Over the past few weeks, we have seen a whirlwind of accusations leveled against political figures. Some of those alleged of malfeasance already hold power, like Al Franken, a Democratic senator from Minnesota. Others are ascendant, like Senate candidate Roy Moore, the aspirant Republican from Alabama.
Democrats are incensed about the “Russia Thing,” whatever might be there, but it takes away from valuable conversations that need to take place.
No, not really. But what if we did? If we, as a society that prides ourselves as progressive and forward-thinking, still condone the execution of our fellow citizens, why does it matter if it is hidden behind dark walls in remote prisons?
Fifty-nine people. As of this writing, that is the number slain in the Las Vegas massacre last weekend. In the wake of these horrific events, we reflexively try to rationalize what happened.
One purported reason for President Donald Trump’s ascension, and for that matter, Sen. Bernie Sanders’, is an anti-establishment sentiment among voters.
Over the course of the dialogue surrounding Confederate monuments, the motivations of those calling for their removal have varied widely. To truly take a sober analysis of the question before us, we should differentiate between the various motives and rationale, and see which pass muster.
Ben Shapiro is Berkeley bound and the college is buckling down as if a natural disaster were incoming. UC Berkeley is even facing the prospect of canceled classes because of the “militarized campus” atmosphere.
When most Americans had their introduction to antifa, or anti-fascist, groups, it was an overwhelmingly peaceful collection of disparate peoples who opposed the white supremacists rallying in Charlottesville. In that setting, they appeared docile.