These new data centers are being built at a rapid clip in response to the use of artificial intelligence programs and the burgeoning AI industry driven by larger firms Microsoft, Google, Meta and Amazon. Utilities are relying on natural gas to meet this need. Up to 30% of demand will be met with gas powered plants; the connection between the increased reliance on AI and the reliance on carbon becomes apparent. Ben Cahill, an energy expert at University of Texas, points to these power-hungry new data centers being built when he says, “The scenarios for rapid decarbonization of the power sector seem less viable today than they were just six months ago.” ERCOT, the primary grid operator in Texas, says demand is on track to double by 2030.
ANALYSIS
Globally, over half of carbon emissions come from three countries: China, U.S., and India. Others, including the EU (accounting for 8% of global emissions), look to these three for renewables transition leadership. The Trump model will act to dissuade others from making alternative energy investments, and will force other countries to take the lead in lessening dependence upon carbon-based energy. India is the leading importer of U.S. coal followed by Japan. While Trump will encourage greater use of coal domestically, receipts from exports will be supported by the new administration, and this position is consistent with Trump opting-out of international climate-related commitments. The recent United Nations report reflects this lack of global climate leadership: there is “virtually no chance” of meeting the international target to limit temperature increases.
To the extent that nuclear is considered clean-energy, Trump does support the increased use of nuclear energy. And outgoing President Joe Biden had vowed to eliminate all gaspower grid emissions by 2035. That goal though, was not actively pursued; currently, there are 220 new gas-burning power plants in various stages of development nationwide and most will come online before 2032 with each plant averaging a 30-year lifespan. Trump’s actions to de-regulate through new rules that weaken the EPA and other enforcement agencies effectively endorses these gas-fueled power plants.
Travis Fisher, Director of Energy and Environmental Policy at the Cato Institute, concludes that any environment shift will be led by the private sector while Trump is in office. “For those of us who care about our democracy as well as healthy communities and a safe and livable planet for our children,” he said “it will be up to the companies driving new demand — namely Big Tech — to decide just how green they want to be.” In line with that conclusion, when corporate net-zero goals threaten profit objectives, an increasingly common scenario amongst larger firms, decisions tend to follow the financial path of least resistance.
We also know that firms in the clean-energy sector of the economy depend upon government clean-energy policies and the grant funding that follows those policies. Those taxpayer dollars go directly into improving alternative energy technology. Private investors in this critical sector pivot act on what they see from federal and state backing, as took place with the private funding of companies that were IRA recipients. According to ImpactAlpha, venture capital “is just two degrees removed from at least one government grant.” Alongside Trump’s plan to cut the DOE’s Loan Programs Office, we can expect much of the critical private investment in renewables to shrink.
As COP29 in Azerbaijan wraps-up, developed, high carbon-emitting countries did reach an agreement to provide some degree of financing ($300 billion dollars in aid) to poorer nations who lack the resources to address the human suffering from warming and weather events. The exact amount of the U.S. contribution has not yet been determined, though a moot point as President-elect Trump is expected to rescind any and all amounts that get committed prior to him taking office. Without U.S. contributions, other countries will be reluctant to step-up funding.
Trump’s nominee to run the EP is Lee Zeldin whom Trump endorsed as someone who “will ensure fair and swift deregulatory decisions that will be enacted in a way to unleash the power of American businesses.” Zeldin, who served as representative from New York for eight years, echoed the voice of a Trump loyalist: “We will restore US energy dominance, revitalize our auto industry to bring back American jobs, and make the US the global leader of AI.” His voting record is not uniformly pro-business; some called him a moderate. On the one hand, he was one of 23 Republicans to support the PFAS Action Act which raised the EPA’s water quality standards, and on the other, in his bid for Governor of New York, he wanted to open fracking and add gas pipeline construction in the state.
While Donald Trump’s campaign appealed to an electorate who favor lower gas prices and high-paying energy sector (fracking) jobs, his policies will leave open added options for energy companies looking to reap greater profits, and those options will continue to include the use of renewable non-carbon sources. And even though federal dollars to alternative energy development will taper-off, states are expected to step-in where and when the economics tip in favor of solar, wind, and even nuclear (which Trump favors). If his planned tariffs apply to renewable technologies, domestic manufacturers could see a boost in revenue and expanded manufacturing. From a global leadership lens, the new administration is expected to abandon environmental ideals altogether, which may please China, India, and Russia in the short-term, yet translates into displeasing the planet Earth and its inhabitants over the longer-term.
Engagement Resources
- https://e360.yale.edu/ offers opinion, analysis, reporting, and debate on global environmental issues.
- https://www.science.org/ publishes the very best in research across the sciences, with articles that consistently rank among the most cited in the world.
- https://insideclimatenews.org/ publishes essential reporting, investigation, and analysis about the biggest crisis facing our planet.
Stay informed with the latest insights from our dedicated reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist Weekly Newsletter. Your support is crucial in safeguarding fearless, independent journalism. If you appreciate our content, please consider donating today to continue in helping to protect democracy and empower citizenship.
Developments in Syria: A Window of Opportunity
Developments in Syria: A Window of Opportunity
Foreign Policy Brief #173 | By: Damian DeSola | January 10, 2025
__________________________________
The Assad regime has fallen. After over fifty years of a totalitarian hereditary dictatorship, the neo-Ba’athist regime vanished on 8 December 2024 when President Bashar al-Assad escaped capture from Syrian rebels and flew to Moscow. In less than two weeks, the nearly fourteen-year civil war changed dramatically. To understand the implications of this lightning liberation, let us look at the status of the various factions whose shifts in power allowed it to occur in the first place.
Surprisingly, or perhaps unsurprisingly, the main contributor to the end of the Assad regime was its staunchest backer – Russia. Since the start of the war in Ukraine, Russia has made difficult decisions regarding its military equipment and manpower. By focusing on its border war, Russia removed sizeable military support from Syria. Viewing the war in Ukraine as its priority, Russia effectively abandoned the Ba’athist government, allowing it to be crushed by the better organized and equipped Syrian Rebels. The loss of their influence in Syria is a major blow to Russian influence in the region and the Mediterranean, losing vital access to the country’s military and naval bases.
Who are these Syrian Rebels? Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) is a Sunni Islamist paramilitary organization led by the now de facto leader of Syria, Ahmed al-Sharaa. Originally set up in 2011 at the outset of the Civil War as an affiliate of Al-Qaeda and supported by the now-deceased ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, it became a powerful militant opposition to the Ba’athist regime. Later, under the leadership of its current leader, al-Sharaa, the organization broke from al-Qaeda and joined various other Syrian militant groups, becoming the HTS as is understood today.
Al-Sharaa has taken steps to ensure that the new regime respects the rights of minorities and to treat former Assad employees and soldiers humanely. The interim government has also claimed they will hold elections in four years once a constitution is drafted. They have also reopened currency exchanges and have allowed Western products back on store shelves. Much of this has been understood to be signals of openness to Western governments and regional states for normalized relations.
Concurrently, there have been reports of the interim government acting in an autocratic fashion. While al-Sharaa is attempting to protect minorities writ-large, the Alawite people, the ethnic group that the Assad family came from and whom that family gave favor, live in fear of retribution from soldiers and interim government officials. Another concerning sign is the reworking of historical textbooks to exclude certain events and people without the permission of the Syrian academic community. These conflicting actions of liberalization and authoritarianism leave uncertainty as to whether the new regime will remain a beacon of hope for the Syrian people.
While this interim government controls most of the Syrian territory to the West of the Euphrates River, the Eastern side is majority controlled by the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF). Led by left-wing Kurdish militias and rebels, this group controls what is now referred to as the Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria (AANES), or more fashionably (and unofficially) Rojava. This region and the SDF are backed by the United States and were a major part of the forces that captured Islamic State territory in Iraq and Syria.
Sharply opposed to the establishment of a Kurdish state, the Turkish government has conducted incursions into Kurdish-controlled territory soon after the U.S. removed troops from the Turkish border following the territorial defeat of ISIS in 2019. To justify anti-Kurdish activity, Türkiye directly aligns the SDF with the Kurdish Workers Party (PKK), a militant guerilla movement in Southwest Türkiye, which they have labeled a terrorist organization. Two major sectors of Kurdish territory, North and Northeast Syria, are occupied by Turkish forces. Following the fall of the Assad regime, Türkiye has increased its attacks on Kurdish forces.
Finally, there is Israel. With the resounding defeat of Hezbollah, and the crippling of Hamas, Israel has been free to take advantage of the chaos in Syria. Soon after the fall of Damascus, Israel moved its forces into the Golan Heights, a region that the two nations have disputed for decades, with plans to permanently control the region. They have also wasted no time in destroying abandoned Assadist military assets with the goal of weakening the incoming government in case it is hostile towards Israel. The territorial incursions have been condemned by local governments including Jordan and Türkiye.
Analysis
Now, how will and how should the incoming Trump administration deal with this new Syrian reality? Let us start with how the Biden administration has reacted so far. Within weeks of the interim government taking control, the U.S. State Department sent a delegation to meet with Syrian officials and the de facto leader, Ahmed al-Sharaa. Soon after, the $10 million bounty on Sharaa was rescinded; spokespeople from the State Department referred to the meetings with Sharaa as “productive”, showing signs of potential future cooperation between the U.S. and this new Syrian government. While HTS is still labeled a terrorist group by the U.S., it seems the groundwork for a potentially positive relationship is being laid.
This administration is about to leave, and along with it, its current policies. Trump has cast no illusions on the idea that he aims to be an isolationist president. In true Trumpian fashion, he has already jumped the gun by posting on Truth Social, “Syria is a mess, but is not our friend, & THE UNITED STATES SHOULD HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH IT. THIS IS NOT OUR FIGHT. LET IT PLAY OUT. DO NOT GET INVOLVED!” However, where the U.S. stands in the Middle East, especially regarding Russian and Iranian influence, and a recent resurgence of Islamic terrorism, Trump may see need to establish relations with this new Syrian government.
However, his penchant for transactional foreign policy may lead to a souring of relations. By potentially requesting too much out of the new government, such as access to the abandoned Russian naval ports, free movement of American military equipment, or even permissions for their oil fields, there are clear opportunities for Trump to sour this relationship. Furthermore, the past friendly relations between Trump and Netanyahu could result in Israeli pressure to avoid normalized relations with the new Syrian government.
The dust has barely begun to settle on the latest developments of the Syrian Civil War, and there is still an array of potential outcomes that can occur. The chaotic civil war has brought in a range of powerful actors, capable of changing the narrative at a moment’s notice. However, an opportune moment for building a peaceful Syria is happening at the same time. If the right steps are taken by the Democratic West, the elusive bright future for the Middle East will finally be at hand.
Engagement Resources
- Live map of the Syrian Civil War
- Website for the U.S. Mission to the Syrian Democratic Council; provides information about the SDF and AANES (Rojava).
- Background report on Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham from the Center for Strategic & International Studies
Stay in-the-know! Always get the latest updates from our reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist Democracy Weekly Newsletter, and please consider contributing to ‘Keeping Democracy Alive’ by donating today! We depend on support from readers like you to aide in protecting fearless independent journalism.
Week That Was: Global News in Review
Week That Was: Global News in Review
Foreign Policy Brief #172 | By: Abran C
__________________________________
Canada Prime Minister Justin Trudeau holds a press conference outside Rideau Cottage in Ottawa, Canada, on January 6
Justin Trudeau resigns as Canadian Prime Minister
Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has announced that he’ll step down as head of the country’s governing Liberal Party, after weeks of speculation that his time in leadership was coming to an end. Trudeau has led the Liberal Party since 2013 and been prime minister since 2015. He and his party were initially popular with a 65% approval rating shortly after taking office nearly a decade ago. But as Canada suffered a cost-of-living crisis in the wake of the Covid-19 pandemic, as well as criticism of immigration and environmental policies, Trudeau’s popularity has decreased steadily and is now at only a 22% approval rating. As other voters in Western countries have indicated, Canadians too are disillusioned with establishment and incumbent governments. In recent months, polls have indicated that Canadian voters are also ready for a new governing party with many predicting a rightward shift in the country’s politics.
![Senegalese President Bassirou Diomaye Faye speaks during a press at the Palais de la Republique in Dakar after their meeting, on 22 April 2024 [SEYLLOU/AFP via Getty Images]](https://www.usresistnews.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/Artboard-2-300x192.png "Week That Was: Global News in Review 2")
Senegalese President Bassirou Diomaye Faye speaks during a press at the Palais de la Republique in Dakar after their meeting, on 22 April 2024 [SEYLLOU/AFP via Getty Images]
Senegal kicks out the French
Senegal’s prime minister last week announced that the government is closing “all foreign military bases,” a move primarily aimed at France as no other foreign forces have military bases in Senegal. France is the West African nation’s former colonial ruler who still operates within the country. France has faced opposition from African leaders over what they describe as a demeaning and heavy-handed approach to the continent. The move follows a string of ousting for the French in West Africa over the past few years, as several countries including Chad, Niger and Burkina Faso, Ivory Coast and now Senegal have kicked French troops off of their soil. French President Emmanuel Macron stirred up further controversy with France’s remaining allies in West Africa and faced accusations of showing a neo-colonialist attitude after stating that African countries “forgot to say thank you” for France’s military involvement in the Sahel.
Rescue workers search for survivors in the aftermath of an earthquake in Changsuo Township of Dingri in Xigaze, southwestern China’s Tibet Autonomous Region on January 7, 2025.
Earthquake in Tibet
A 7.1 magnitude earthquake shook a high-altitude region of Tibet, damaging hundreds of houses and killing at least 126 people. Nepal is reported to have experienced the earthquake, but there are no initial reports of injuries or damage, according to the country’s National Emergency Operation Center. The quake’s epicenter was in Tibet’s Tingri county, an area where the India and Eurasia tectonic plates grind against each other and can cause earthquakes strong enough to change the heights of some of the world’s tallest peaks in the Himalayan mountains. Nearly 150 aftershocks were recorded in a few hours after the earthquake. Chinese leader Xi Jinping called for all-out efforts to rescue people, minimize casualties and resettle those whose homes were damaged.
Herbert Kickl, the leader of the far-right Freedom Party, after speaking with reporters on Tuesday in Vienna. Credit… Lisa Leutner/Reuters
Austria’s new Far-Right government
The leader of Austria’s Far-Right Freedom Party received a mandate to form a government last week when Austrian President, Alexander Van der Bellen, asked the party to form a new ruling coalition in what would yield the first far-right-led government in Austria since World War II. The Freedom Party was founded by former members of the SS, the Nazi paramilitary force, in the 1950s. It was largely shunned in its early years, but then slowly became part of the mainstream political establishment. Following the President’s announcement hundreds of protesters, including Jewish and left-wing activists, gathered outside the presidential office in Vienna holding banners to boo and whistle, shouting “Nazis out”. The Austrian Freedom Party is part of a right-wing populist alliance in the European Parliament, Patriots for Europe, which also includes the parties of Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán and of the Netherlands’ Far-Right Geert Wilders, whose party dominates the Netherlands’ government.
Venezuelan opposition leader seeks support to challenge Maduro
The presidential candidate for Venezuela’s opposition, Edmundo González (left), was at the White House meeting US President Joe Biden on Monday January 6, 2025 BBC NEWS
Venezuelan opposition leader Edmundo González is touring Latin America and the US, meeting leaders in an effort to build his credibility internationally and pressure President Nicolás Maduro as his inauguration nears. González, who left Venezuela for Spain after the presidential elections last year, has claimed he will return to Venezuela to assume the presidency on January 10. The opposition has also called for a massive mobilization on January 10 in an effort to challenge Maduro. Gonzalez has also urged the Venezuelan military to recognize him as their commander-in-chief and “put an end to the leadership” of President Nicolás Maduro. However despite Gonzalez’s efforts, Maduro organized an inauguration ceremony and swore himself into office on January 9.
Stay in-the-know! Always get the latest updates from our reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist Democracy Weekly Newsletter, and please consider contributing to ‘Keeping Democracy Alive’ by donating today! We depend on support from readers like you to aide in protecting fearless independent journalism.
Do All Acts of Political Violence Need a Side?
Do All Acts of Political Violence Need a Side?
Social Justice Policy Brief #170 | By: Morgan Davidson | January 07, 2025
Photo by Colin Lloyd
__________________________________
Summary
The start of 2025 has been marked by significant acts of political violence, setting an unsettling tone for the year. From the New Year’s terror attack in New Orleans to the explosion of a Tesla Cybertruck outside the Trump Hotel in Las Vegas, these incidents highlight a troubling escalation in politically charged violence. This series of events follows the tumultuous year of 2024, which saw two assassination attempts on President Trump and the murder of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson—a crime classified as an act of domestic terror allegedly committed by Luigi Mangione. These developments suggest a shift from isolated, lower-level incidents to large-scale, nationally salient events reminiscent of January 6th.
This rise in political violence raises an important question: Must every act of political violence in a polarized America be classified along partisan lines?
Analysis
A friend recently suggested I write about the emergence of left-wing violence in the wake of Donald Trump’s re-election. At first glance, incidents like the Tesla bombing near Trump’s Las Vegas resort may seem easy to label as left-leaning violence. However, such conclusions often obscure a more complex reality. Acts of political violence, particularly those rooted in broader social grievances or religious ideologies, resist simplistic binary classifications.
Take, for example, the murder of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson by Luigi Mangione. This act reveals a deeper frustration with the for-profit healthcare system, which many criticize for prioritizing profits over saving lives. The economic and emotional toll of such a system affects Americans across the political spectrum, transcending partisan boundaries. While the act itself is inexcusable, its underlying motivations reflect widespread discontent that cuts across ideological lines.
Similarly, acts of terror tied to religious extremism, such as the attack in New Orleans, challenge the utility of a partisan lens. When a perpetrator acts in alignment with ISIS or similar groups, their motivations often have little to do with domestic political affiliations. The chants of “Death to America” from such attackers make it clear that their agenda targets Americans collectively, regardless of partisan alignment. These are not acts meant to bolster a domestic left- or right-wing agenda but rather manifestations of foreign extremism with broader, more destructive goals.
Beyond Partisan Blame
While debates over the Middle East have polarized Americans, with partisans adopting staunch and opposing positions, acts of terror committed by individuals sympathetic to ISIS’s goals should not be framed within domestic political binaries. Such acts are expressions of allegiance to a foreign extremist ideology rather than extensions of internal partisan conflicts. Recognizing this distinction is essential for addressing the broader patterns and commonalities among these incidents.
By focusing on partisan blame, we risk obscuring the shared grievances that fuel these acts of violence. Political elites and media narratives often exploit such events to deepen divisions, shielding themselves from accountability and avoiding meaningful dialogue about systemic issues. For instance, the debate over whether Mangione was a Democrat or a Republican detracts from addressing the healthcare system’s flaws, which lie at the root of much of the public’s anger and despair.
Contributions from the Mental Health & Gun Crises
While partisan narratives often dominate discussions of political violence, it’s essential to consider that not all perpetrators are ideologically driven. For example, the two individuals who attempted to assassinate President Trump in 2024 have not been conclusively linked to specific political motivations. Instead, these cases appear to involve unstable loners acting out of personal grievances or psychological distress. Such examples remind us that some acts of violence defy traditional political categorizations, reflecting broader issues of mental health and societal alienation.
This observation is critical because it challenges the reflex to attribute every act of violence to partisan hostility. By overemphasizing political affiliations, we risk neglecting the underlying psychological and social factors that often drive these individuals to commit such heinous acts. Addressing these factors—whether through improved mental health resources or stronger community support systems—may help reduce the frequency of such violence.
Relatedly, a crucial aspect of America’s violence problem is the widespread availability of firearms. In almost every incident mentioned, from Luigi Mangione’s attack on UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson to the New Year’s attack in New Orleans, firearms or explosives played a central role. The sheer accessibility of weapons in the United States enables individuals, regardless of their political alignment or mental state, to carry out acts of violence with devastating consequences.
This sobering reality underscores a critical truth: the pervasive availability of firearms in the U.S. serves as a significant enabler of violence, whether politically motivated or otherwise. Irrespective of ideology, the ease of access to weapons empowers individuals to act on grievances—whether born of systemic inequalities, personal vendettas, or extremist ideologies. The recent surge in violence highlights the urgent need for investigative processes to prioritize identifying indicators of mental instability. Additionally, a coordinated national initiative is essential to confront the psychological challenges afflicting individuals nationwide, adopting a proactive stance to address these deep-seated risks and prevent further tragedies.
Addressing Shared Grievances
The murder of Brian Thompson underscores a shared sense of frustration and discontent among Americans—Democrats, Republicans, Independents, and others. Rather than dividing the public along partisan lines, we should focus on the systemic issues that contribute to such acts of violence. This includes acknowledging the fear, anger, and pain that drive individuals to commit these heinous acts. While these emotions do not justify violence, they highlight tangible hardships and unmet needs that demand attention from policymakers and society as a whole.
Similarly, the New Orleans attack reveals the futility of analyzing ISIS’s political stance within the context of American partisanship. It is unlikely that terrorists chanting “Death to America” care whether their victims are Democrats or Republicans. Such acts are driven by foreign ideological objectives, not by domestic political affiliations. Debating their partisan implications only distracts from the larger threat they pose to all Americans.
In both domestic and foreign contexts, these acts of violence highlight vulnerabilities that transcend American political binaries. They point to systemic issues—from healthcare inequalities to national security gaps—that require a unified response. Instead of waging identity politics or assigning blame along partisan lines, we must address the root causes of these grievances and work toward solutions that foster solidarity.
Whether it involves reforming the healthcare system to reduce economic anxieties or countering the influence of foreign extremist groups, the focus should be on actionable steps that address the underlying issues. Only by doing so can we begin to reduce the frequency and severity of these acts of violence and create a society that prioritizes unity and resilience over division and blame.
In conclusion, not every act of political violence in America needs to be classified along partisan lines. By shifting the narrative away from binary classifications and toward a more nuanced understanding of the motivations and grievances behind such acts, we can foster a more constructive dialogue and build a stronger, more unified nation.
Engagement Resources
- Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC): Tracks hate groups and extremism in the U.S., offering insights into political violence and its root causes.
https://www.splcenter.org - Brennan Center for Justice: Research and policy proposals on combating domestic terrorism while safeguarding democratic values.
https://www.brennancenter.org - The Violence Project: A database and research organization examining the causes and prevention of mass violence, with a focus on political and ideological factors.
https://www.theviolenceproject.org - PEN America: Advocacy for free expression and against hate speech and violence, promoting dialogue in polarized times.
https://pen.org
Wanna stay in-the-know? Always get the latest updates from our reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist News Weekly Newsletter, and please consider contributing to ‘Keeping Democracy Alive’ by donating today! We depend on support from readers like you to aide in protecting fearless independent journalism.
Trump’s Big Inauguration, Brought to You By Big Tech
Trump’s Big Inauguration, Brought to You By Big Tech
Technology Policy Brief #124 | By: Mindy Spatt | January 07, 2025
Photo by The Now Time on Unsplash
__________________________________
Summary
Donald Trump’s triumphant return to the White House on January 20th will be funded by the same tech billionaires who eschewed him the first time he was president. Now they are looking to trade their massive financial support for their dream agenda in Washington, an unregulated industry free to make its own rules.
Analysis
Donald Trump and Big Tech were not friendly during his first term. In 2016, Candidate Trump received little to no support from major tech companies or their leaders and criticism flowed both ways. Trump accused Meta, Google, and others of censoring conservative voices especially because social media companies temporarily suspended Trump’s accounts after the US Capitol was attacked on Jan. 6, 2021.
After Trump took office, tech CEOs butted heads with him over his immigration policies and other excesses. In 2020, Jeff Bezos said Trump’s refusal to accept the election results “erodes our democracy around the edges.” Last month, Bezos joined Mark Zuckerberg, Tim Cook, and the many other high-profile tech leaders lining up at Mar A Lago to kiss Trump’s ring, to put it politely, all with millions of dollars in their hands.
That’s not all Bezos is doing for his new buddy. In November, Bezos came under fire for refusing to allow the Washington Post, which he owns, to endorse Kamala Harris. He recently interfered with editorial content at the Post again, nixing a cartoon depicting him kneeling before Trump, prompting its author, editorial cartoonist Ann Telanes, to resign from the paper.
Whatever problems tech CEOs had with Trump 1.0 have disappeared, even though in the interim Trump has been found liable for sexual assault and guilty of 36 felonies and campaigned on lunatic ravings about abortion in the ninth month and sex change operations being performed in schools. After the Biden Administration’s wariness of Bitcoin, AI, and internet monopolies, tech billionaires are fawning over Trump and the possibility of dramatically loosened regulations.
Trump has said he plans to reverse President Biden’s 2023 executive order on AI. That is in keeping with the Republican Party’s platform, which states ‘We will repeal Joe Biden’s dangerous Executive Order that hinders AI innovation and imposes radical leftwing ideas on the development of this technology.’. Those radical leftwing ideas include safety and privacy standards for AI and a watchful eye toward the potential of AI to ‘displace and disempower workers; stifle competition; and pose risks to national security’. Open AI CEO Sam Altman is on board with his $1 million inauguration contribution.
Consumer protections and labor standards are unlikely to flourish in the new regime. President Biden’s moves to protect gig workers won’t be continued by Trump, which may be why Uber and its CEO Dara Khosrowshahi forked over $2 million. In recent years, the Federal Trade Commission has sued Amazon for monopolistic practices and Meta for antitrust violations and has challenged mergers and acquisitions by big tech companies. One of Trump’s first moves will be to replace Lina Kahn, the current chair of the FTC, with someone far less aggressive, an agenda the tech bros have made no secret of.
What will flourish is Bitcoin. As Trump said at a Bitcoin conference, “The rules will be written by people who love your industry, not hate your industry.” Case in point, he recently described his pick to head the Securities Exchange Commission, Paul Atkins, as someone who “recognizes that digital assets & other innovations are crucial to Making America Greater than Ever Before’.
Coinbase likes that idea and contributed $1 million. A cryptocurrency trading firm with the inappropriate name of Robinhood donated $2 million. Ripple, another crypto firm, gave the inaugural committee $5 million. If Trump fulfills his promise to turn America into the “crypto capital of the planet,” they’ll likely get an enormous return on their investment. As of this writing, the inaugural committee has collected $2 billion and is still open for business.
Engagement Resources
- List of Tech Companies That Donated to Trump’s Inaugural Fund, Dec 13, 2024
- Tech Billionaires Get in Line to Support Trump Inauguration Fund, by Eloise Goldsmith, Dec 13, 2024
Stay in-the-know! Always get the latest updates from our reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist News Weekly Newsletter. Your support is crucial in safeguarding fearless independent journalism. If you appreciate our content, please consider donating today to help protect democracy and empower citizenship.