The United States is coming undone. It is dis-united. Its citizens are bitterly divided along a widening chasm, each side believing the other is despicable; its democratic institutions are under assault; its ideals of equality and respect for the rule of law, once so widely admired around the world, are now ignored, even scorned, by […]
More than anything else, Trump’s rise is the manifestation of the anger of a significant minority of white voters over their loss of demographic and cultural hegemony. They’ve seen the new America, represented most dramatically by Barack Obama, and they’re not happy about it.
The news left tens of thousands of students stunned: Just as the fall semester was starting, ITT Technical Institute, one of the nation’s largest chains of for-profit colleges, shut down all its campuses, stranding some would-be graduates a few months shy of a diploma.
Trump has managed to persuade many working-class whites that illegal immigrants destroy neighborhoods, peddle drugs, murder innocents and drive down wages. They take well-paying jobs, he says, from citizens who deserve them.
While the experts rarely link a single event to global warming — and climate scientists have not said that it caused the devastating Louisiana floods — they point to increased rainfall and flooding as a likely result of a warmer climate.
Not every police shooting of a black man is unjustified. Sometimes law enforcement authorities have no choice but to shoot a criminal suspect who behaves in a way that poses risks — both to police personnel and to civilians.
The tragic heroin epidemic has prompted an outpouring of sympathy and calls for a less punitive approach to illegal drugs, but heroin users are overwhelmingly white. That compassion has not been extended to black Americans, who are still regarded as more drug-addled, more violent, more dangerous and more deserving of lengthy prison terms.
The universal franchise is a radical idea — and a relatively new one in human history. The proposition that each man or woman is given equal footing at the ballot box, whether rich or poor, brilliant or simple, black, white or brown, broke with a sturdy convention in human affairs: that the rich and powerful should rule or, at the very least, choose the rulers.
Why has Hillary Clinton inspired such rage, such resentment—fueled by very different sentiments and assessments—over the years? What has she done to earn so much antipathy?
It’s often noted that liberals and conservatives tend to see the world differently. But if the Republican National Convention is any indication, liberals and conservatives inhabit not just different worlds but different galaxies—far, far away from each other.
There is nothing new about police violence toward black citizens, nothing unusual about bias in the criminal justice system, nothing unexpected about the institutional racism that conspires to imprison black Americans disproportionately.
Maybe there is no antidote for the evolutionary proclivity to distrust those who don’t look or sound like us. But it is certainly true that those instincts would be less volatile if they were not continuously stoked and primed by pandering and opportunistic politicians, from the United States to Great Britain to Austria.
Their protest didn’t work, but that shouldn’t be counted as defeat. Lewis and fellow Democrats — who even sang, with slightly revised lyrics, the old standby “We Shall Overcome” — succeeded in highlighting the cruel and crazy intransigence of the gun lobby and its claque of political water-carriers.
Republican establishment figures are feigning surprise over their nominee’s racism, misogyny, narcissism and contempt for the rule of law, but they are being disingenuous. They’ve known for years the sort of man Donald Trump is. And they welcomed him and his money.
There is an axiom, frequently quoted to younger folk who are facing difficulty, that says you are more accurately judged by your response to adversity than your response to advantage. There’s much truth in that — and Sanders, who is no longer young, should know it.
Even after men and women have served their time — after they have paid their debt to society, as the cliche goes — most states restrict their franchise. It’s an odd idea: Those men and women are harmless enough to release onto the streets, but they can’t be trusted to vote.
The racially intolerant are losing the battle for primacy in the American story. They no longer dominate the nation’s culture or mythology, as the changes in the currency illustrate.
The Border Patrol union is so impressed with Trump that it has chosen to, well, trumpet its endorsement, breaking with union history in its first-ever official support for a presidential candidate during the primaries.
As a handful of well-respected economists belatedly concede, the free trade agreements that drew bipartisan support for much of the last 25 years never brought the broad prosperity that was promised.
In his first presidential campaign, President Barack Obama pledged to close the infamous U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, where torture has been practiced and due process flouted. The reviled facility is a stain on our reputation as a beacon for human rights and as a role model in a world where the innate dignity […]
It’s an excellent idea. But Sanders is vague — and his supporters quite naive — about the prospects of bringing a single-payer system to the United States.
Like other so-called stings by ultraconservative “citizen-journalists,” this operation did not depend on fairness, accuracy or transparency. Of course, that didn’t stop conservative politicians from pouncing on the opportunity to show their support.