Words and Movements

Free Speech and the Unconstitutional Arrest of Don Lemon

November 22, 2025

February 1, 2026

by
Tarik Kiley

The journalist Don Lemon was arrested recently in Los Angeles and charged with federal civil rights violations after covering a protest against immigration enforcement, where the protest took place in a Minnesota Church. While another independent journalist and two protestors were arrested as well, Don Lemon’s arrest is particularly poignant because of his high profile in the journalist community. This is also interesting because the pastor of the Minnesota church where the protest took place is also a member of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

ICE is at the top of President Donald Trump’s agenda. Immigration enforcement is the number one most visible policy of President Trump’s administration. So, then it follows that, given his dictatorial leanings, he would arrest anyone criticizing ICE. Had the pastor of that Minnesota church not been a member of ICE, you can wonder whether such a heavy-handed response, such as arresting a high-profile journalist, would have occurred.

The federal government is framing the arrest as based on a violation of freedom of worship. Whether this applies is questionable, as Don Lemon made it clear that he was at the protest as a journalist, not an activist. So, it could be argued that Mr. Lemon had no political motivation for being present at the protest and was simply covering it as any journalist would.

But the news that Mr. Lemon was reporting could have been potentially harmful to the image of ICE and President Trump. So, this was evidently a political arrest to silence any criticism of the Trump regime. This could be inferred because President Trump has continually been dismissive and hostile toward reporters with whom he disagrees or who ask questions he doesn’t want asked.

The First Amendment is at play here, but it is not this selective interpretation of it, which led to Don Lemon’s arrest. The First Amendment protection of free speech is at question here. Mr. Lemon was reporting news that could potentially hurt President Trump and ICE’s image in the public eye. So, President Trump wanted to silence that speech.

According to ala.org, “One of the ten amendments of the Bill of Rights, the First Amendment gives everyone residing in the United States the right to hear all sides of every issue and to make their own judgments about those issues without government interference or limitations.” So, the idea here is that Mr. Lemon was not working to interfere with Christians’ worship. Instead, he was exploring a side of an issue that was ultimately unfavorable to President Trump.

Ala.org continues to say, “The right to speak and the right to publish under the First Amendment has been interpreted widely to protect individuals and society from government attempts to suppress ideas and information, and to forbid government censorship of books, magazines, and newspapers as well as art, film, music, and materials on the internet. The Supreme Court and other courts have held conclusively that there is a First Amendment right to receive information as a corollary to the right to speak.” So, journalists have a right to speak and report the news, particularly when their motive is only to report the news and express various sides of an issue. Just because the argument is distasteful to those in power doesn’t mean journalists can be censored or news suppressed.

Works Cited

https://apnews.com/article/don-lemon-arrest-minnesota-church-service-d3091fe3d1e37100a7c46573667eb85c

https://www.ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/censorship
Should African Americans Embrace Nationalism?

November 22, 2025

January 24, 2026

By

Tarik Kiley

My father, Henry Sterling Kiley, was a member of the Nation of Islam. Their view of politics, as expressed through Malcolm X, initially was based on Black Nationalism. The Nation of Islam also combined Black Nationalism with a form of militarism and capitalism. While I still think that capitalism combined with some aspects of socialism works better than the adoption of the communist model, and I still believe in self-defense, I have begun to wonder whether African Americans should embrace nationalism without deep examination…

Nationalism, as expressed in movements of self-determination against Western imperialism and colonialism, makes sense to me historically. Western (European) imperialism had a racist streak that sought to subjugate anyone who was non-European. Leaders like Mao Zedong in China rose to liberate their people from European and Japanese imperialism, with Japanese imperialism being an offshoot of European imperialism. Also, later, leaders such as Ho Chi Minh fought the Vietnam War against French imperialism, more specifically, and ended up fighting the USA, because the USA came to the defense of France during the Vietnam War.

So, if you are fighting to liberate your people, then nationalism makes sense to me, at least. Identity politics also comes into play, because if you are constantly being reminded that you are not European, and that being European makes you “better than others,” then of course, the reaction will be that no, Europeans are not better or superior, but that subjugated races have value too. In this way, nationalism can help mobilize non-Europeans to take pride in their ethnic identities. This feeling of solidarity can lead people to fight for liberation through protests, such as those done by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. of the USA, or by guerrilla warfare, such as that done by Fidel Castro of Cuba.

But, for African American people in the USA, nationalism can have serious shortcomings. Nationalism often leads to wars between states and ethnicities. White nationalism in America, for example, is based on the idea of ethnically cleansing the USA of non-whites. This is problematic because the USA is a federation and a representative democracy. Citizenship in America isn’t based on race or ethnicity, but rather on birth within its borders and naturalized residency. Much of the USA’s power is based on the idea of equality, and the concept of racial superiority directly interferes with the functioning of a clearly legitimate federation and representative democracy. Only having White Americans in power is a direct contradiction to the idea of equality.

Also, nationalism often degenerates into tribalism. This is concerning because African Americans do not have the political and military power to go it alone. The world also witnessed the societal damage caused by WWI and WWII. African Americans who fought in those wars on the side of the USA saw firsthand how extreme forms of nationalism led to wanton violence and tribalism. African Americans witnessed firsthand the failings of fascism, in particular, in WWII. The idea of “race” fell apart, as Germans, under Hitler, slaughtered other “Whites” of French, English, Jewish, etc., descent.

It could also be argued that tribalism is precisely what many African American leaders have fought against, historically. The idea of being trapped on a reservation, or in a ghetto, is and has been unappealing for many African Americans. We continue to embrace many cultures, and have done so, socially and historically. African Americans have spoken against racism because we know how racism feels. In this way, through our political actions, we reject certain aspects of nationalism.

Also, many of us embrace democracy. Democracy seems to be embedded in American political culture. So, if to be nationalistic is to revere a dictator, then we again reject nationalism.

Additionally, we have witnessed firsthand the results of an us-versus-them mentality. We suffered during Jim Crow and segregation under this type of xenophobia. So, having been discriminated against, why would we discriminate against others?

For the most part, African American culture is multicultural and inclusive. Primarily, we don’t treat other ethnic groups as if they don’t belong, because we know how that feels. We could probably start there, as a people, we don’t exclude others based on nationalistic tendencies. To reject racism, we don’t necessarily need to hate others.

What we could do that requires a certain level of self-defense, though, is to seek protection under international law. This was the last big push that Malcolm X made, after he went on a Hajj to the Middle East and Africa, and realized through observation that the whole world isn’t racist. Something else that he might have learned, had he not been assassinated, is that many other countries fought European imperialism, colonialization, and the racism that came with it, and succeeded in their efforts. Being proponents of international law gives us the protection against conquest and the recognition of our human rights. This does require a global perspective, admittedly.

So, while we might not want to reject nationalism completely, because we have to defend ourselves, at the same time, the hatred that nationalism can bring is definitely not for us. We want to do what is good for African American people, but we don’t want to do this at the expense of other ethnic groups. We have a duty to show empathy for one another as Black people, but we also have a duty to show empathy for the human race.
A Reservation for Blacks: The Creation of the American Ghetto

November 22, 2025

January 10, 2026

by

Tarik Kiley

In the early to mid 20th century, many rural Black people moved from the southeastern USA to the industrialized cities of the northeast and midwest. This move was called the “Great Migration.” Notably, the Great Migration seriously impacted the development of urban, Black culture. The Harlem Renaissance, in the city of New York, for example, led to the rise and proliferation of Black literature and poetry. But, what was once a place of liberation soon became a place of indirect imprisonment. What originally provided opportunities for African-Americans would soon become a place of desperation and poverty. Thereby, we have the rise of the “ghetto.”

The American ghetto, or “inner city” was created through formal and informal exclusion and economic disinvestment. According to npr.,org, “In 1933, faced with a housing shortage, the federal government began a program explicitly designed to increase — and segregate — America’s housing stock. Author Richard Rothstein says the housing programs begun under the New Deal were tantamount to a ‘state-sponsored system of segregation.’ The government’s efforts were ‘primarily designed to provide housing to white, middle-class, lower-middle-class families,’ he says. African-Americans and other people of color were left out of the new suburban communities — and pushed instead into urban housing projects.” We have to understand that the prosperity that came around the time of circa WWII America, would not be shared with Black people. Redlining, blockbusting, white flight, all would be used to keep Black Americans, for lack of a better term, on their own reservations, in the “ghetto.” These concentrations of poverty and lack of economic opportunity would significantly damage the life chances of urban, African Americans.

The history of the creation of the American ghetto is thoroughly covered in Richard Rothstein’s book, “The Color of Law.” In order to understand residential segregation better, it is suggested to study Rothstein’s text.

Furthermore, to this day, the skin color of residents is used to determine the property values of urban neighborhoods. African-American owned homes are considered to be of less value than those in White majority neighborhoods, and there is the prevalent myth that Black neighborhoods are rampant with crime. While urban crime is a problem, there hasn’t been a significant scientific study to suggest that urban Blacks are more violent than their White counterparts. It is simply a prevailing perception.

We also have to understand the power of perception, specifically. Under the policy of “urban renewal,” many inner city African American communities were determined to be “blighted,” and were subsequently targeted to be torn down to build highways and other infrastructure projects that damaged the Black neighborhoods in question. At the same time, Black people couldn’t buy homes in White majority suburbs because of redlining policies. This combined with restrictive covenants kept many Black people from taking advantage of the vast economic development occurring in post-WWII suburbs, and instead Black people were forced into Black only, urban areas…the ghetto.

While worthy of another entire study completely, the rise of public housing in urban areas, up to about the mid-1990’s, was also detrimental to the development of the Black family, and kept urban, Black people in poverty as well.

The rise and prevalence of the American ghetto also had ties to the public education system. We know through history that one of the complaints of Civil Rights activists, in the 1960’s, was the unequal education system that came with segregation. Majority Black schools were underfunded, and didn’t have the high quality of resources granted to White majority schools. Now we know that the American Dream, post-WWII, had been connected to the idea of obtaining a higher education, and reaping the benefits that came about with the higher salaries granted to those with higher education. This means that if your children attended a neighborhood school, at the time, with that neighborhood school being segregated, as well, because of residential segregation, then the students would be surrounded by people of one racial identity, primarily. For urban Black people, your peers would be poor as well. This type of class distinction, tied with racial identities led to cultures of poverty, too.

Race and class became tied and began to influence urban, African American culture, in the post Civil Rights era. For example, rap music, and the culture of Hip Hop, invented in 1973, was heavily influenced by the feelings associated with experiencing poverty and racial exclusion. Songs such as “Ghetto Bastard,” by Naughty by Nature, released in 1991, explained the very real circumstances of living in the inner city.

It should also be understood that economic exclusion has had a significant impact on the everyday lives of African Americans, and economic empowerment is just as important as obtaining political power. While obtaining the power of the ballot is one thing, and admirable, living in poverty is another issue that needs to have a light shown upon it. The standard of living and neighborhood quality of life of Black people living in the urban USA needs to be examined and understood in the post-industrial context of the 21st century.

Just as Native Americans were pushed onto reservations, and forced into poverty, Black people need to understand the consequences of contemporary housing practices such as “gentrification.”

To remedy all of this, Black people would need to sustain incomes that keep us abreast of rising housing costs, and also to self-develop Black neighborhoods with shops and beneficial forms of infrastructure. Increased incomes for Black people, and the end of housing discrimination, will add to racial integration, as Black people will be able to afford more expensive, desirable homes, regardless of location, and will reap the benefits of the infrastructure in those areas, such as stellar public schools. Additionally, if Black, urban neighborhoods are no longer areas of increasing poverty, and White people move into those neighborhoods, then Black people will not be displaced if Black people have comparable income levels.

This all means that public schools, places of employment, banks, and local governments all need to shift their perceptions of urban, Black people and actually give us a chance. As someone born in the inner city of Baltimore, MD, in the late 1970s, I understand the perceptions of your life chances that come with poverty, and feelings of exclusion from the American Dream.

After all, it is about the American Dream. Only since the 1980’s, have we seen an emergent Black middle class, who had worked towards realizing the American Dream. But, more notable, we still have the despair of the inner city, as expressed through the 1992 rebellion in Los Angeles, CA for example. Urban, Black people still face perceptions of criminality and underdeservedness, that had come about with police brutality, miseducation, and treatment as an “underclass.” There are also the perversions that occur when poverty is enforced as it has been, such as gang violence and family disintegration.

It is thoroughly unfair to be determined as a member of an underclass, simply by chance of being born Black and poor. Instead, public education should work to give all Americans the tools that we all need to be successful members of a democratic society. Too many times, Black people are imagined as a threat, and excluded from the benefits of the American Dream. We are disparaged in movies such as, “The Birth of Nation (1915),” and throughout the 1990s, as well, in movies such as “Dangerous Minds (1995).” If American culture keeps imagining urban, Black people as unlearned and “dangerous,” then that will be the self-fulfilling prophecy.

Works Cited

https://www.npr.org/2017/05/03/526655831/a-forgotten-history-of-how-the-u-s-government-segregated-america

https://origins.osu.edu/watch/1992-los-angeles-rebellion#:~:text=When%20a%20Simi%20Valley%20jury,Breyfogle%2C%20and%20Laura%20Seeger.
Affordability and Inflation in Our Time

November 22, 2025

December 7, 2025

by Tarik Kiley

Since the end of the pandemic, it seems like my dollar just doesn’t buy what it used to. Going to restaurants and the grocery store seems like a significant undertaking, and everything seems to have gone up in price, starting with food. This is problematic because all sectors of the economy seem to be impacted by price increases. I recently looked into homebuying, and there just aren’t really enough houses on the market for around $100k or so anymore.

What makes it worse is that I’m living in a city that many people from elsewhere are moving to. That city is Charlotte, NC. The increased population of transplants to Charlotte makes housing more scarce, as infrastructure investment and housing construction haven’t caught up with demand, driving up home prices.

The current cost of living makes no sense. Not only has the cost of living become ridiculous, but the rise in consumer prices has not been offset by wage increases. I’m still making 1980s and 1990s wages. Living on wage labor is insufficient these days, and the current salary level keeps the American Dream out of reach. Politico.com states that,

“Home prices have increased 58 percent since 2010 when adjusted for inflation, pricing out millions of potential buyers, according to a 2024 analysis from Harvard University.” The middle class is being priced out of the American Dream.

Tariff costs are being passed on to the consumers, and the current crackdown on Latinos who primarily work in construction, agriculture, and hospitality doesn’t help either. Mr. Trump, as president, seems to be more focused on hurting people from other ethnicities than he is on dealing with inflation and the affordability crisis.

What do we do about the rising inflation that increases the cost of living?

First of all, real incomes must rise. According to imf.org, “In an inflationary environment, unevenly rising prices inevitably reduce the purchasing power of some consumers, and this erosion of real income is the single biggest cost of inflation.” If your money buys you very little, then wages have to go up, or prices have to go down.

Inflation is also concerning for those who live on a fixed income. People receiving social security, for example, suffer because their stipends are less able to keep pace with inflation. This is often somewhat offset by cost of living (COLA) adjustments.

The output of goods and services must also increase as their quality improves. If we can make more goods and services cheaper, faster, and better, then people can buy more high-quality goods at lower prices. For example, when examining the market for computers, they are currently more powerful, practical, and cheaper than in previous decades.

Computers can now do more for the average consumer and cost less, for what they are capable of doing, than in the 1980s, for example. While some might disagree, I believe that this type of productivity will lead to opulence.

This also means that the government needs to be in the business of research and development. Our food prices were so low until recently, partly because the government invested in agribusiness. They encouraged the use of new farming technology and also subsidized the industry to keep the cheap production of food profitable for farmers.

This is all to say that we shouldn’t be in the business of using tariffs or reducing our labor supply. Instead, we should invest in new technology, raise the minimum wage, and pursue other policies that promote prosperity.

Works Cited

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/11/24/republicans-housing-affordability-message-rent-mortgage-00665189

https://www.imf.org/en/publications/fandd/issues/series/back-to-basics/inflation
Learning from History: Lessons from the American Revolutionary War

November 22, 2025

November 24, 2025

By

Tarik Kiley

Since World War II (WWII), the United States has maintained military dominance worldwide. But dominance always comes with specific limitations. At the time of the American Revolution, the British Empire, which the Americans were fighting against, was also the dominant superpower. But the British Empire failed to learn essential governance lessons, which cost them their 13 North American colonies.

The first lesson is that no power can hope to go it alone. No matter how powerful we think we are, we cannot work without alliances. During the American Revolutionary War, the British Empire was the leading superpower of the era. But when France joined the former colonies together in an alliance against Britain, the tables turned. According to usarcent.army.mil, “France’s decision to back the US changed the balance of power between Britain and its competitors. French military power challenged Britain in every theater of the globe…” This means that even the perceived weakest of powers can change the balance of power with strong allies on their team.

Additionally, it isn’t possible for even the strongest of powers to have enough infrastructure to operate globally. Human technology hasn’t progressed to the point of realizing global power. Instead, respecting local control is essential to managing any large political territory. The British Empire created many of its problems by attempting to subjugate local rulers or turning them into puppets of their empire. The nationalist movements that fought against the British Empire and other European imperialists emphasized local control.

Also, no matter your power, it is never a good idea to make enemies. The people who hate you will put aside their differences to team up against you. It is never a good idea to assume you can get away with anything and that others will remain loyal to you. As usarcent.army.mil points out, “They [the British] were often dismissive of colonial leaders, both patriot and loyalist…” Continuing the concept of local control, one of the central tenets of the American Revolution was the quest for independence, which is a form of local control.

The British also didn’t completely comprehend the extreme cost of protracted war. According to americanrevolutioninstitute.org, “Their [the British Empire’s] only serious liabilities were the difficulties involved in conducting a war to restore royal authority over a widely dispersed people thousands of miles away, with the threat that their European enemies would take advantage of the situation and attack them while they were doing it. The American Revolutionaries prevailed in their war for independence by outlasting the British, turning British liabilities into American advantages, making the war too costly for the British to continue, and persuading the French to risk supporting them.” Not only is the situation of alliances being formed against you dangerous, but the cost of conducting lengthy wars across a large territory can prove detrimental as well.

The American Revolution should also be noted for the power of political ideas. The idea of representative democracy was essentially unheard of at the time of the revolution. Instead the current global order of the time was defined by dictatorships and monarchies. As americanrevolutioninstitute.org notes, “Before the American Revolution, nearly everyone on Earth was the subject of a king, emperor, czar, hereditary chief or some other ruler who claimed to rule by hereditary right or divine will. Their people were subjects, legally bound in varying ways to obey their will. Governments everywhere, with few and transient exceptions, existed to advance the interests of the sovereign, which were regarded as synonymous with the interests of the state and of society.”

The USA was unique in that the concept of sovereignty was defined to no longer rest in the personage of a king, but instead in the people. This idealism as expressed in the Declaration of Independence, and later in the US Constitution, became the standard by which the people not only understood their power, but has also been reimagined and accepted by generation after generation of US citizens since the American Revolution. Each generation of Americans reexamines their ideals, but never forgets them.

The critical takeaway here is that Americans love freedom so much that we violently rebelled against the British crown. Before the Continental Army was organized, militias were already on their way to rebel against the King. As descendants of the American Revolution, we should not only understand that our forefathers were rebels, but that they also accepted nothing short of reciprocity from the so-called King. They defended themselves against unlawful force, wrote and promoted ideas based on freedom, and continually fought for recognition of our independence.

Works Cited

https://www.usarcent.army.mil/News/Features/Article/1880711/cautionary-tales-in-history-5-lessons-from-revolutionary-war-missteps/

The American Revolution in One Lesson

https://www.britannica.com/event/American-Revolution/Washington-takes-command
Opposing Trump’s Policies

November 22, 2025

November 22, 2025

By

Tarik Kiley

I want to express serious disagreement with two of President Trump’s policies. The first is his immigration policy, and the second is his tariff policy. In my opinion, President Trump’s policy on immigration is driven by xenophobia, hatred of brown people, and racism. His tariff policies are also driven by isolationism and xenophobia.

First, arresting brown skinned people and sending them to concentration camps should, on its face, prove that he is racist, in that he is not only targeting illegal immigrants, but also any brown skinned person who appears to be Latino. He has arrested US citizens and those seeking a path to legal citizenship. If this question is about obtaining legal citizenship, why is he also targeting those working to achieve citizenship legitimately?

Also, arresting Latino people indiscriminately, subjecting them to cruel and unusual punishments, and denying them due process is not only wrong, but it also hurts the USA’s economy. Many Latino people take low-wage jobs, such as construction and agricultural work. Without these workers, essential sectors of the USA’s economy will suffer.

On another note, imposing ridiculous tariffs on imports is bad for the economy. If the question is about the USA importing less and exporting more, then the USA needs to continue developing goods the world wants to import. Currently, we export a lot of culture, and that is good for our economy. But to truly be a competitive exporter, the USA needs to diversify its economy and increase production in the 21st-century sunrise industries. Some of these industries include clean energy and robotics.

To develop the sunrise sectors of the USA’s economy, the USA needs to invest in research and development. Federal dollars could go towards supporting research universities and giving grants to graduate students, for example, who are at the forefront of technological development and innovation.

It should be evident that the USA is no longer a globally competitive producer of manufactured goods. But that is just a sign that the USA needs to change, adapt, and innovate. The goal should be a high-technology economy that adapts to the global economic landscape and invests in new technologies in a diversified manner.

Also, despite President Trump’s xenophobia, international cooperation is a good thing at times. International cooperation in space travel and agriculture is beneficial to all, for example. All countries on the globe have a potential interest in space travel, and helping disadvantaged countries feed themselves is useful and has intrinsic value.

Additionally, not only are President Trump’s immigration policies going to wreck essential sectors of the economy, potentially, but his tariff policies will only increase prices for the USA’s consumers and contribute to inflation.

This also shines a blaring light on the fact that worker poverty will increase under President Trump’s policies. Not only are prices going to rise, but it should also be noted that the minimum wage has not risen to keep up with inflationary pressure. So, the USA’s workforce will see less buying power from their dollars, and as a result lead to a lower standard of living.

I’m hoping that we will all be able to see the failings of President Trump’s economic policies. At a time like this we need more workers, not less. We need more workers to help us build the infrastructure of the 21st century. We need workers to build high speed rail, to maintain roads and bridges, and to update us with additional construction.

We also need to participate in international trade by offering the world exports that they desire to import. These should be innovative high technology exports such as robotics and clean energy. We should not be in the practice of punishing other countries for their productivity. We should raise our productivity.
Deconstructing Our Current State of Affairs

November 22, 2025

November 18, 2025

Deconstructing Our Current State of Affairs

By

Tarik Kiley

In the United States of America, we are facing a crossroads. We are faced with the decision to either come together as a more perfect union, or to let political opinions divide us against one another. We can either fight one another in factions, as expressed in “Federalist #10” by James Madison or work towards building bipartisanship between political parties. According to time.com, “One of the worst consequences of our current political climate is the spike in feelings of alienation many of us are experiencing in our relationships with family members, neighbors, former friends, and coworkers who differ from us politically.” Division has made it difficult for us to move forward on common goals as a country. Instead of seeing one another as neighbors, we are seeing one another as a source of blame and conflict.

We are facing the reality of threats to our political norms including the increasing normalization of political violence. The idea of political violence in the USA is becoming more and more commonplace, and we are moving away from our norm of political discourse to one of wanton violence. Unfortunately, this legitimization of political violence is coming from the highest office in the land. This is evident in actions such as the current President of the United States, Mr. Donald Trump, pardoning the January 6th rioters, who attacked the capitol in his name, to dispute the results of the 2020 presidential election.

We have also returned to a very oversimplified mentality of “us vs. them,” or in-group versus out-group political thinking. This can be found in Mr. Trump’s immigration policy. With his immigration policy, Mr. Trump is essentially attempting to punish people who look Latino, as “illegal immigrants” and “criminals.” This is of course a very oversimplified view of Latino people, and this viewpoint is fueled and driven by racism.

Mr. Trump’s inability to show empathy for others, as evident through his many actions, is also partially driven by narcissism. According to the mayoclinic.org, “Narcissistic personality disorder is a mental health condition in which people have an unreasonably high sense of their own importance. They need and seek too much attention and want people to admire them. People with this disorder may lack the ability to understand or care about the feelings of others. But behind this mask of extreme confidence, they are not sure of their self-worth and are easily upset by the slightest criticism.”

This is evident in Mr. Trump’s behavior. Also, helpguide.org states, “…people with narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) are in love with an idealized, grandiose image of themselves. This is evident in Mr. Trump’s need to be showered with praise and gifts on a consistent basis. It also explains his need to bully others. Ultimately, Mr. Trump’s narcissism makes him psychologically unfit to lead.

Though, despite his mental incapacity to lead, Mr. Trump still has those who obey his orders. They are “ICE” and the “border patrol.” Unfortunately, they both have symptoms of acting as the Gestapo did under Hitler. They do so in a few ways. They abuse their power, utilize arbitrary detention, and use ruthless tactics to suppress dissent. In fact, we’re not that far from Mr. Trump using his police force to investigate those he considers to be his political enemies.

When faced with Gestapo tactics, the American people cannot remain passive. We can’t just accept what is happening without resisting. We can resist in various ways.

First, we cannot treat political violence as if it is normal. We have to insist on maintaining our democratic institutions, and our civil liberties. These include the freedom of speech, press, and religion, the right to assembly and association, the right to due process and a fair trial, and other similar ideas. We also have to face the fact that authoritarian regimes often promise civil liberties, while ignoring them in practice. Such is the practice in Mr. Trump’s USA. Under Mr. Trump, civil liberties and human rights are consistently trampled upon. This is important to understand, because we don’t want to be reduced to a state of slavery, or live in a country that spits on international law.

We need to move the culture forward. Just as in the 1940 movie, “The Great Dictator,” by Charlie Chaplin, we need to comment on our times through literature, film, music and art. Expressing ourselves, and moving the culture forward implies that we will not be silent. We cannot be silent, because silence and complicity only fuels injustice, while cultural expression suggests a state of action that leads towards justice. Increasing cultural expression leads to the idea of communicating with others. As social creatures, we utilize language to accomplish what we could not do individually. So, people still need to express through language, their ideas, and hopes and dreams for the future.

We also need to take voting as a serious duty of being a citizen in a republic. Although the Electoral College still picks presidents, the US Congress, state and local elections, are decided through popular vote. An organized and active electorate is a major bane to dictatorship, because informed people will more likely vote fools out, and replace them with people who consider their best interests at heart…or at least, we hope so. This goes back to the idea of social contract, or the consent of the governed. Society must agree to be ruled, and rule is not something that can be imposed on the people. In our representative democracy, the ballot is truly powerful. This should be inherently understood.

Dictatorship comes at the cost of freedom for all. Since dictatorship threatens all Americans, we have to resist dictatorship together, as there is strength in numbers. If we are to express civil disobedience through marching and picketing, then that civil disobedience must occur on a grand scale. As with the 2025, “No Kings” protests, US citizens must organize on a large scale to make a difference. The “No Kings” protests remain important because they express an idea. The idea is one of adherence to the US Constitution. The US Constitution is ultimately an idea. Ultimately, this fight is about ideas. The main idea is freedom, and resistance to anyone who would enslave us.

Works Cited

https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed10.asp

https://time.com/6270884/americans-tackle-political-division-together/

https://www.charliechaplin.com/en/articles/29-the-final-speech-from-the-great-dictator-

https://www.britannica.com/topic/social-contract

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c5y7l47xrpko

https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/narcissistic-personality-disorder/symptoms-causes/syc-20366662

https://www.helpguide.org/mental-health/personality-disorders/narcissistic-personality-disorder

https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/gestapo

https://www.britannica.com/topic/human-rights

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c93xgyp1zv4o
HEALTHCARE CRISIS

November 22, 2025

November 18, 2025

By

DonnaMarie Woodson

Across the country, including in North Carolina, Health Care is in crisis!

Since taking power, Donald Trump and Congressional Republicans have launched an all-out assault on our Health Care system. From slashing Medicaid in North Carolina and driving rural hospitals to close – to now ending Affordable Care Act Tax Credits, they’ve created a disaster for working families and why? For the biggest grift in American History!

I’ve been an Advocate for the Affordable Care Act since President Obama proposed this revolutionary piece of legislation. Making “Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness” a reality for the American people.

But, without the tax credits that make health care affordable, North Carolinians who buy insurance on their own will see their premium costs SKYROCKET! Beginning in 2026, Republicans have made sure that premiums in North Carolina will increase by an average of 149 Percent MORE EVERY SINGLE YEAR! This increase will exacerbate the uninsured rate and raise costs for hard-working North Carolinians at a time when too many are struggling to make ends meet.

This heinous scheme by the Republicans to gut the Affordable Care Act is personal for me. As a 10-year Survivor of both Colon and Breast Cancer, I’m blessed to be able to speak with organizations like Protect Our Care because of Grace and the Affordable Care Act – which saved my life!

During the 2008 recession my husband was laid off, and we lost our health Insurance. I put off my routine screenings because of the cost. So, when the ACA passed, we qualified and I signed us up. Without the ACA and the tax credits I don’t know we could have afforded the costs associated with my cancer treatments. Chemotherapy alone cost $8,000 per treatment which I had twice a month for 6 months. That’s $96,000!

Like me, I’m sure most hard working Americans don’t have that kind of money just lying around. Eliminating tax credits will gut the ACA and cost the lives of millions of Americans!

This cavalier attitude is Obscene and We the People cannot let this stand.

Works Cited

https://tax.thomsonreuters.com/news/estimated-impact-of-aca-premium-tax-credit-expiration/#:~:text=Enhanced%20Affordable%20Care%20Act%20premium,will%20end%20unless%20Congress%20intervenes.

Deconstructing Our Current State of Affairs