Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

We live in our own version of Wonderland

Drawing of a scene from "Alice in Wonderland"

Alice attends the Mad Hatter's Tea Party, iIllustration by Sir John Tenniel.

Andrew_Howe

Lockard is an Iowa resident who regularly contributes to regional newspapers and periodicals. She is working on the second of a four-book fictional series based on Jane Austen’s “Pride and Prejudice."

“Curiouser and curiouser,” Alice cried after falling down the rabbit hole in Lewis Carroll’s “Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland.”

In nearly every arena of our lives we might observe the same, from our changing climate and increasingly high-stakes global conflicts, to space travel, energy conservation and the accelerating use of artificial intelligence. And, of course, in our volatile politics. Things are indeed getting curiouser.


Each of our branches of government frequently inhabits an improbable “wonderland.” In the executive branch’s presidential race, we heard: “Christians, get out and vote, just this time. You won’t have to do it anymore. Four more years, you know what, it will be fixed, it will be fine, you won’t have to vote anymore, my beautiful Christians.”

What?!

Like the White Rabbit in Alice’s Wonderland, is the Republican candidate scurrying off to his terribly important date? Win, or an insurrection? Has someone stolen the Red Queen’s tarts, or the previous election? No, it’s Wonderland.

In Wonderland’s Caucus Race, “They began running when they liked, and left when they liked, so that it was not easy to know when the race was over.” Sounds much like the Democratic Party’s election process, which we thought happened during the primaries. Apparently not.

And participants in the Queen’s croquet game have nothing on our Congress. “They all played at once, without waiting for turns, quarreling all the while” is a lot like our legislative branch. Lawmakers often even use the Red Queen’s method to win the day: “sentence first, verdict afterwards!”

What about our third, unelected, judicial branch? Again, who stole the tarts? But it was ruled that no tarts were stolen; there are just different rules for those who make the rules. The Red Queen’s “off with their heads” is too harsh, but not reporting lavish gifts and vacations should have some consequences.

Wonderland’s Mock Turtle could be talking about our political campaigns and their “different branches: Ambition, Distraction, Uglification and Derision.” Ambitious politicians spouting ugly rhetorical derisions pretty much describes what we see and hear from every media outlet every day this election season.

Although we may want to hide our heads in a hole, we cannot. And we cannot escape, tumbling down a rabbit hole as Alice did. What then?

Attend the Mad Hatter’s Tea Party and imitate the Dormouse, falling asleep with our heads in our teacups? No time for that. Or perhaps the Caterpillar had the right idea? Take all the pundits, roll them together and smoke them to escape reality. For many reasons, it is a bad idea.

“I wish I hadn’t cried so much,” Alice said, swimming in a pool of her own tears. She is right. There is far too much at stake for useless tears.

The best advice: Do not drink any potions marked “Drink Me,” as the concoction makes us too big or too small. We cannot afford to get too big to listen to others’ viewpoints, or become small enough to drown in our own pool of despair. Be skeptical, but hopeful.

“But I don’t want to go among mad people,” Alice tells the Cheshire Cat. “Oh, you can’t help that,” he replies. “We’re all mad here. I’m mad. You’re mad. You must be or you wouldn’t have come here.”

Probably true. And here we are. But we have always been here, always brooked controversy and disagreement, arguing and posturing. This adventure is nothing new for us.

Carroll wrote “Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland” in Oxford, England, in 1865. The same year, our country was coming to the end of a devastating Civil War and our 16th, and arguably greatest president, was assassinated. Yet, here we are today, holding an election for our 47th.

When Alice’s sister hears her tales from Wonderland, she reminds Alice it was all a dream.

So, too, is democracy a dream. One which for 248 years has withstood all kinds of inanity, difficulties, wars, etc., yet continues to exist on the solid ground of the real world.

The dream lives on. Crafted into reality by the foresight of our founders, instilled with checks and balances, a living, changing entity of individual states, united. Stronger for our diversity, more stable with our open venues for discussion and argument, and, despite our differences and strife, still thriving, Wonderland in its wonder.

And still the greatest country the world has ever seen.


Read More

An empty grocery cart in a market.

NYC Mayor Zohran Mamdani proposes five city-run grocery stores. See the arguments for and against, from food deserts to bodega concerns and the $70M cost.

Getty Images, Kwangmoozaa

Government-Owned Grocery Stores: Accessible Nutrition or Government Overreach?

Issue Introduction

Over the past few years, affordability has become the most central issue affecting Americans and the quality of life in the United States. The prices of groceries and basic necessities have risen 25-30% since the COVID-19 pandemic and are projected to rise another 3.2% in 2026. At the same time, the exodus of grocery chains from rural and low-income areas has scattered food deserts throughout individual states. Recent mass closures include Grocery Outlet’s shuttering of 36 stores and continued shut-downs of many Albertsons locations. These factors have led politicians to make affordability a major campaign issue.

During his progressive campaign for mayor of New York City, Zohran Mamdani raised the idea of opening grocery stores owned and operated by the city government to provide New Yorkers with affordable groceries. In his April 2026 public address that marked his first 100 days in office, Mayor Mamdani announced plans for the first of five city-run grocery stores. Mamdani’s proposed initiative will use $70 million in capital funding to build five city-owned municipal stores–one in each borough–and place them under control of the New York City Economic Development Corporation (NYCEDC). NYCEDC will then select third-party operating staff in accordance with city standards for affordability and proper labor practices. Public opinion following the announcement continues to be divided between uproar and support.

Keep ReadingShow less
​U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth

U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth testifies during a Senate Committee on Appropriations hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., on July 21, 2026. Hegseth is crafting a strong and masculine identity for his audience as he reportedly contemplates a presidential run.

(Alex Wroblewski/AFP/Getty Images/TNS)

Politicians Can’t Just ’Give the People What They Want’

For reasons that will baffle my many detractors, I am often asked for advice about being an opinion journalist. One of my standard responses is: You have to be willing to disappoint your biggest fans.

What I mean is that if you start to see your job as telling fans what they want to hear, you risk becoming an entertainer rather than a thinker, and eventually you become a caricature. I’ve seen it happen numerous times. Patrick Buchanan was a brilliant columnist and a serious person. But over the course of his career, he listened too much to the people who said, “Go Pat, go!” and too little to friends who said, “I think that’s taking it too far.”

Keep ReadingShow less
White marble exterior of the United States Capitol, often called the Capitol Building, is the home of the United States Congress and the seat of the legislative branch of the U.S. federal government

Congress approval is at a record-low 10%. Moderation and consensus-building, not partisan theatrics, are how Washington gets problems solved.

Richard Sharrocks / Getty Images

Reclaiming the Politics of the Possible

Washington is stuck in a cycle of performative conflict. The incentives seem to reward outrage, not outcomes that last; purity tests, not problem‑solving. So it’s no surprise that after three shutdowns in less than a year, public approval of Congress collapsed to just 10 percent this spring. (Gallup, April 2026.) But the country we live in — where many middle-income families report persistent financial strain and businesses are navigating unprecedented technological upheaval — cannot be governed by theatrics. Breaking this cycle requires moderation, consensus‑building, and a cooperative approach to governance.

This is not a call for centrism as an ideology. Instead, this is a call for transformative leaders to embrace moderation as their governing strategy, recognizing that in a pluralistic country of nearly 350 million people durable solutions require broad and stable alliances. Ultimately, this is a call for the 240 million of us who are eligible to vote in November to elect consensus-builders instead of bomb-throwers, and healers instead of arsonists.

Keep ReadingShow less
Adult man holds a microphone while asking a question during a town hall meeting.

Congress ignored 90% of public support for background checks. Learn how citizen assemblies and sortition helped Ireland break gridlock and could work in the US.

SDI Productions/Getty Images

Consensus Without Power: How Sortition Could Break America's Legislative Gridlock

In April 2013, four months after the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting killed twenty children, the US Senate voted on the Manchin-Toomey Act to expand background checks and to include gun-show and internet sales of firearms. Roughly nine in ten Americans, including a majority of gun owners, supported the bill—a figure that has held steady across more than a decade of polling. It fell short of the 60-vote threshold by six votes. This was not an outlier. On complex issues, representatives often fail to translate public consensus into reality. Research shows that legislators consistently vote in line with donor and interest group preferences over constituent opinion. Before the vote, the National Rifle Association (NRA) warned every senator it would “rate” their vote on its annual rating system, and a low NRA rating could cost senators their next primary. Consequently, the bill died 54-46, and the majority of Americans watched, powerless, as their consensus was overridden by self-interested representatives.

Liberal democracies need a method to bypass electoral incentives that run counter to public opinion. One already exists: Ireland faced the same stalemate on complex issues before it instituted a process called sortition. The beauty of sortition lies in its removal of the primary pressure that misaligns representatives’ interests from public interest: reelection. Much like jury duty, citizens are randomly drawn from the population. An independent body then stratifies the pool, so the final group mirrors the country by age, gender, geography, and income. The group meets over weeks or months, hearing from experts and the public, as well as debating frequently. At the end, it issues a recommendation that parliament may then put to a referendum or pass into law.

Keep ReadingShow less