This article provides an analysis on some of the recent programs and directions from the current administration to erase certain programs and ideologies.
National Public Radio (NPR), the Public Broadcasting System (PBS) join the elite group who are on the proverbial chopping block from the current administration. The new wave of censorship has the trajectory for the full erasure of these American cultural staples. What happens to Americans if these actions are completed? It’s more than seeing childhood educational programs, drive-time radio episodes, and how to set one’s sights on where to go to college, are slowly becoming a dying resource. This discursive approach is now being institutionalized for the sanitation of cultural signifiers of a free democratic society. If such actions as the withholding and freezing of educational funding, the extraction and elimination of diversity programs, deportation raids on foreign students labeled as a threat to the current political ideology, and now the potential for erasing a free resource for public accessibility to news and educational programming, are to be fully indoctrinated, the evolution and progress of America’s historic definition of democray and a free society will become null and void.
Your Education On Shaky Ground
“Across the United States, universities are raising the alarm about what they see as a campaign by the Donald Trump administration to assert political control over higher education. Columbia, Princeton, Harvard, Cornell, Northwestern and the University of Pennsylvania have all experienced withdrawn federal grants — part of a broader strategy to condition public funding on political compliance. Federal officials had previously warned 60 institutions that their civil rights policies could jeopardize their grants” (Zane McNeill, NonProfit Quarterly, May 3).
Since President Trump aimed at closing the Department of Education (DOE) early in his administration, the fear grew about how soon his attacks would come to other centers of learning. Disguised as part of the extraction of DEI programs and deportation of students viewed as foreign insurrectionists, the process of slowly overturning centers of higher education has started.
“…[T]he private institutions targeted by the Trump administration are themselves 501c3 tax-exempt organizations. Advocates for nonprofit and academic freedom have pointed out that Trump is targeting universities first — including their tax-exempt status — as a precursor to using the same tactics against other nonprofit organizations” (Zane McNeill, NonProfit Quarterly, May 3).
[comment] Following a brief, if the federal government supplies monies to these educational centers, then the government will have the final say on how much and when to provide these funds. A weak argument framed around an assumption, not legal logic.
“For nonprofits — especially those working in civil rights, education, journalism, or public health — this should raise serious concerns. The suppression of academic freedom isn’t just campus politics — it’s a warning signal for civil society and for our democracy. As universities lose the freedom to teach, research, and dissent; nonprofits will lose critical allies needed to investigate injustice, educate communities, and imagine alternative futures” (Zane McNeill, NonProfit Quarterly, May 3).
Centers of higher education have a long history of defending civil rights and the process of free speech. The current administration is focusing on how to complete this step-by-step process. Those educational institutes have vowed to fight these orders using all available resources. The federal government has more resources available to weather a legal storm. This unsatisfying and grossly illegal practice may be easier to complete from these involved centers for learning.
A Thought Already Stated
Is the U.S. Becoming an Autocracy?
“Other countries have watched their democracies slip away gradually, without tanks in the streets. That may be where we’re headed — or where we already are,” (Andrew Marantz, The Political Wire, May 3).
This is a point I’ve stated and written about in-depth elsewhere. On hearing then-President Biden frame the new direction of the government as an oligarchy, my response was, “This is not an oligarchy.” Such a historic term would go over the ears and knowledge base of most hearing Biden’s final White House address to the nation. The term, oligarchy, sounds important. With no knowledge or context of its use, it’s easy to develop a sense of fear. The truth is, under the current administration, the US is facing to become more of an imperialistic autocracy.
Starting with a monarchy, then advancing comfortably toward a full imperialistic autocracy, the monarchy would enjoy retaining control in a tight family. However, the children of the controlling male-dominant hands of the patriarchy, President Trump, are far from ready to run a monarchy. This is why an autocracy appears to be the most useful direction for the imperial trajectory. Considering such a dramatic change in America’s history, to fully usurp power and define complete dominance, the forming imperial autocracy will follow the current practice of counter-news and history, delete the news sources, and rewrite history according to the imperialistic autocracy ideology and demands. These two final directives would secure the prominence of the imperialist autocracy.
Trump Mulls Executive Order on College Athlete Payments
“President Trump is considering an executive order to examine payments made to college athletes and whether they have created an unfair system,“ the New York Times reports.
“Mr. Trump’s focus on the issue — which he’s talked about in the past, one of the people briefed on the matter noted — was renewed after he spoke with Nick Saban, the famed former University of Alabama football coach, backstage at an event Thursday night in Tuscaloosa, where Mr. Trump delivered an address to graduates” (qtd in The Political Wire, May 3).
“After Trump met with Rob Manfred at the White House last month, the issue of Rose was among the topics of conversation. Trump told others after the discussion that Manfred will posthumously remove Rose from MLB’s permanently ineligible list.”
“If that happens, it would open the door for the game’s all-time hits leader to be elected into the Hall of Fame nearly four decades after he was banned for gambling on baseball” (Wall Street Journal, qtd in The Political Wire, May 3).
Student athletes are being groomed for professional careers early on. Gaining payment from their educational institution to play for the institute has become a common practice. To reduce or even eliminate such a practice now could have a devastating effect on these institutions that profit from these students. The other perspective is to look at this as a pay-to-play cycle that would be broken. Institutes can take advantage of student-athletes who are paid to play under the name of the institute. At some point, this dependence of the enrolled student on the institute to play in their select sport and get paid establishes a cycle of performative slavery. Might this unconfirmed direction be the necessary tool to stop this cycle? It will have to be seen if and how this early announced concept would take place to best serve both the institute and the student.
Pete Rose has had an asterisk next to his name in baseball’s history. Applied because he gambled on the sport, Pete Rose has been disqualified from the Baseball Hall of Fame, despite his impressive hitting history and legacy in the sport. To lift those restrictions and allow Peter Rose to be eligible for a position he would have otherwise already held can open an unsuspecting Pandora’s Box. If such leverage and opportunity are allowed to a career gambler, can this president be rewritten by others in the sport who face tangential issues? Could the argument be made for one who abused steroids and, therefore, is not eligible for the Hall of Fame, no matter how incredible their career?
The argument could be made based on some lofty health issue and the need for such drugs to cope with their job, playing baseball. Following such, these actions were their “gamble” on their career to continue as long as possible. It’s a thin argument, but the option would now be available. One step further, if the argument seems to already been given serious interest from President Trump, what’s to stop a similar parralell executive order, or included in the “Free Pete” execute order, to include all substances which may have been abused (read: Pete Rose gambled on his sport because it was his “drug of choice”). It could happen.
Penny Pinching Or Just Tired Of Americana
“The McRecession hits fast-food chains. Low and middle-income consumers are increasingly shying away from fast-food restaurants like McDonald’s, a sign that people are pinching pennies amid recession fears” (Axios, May 3).
Has the fear of the full brunt of the tariffs already struck the stomachs of those below the ruling class in America? One of America’s favorite pastimes is to indulge at their favorite fast food restaurant. Once egg prices increased, America’s quick-fix, morning dash meals using eggs were off the schedule. Now with other tariffs set to take place, the punches of these tariffs will begin to hit the pocketbook harder and harder. It would only take one ingredient, packaging style, or shipping delays from products not under the tariff requirements to push consumer prices even higher. Indirectly affected products will be directly affected.
To avoid these additional, unnecessary charges, the value of finding other ways to get nourishment at any moment will need to be fully explored. The convenience of reaching across a drive-thru aisle to get a pre-made lunch or dinner will give way to the prepping and cooking at home agendas. Who is to fall short on this necessary change? Those in the lower and middle classes who have come to know fast food chains as their normal eateries. This is going to take more than the proposed single month to get resolved. It’s going to become, as one major fast-food chain’s branding states, “You can have it your way.”
This Is Your Country On “Anything”
In advance of the Sunday special from Meet The Press, the program released short clips from the interview between host Kristen Welker and President Trump. Axios provides a short transcript that contextualizes the reason for the nervous sensation in multiple areas of the country.
“Are you worried about a recession?” NBC’s Kristen Welker asks President Trump in a clip of an interview that’s airing tomorrow on “Meet the Press.”
“Anything can happen. But I think we’re going to have the greatest economy in the history of our country,” the president says.
“Welker also asks, “Are you comfortable with the country potentially dipping into a recession for a period of time if you are able to achieve your long-term goals?”
“Look, yeah, everything is going to be OK. … This is a transition period,” Trump says. (Axios, May 3).
This short excerpt says it all. Following the obvious statements by the president, there’s little to no concern about the current fiscal issues facing Americans. If there were a sensitive bone or even a hint in his rhetoric, the recent changes to the American economy, including tax cuts and tariffs, would be centered on how Americans can best address the economic condition now, rather than waiting for some undetermined time.
Leaving the question largely unanswered, the president avoids being cornered by his words in the future if his economic plans do not take hold. Restating a “transition period” does not help pay the bills. What profit-focused business would accept a lack of payment for services, noting a “transition period” in one’s finances? The already removed position of he president from the fabric of mainstream America is growing wider each time he, President Trump, answers this line of questioning. If the words, “Look, just let hang on until this is all over, then they can eat lots of cake,” come from the president, we will all know, beyond a shadow of a doubt, the country is set for a full-blown collapse.
One Last Thought
Elon Musk’s Starbase Is Becoming a Texas City
“The South Texas home of Elon Musk’s SpaceX rocket company is on its way to becoming an official city with a galactic name: Starbase,” the AP reports.
“A vote Saturday to formally organize Starbase as a city was being approved by a lopsided margin by a small group of voters who live there and are mostly Musk’s employees at SpaceX” (The Political Wire, May 3).
Sure, why not? When you have everything else in the world and have served as a quasi-politician, why not build a city? Some would settle for owning an island, or even a small countryside. But, to have a town of your own simply says, “I win!” Will Musk have to pay property and business taxes in his city?
Alan Lechusza
