In this video, Todd and Andre discuss the challenges that Black Americans face as they aspire to create the careers and relationships they desire, and how those challenges impact the kind of Black person they can be. In a world where career success depends on the social relationships you develop with people who have influence and networks of opportunity, what pressures exist for members of the Black community to adapt the way they present themselves to the world?
Site Navigation
Search
Latest Stories
Start your day right!
Get latest updates and insights delivered to your inbox.
Top Stories
Latest news
Read More
A Republic, if we can keep it
Jan 19, 2025
Part XXXIV: An Open Letter to President Trump from the American People
Dear President Trump,
You know, we speak the truth when we say that politics is all about messaging. Your campaign message—about a “limping economy” and a “permeable border”—resonated with the electorate. Vice President Harris’ about “to-do lists” and “enemies lists” did not. Your message about “America First” was triumphant; Harris’ about the supposed threat to democracy? Less so.
And that is why your message today—on Inauguration Day—is so crucial to the future of this country we love.
Today marks the third time in history that Inauguration Day intersects with Martin Luther King Jr. Day, the national holiday commemorating the incomparable life of America’s civil rights paragon. The first time it occurred was in 1997 when President Bill Clinton was sworn in to begin his second term. Sixteen years later, President Obama took the oath on that same celebrated holiday.
Both presidents chose to honor Reverend King in their own unique style. President Clinton looked out onto the Lincoln Memorial and echoed King’s famous oration. “Thirty-four years ago,” Clinton declared, “the man whose life we celebrate today spoke to us down there at the other end of this Mall in words that moved the conscience of a nation. Like a prophet of old, he told of his dream that one day America would rise up and treat all its citizens as equals before the law and in the heart.” Moving words, to be sure.
Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter
President Obama likewise stirred a nation by reciting the oath with his left hand firmly planted on two Bibles, Abraham Lincoln’s and Martin Luther King Jr.’s. That message was obvious. America’s first Black President deliberately and humbly channeled America’s two greatest guardians of racial equality.
President Trump, you have a unique opportunity on this day. Inaugurations are momentous occasions, ones where each and every presidential move is closely scrutinized and carefully analyzed. The occasion to deliver a resonate message inspired by Dr. King will not so fittingly come again.
Perhaps you could make some nod to Dr. King in your inaugural address. You could invoke America’s Gandhi on the theme of injustice: “injustice anywhere,” King believed, “is a threat to justice everywhere.” Or you might summon Dr. King on the topic of peace: “true peace is not merely the absence of tension; it is the presence of justice.” Or how about the issue of privilege and power? “I am not interested in power for power’s sake,” the civil rights leader intoned, “but I’m interested in power that is moral, that is right, and that is good.” Or perhaps you just want to keep it simple. Among the most modest and powerful words ever spoken by an American came from the lips of Dr. King: “we cannot walk alone,” he said when faced with the uphill climb to a racially pure nation.
At the very least, though, we think you must acknowledge King’s importance to America’s struggle over inequality. Somehow. You must. Please.
At a time when race relations are at a twenty-first century low, all of us should recognize that the desire for the elevated equality imagined by Reverend King has yet to be realized, that discrimination—both informal and formal—still persists. Your voice is louder than ours; indeed, it is louder than almost any across the globe. We beseech you to use it on this day to remind all of Dr. King’s legacy, his sacrifices, his greatness.
While issuing Proclamation 5927 five years after he signed into law legislation declaring the national holiday, President Reagan described the civil rights warrior in extraordinarily poignant language. Martin Luther King Jr., Reagan remarked, was a “drum major for justice,” someone who taught us with “unflinching determination,” who had “complete confidence in the redeeming power of love,” and whose “utter willingness to suffer, to sacrifice, and to serve” shall forever inspire a nation. It’s time to echo the 40th president.
And the 42nd. “Martin Luther King’s dream was the American dream,” President Clinton concluded in his 1997 inaugural address. Truer words have never been spoken. We implore you, Mr. President, to reaffirm that deeply profound message. For all of us.
Godspeed, Mr. President.
The American People
Breslin is the Joseph C. Palamountain Jr. Chair of Political Science at Skidmore College and author of “A Constitution for the Living: Imagining How Five Generations of Americans Would Rewrite the Nation’s Fundamental Law.”
Keep ReadingShow less
Recommended
Trump Must Take Proactive Approach to AI and Jobs
Jan 19, 2025
Artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly disrupting America’s job market. Within the next decade, positions such as administrative assistants, cashiers, postal clerks, and data entry workers could be fully automated. Although the World Economic Forum expects a net increase of 78 million jobs, significant policy efforts will be required to support millions of displaced workers. The Trump administration should craft a comprehensive plan to tackle AI-driven job losses and ensure a fair transition for all.
As AI is expected to reshape nearly 40% of workers’ skills over the next five years, investing in workforce development is crucial. To be proactive, the administration should establish partnerships to provide subsidized retraining programs in high-demand fields like cybersecurity, healthcare, and renewable energy. Providing tax incentives for companies that implement in-house reskilling initiatives could further accelerate this transition.
To ensure inclusivity, community technology centers and libraries equipped with online courses could be deployed in rural and underserved areas, helping workers across the country adapt to the evolving economy.
AI disproportionately affects regions reliant on clerical and manufacturing jobs, exacerbating local economic hardships. Establishing “economic diversification zones” in these communities—offering tax breaks, grants, and infrastructure investments—would attract growth-oriented industries such as advanced manufacturing, green energy, and technology startups, fostering broader economic resilience.
Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter
Rural areas, however, face a bigger challenge: they are among the least served by technology infrastructure, including high-speed internet. This digital divide limits access to the tools and resources necessary to participate in emerging AI-driven industries, putting these communities at risk of being left further behind. Many of these areas form the backbone of the Trump administration’s voter base, making their inclusion in the AI economy both an economic imperative and a political necessity. Without targeted investments to bridge this gap, rural regions may miss out on the opportunities AI could bring, compounding existing economic disparities.
Displaced workers often face unemployment and financial instability. Expanding benefits to include income-based retraining and extending coverage duration would offer essential relief. Decoupling healthcare from employment could also reduce stress and uncertainty. Meanwhile, portable benefits—allowing retirement and healthcare coverage to follow workers across jobs—would mitigate career-transition risks and bolster economic resilience.
Employers in emerging industries often struggle to fill vacancies despite high unemployment in declining sectors. The Trump administration must facilitate partnerships between educational institutions, labor unions, and employers to align training programs with industry needs. Apprenticeships and internships in fields like AI and machine learning could provide workers with on-the-job experience.
Micro-credentialing programs—short, specialized training modules—would allow displaced workers to transition into new roles without requiring full degrees, ensuring a faster and more efficient shift to growing industries.
Barriers such as inadequate childcare, eldercare, and inflexible work arrangements disproportionately affect women and low-income families. Subsidizing childcare and eldercare could enable more individuals to pursue retraining and employment. Encouraging remote work and flexible scheduling would expand opportunities for workers in rural areas and those with caregiving responsibilities.
The integration of AI and automation into the workforce represents both a challenge and an opportunity. By investing in retraining programs, economic diversification, and robust social safety nets, the Trump administration could empower workers to navigate this transformative period.
However, given the administration's policy direction, which deprioritizes investments in social safety nets, workforce retraining, and regional economic development, it is unlikely that these comprehensive changes will be pursued. Without a significant shift in priorities, many of the most vulnerable workers will face the full brunt of automation-driven job losses without sufficient support. This stark reality underscores the urgent need for a forward-looking strategy to address these issues head-on. Ironically, this burden will fall most heavily on the administration's strongest source of support—rural communities and blue-collar workers—further deepening the challenges they face.
Robert Cropf is a professor of political science at Saint Louis University.
Keep ReadingShow less
As Trump policy changes loom, nearly half of farmworkers lack legal status
Jan 19, 2025
The nation’s agriculture sector, which relies heavily on undocumented workers, could face a significant challenge when President-elect Donald Trump takes office this month amid promises to enact stricter immigration policies.
The percentage of undocumented farmworkers — those without legal status — dropped from 54% in 2020 to 42% in 2022, according to the USDA and the U.S. Department of Labor.
Trump said his mass deportation of undocumented immigrants would start with the “criminals,” but that “you have no choice” but to eventually deport everyone in the country illegally, according to a December interview with NBC’s “Meet the Press.”
Mary Jo Dudley, director of the Cornell Farmworker Program, emphasized the potential consequences of such policies, telling Investigate Midwest, “If we lost half of the farmworker population in a short period of time, the agriculture sector would likely collapse.”
“There are no available skilled workers to replace the current workforce should this policy be put into place,” she said.
As Trump policy changes loom, nearly half of farmworkers lack legal statuswas first published on Investigate Midwest, and was republised with permission.
Mónica Cordero is a Report for America corps member and part of the Mississippi River Basin Ag & Water Desk team. Her expertise includes data analysis with Python and SQL, and reporting under the Freedom of Information Act.
Keep ReadingShow less
We play a role in our political opponents growing more extreme
Jan 18, 2025
As the election dust settles, one thing remains unchanged: America is deeply divided.
Just as before the election, many are hyper-focused on the extreme ideas and actions of their opponents. Democrats are shocked that so many could overlook Trump’s extreme behavior, as they see it: his high-conflict approach to leadership, his disrespect for democratic processes. Whereas Trump’s supporters see his win as evidence supporting the view that the left has grown increasingly extreme and out-of-touch.
But few see that our toxic divides are part of a self-reinforcing cycle—that the hostile, contemptuous behaviors of both political groups contribute to the very extremity on the “other side” that bothers them.
In major conflicts, it’s easy for people on both “sides” to believe it’s the “other side” that is the more extreme and unreasonable aggressor. How someone decides which group is worse will depend on how they filter the immense amount of information around us and how they prioritize its importance.
Let’s look first at demeaning, threatening behaviors on the left.
Before Trump was elected, liberals often painted him and his supporters in the worst possible light. Many influential people promoted the narrative that Trump support was primarily about bigotry, despite that view of things being simplistic and biased. Many minor and ambiguous statements by Trump have been interpreted in highly pessimistic and certain ways. There were many biased and irresponsible stories about the Trump/Russia story.
Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter
These approaches bolstered the narrative that Republicans were under attack by an establishment that treated them in biased and unfair ways. Such approaches helped give Republicans reasons for supporting aggressive and contemptuous responses (like the kinds that Trump engages in).
To be clear, this is not to blame political toxicity on Democrats, nor to let Republicans off the hook.
For one thing, Trump’s divisive personality can be seen as playing a role in making the left more angry and extreme.
On the right, an oft-heard view is that the left has become significantly more extreme, while Republican-side stances have remained largely the same. (A popular meme by Colin Wright and shared by Elon Musk promoted this view.)
It’s true that some liberal-side stances have shifted rapidly. In the last few years, liberals became much more pro-immigration; their support of gender identity-related ideas increased quickly; anti-police views multiplied in 2020.
But what the focus on alleged liberal extremity misses is that groups in conflict are never symmetrical. What Trump and a Trump-dominated GOP contribute to our divides can’t be defined by political stances alone. Trump’s divisive nature—his promoting distrust of the legitimacy of elections, his frequent talk of “enemies” and retribution—those traits are perceived by many as dangerously extreme, but have little to do with issue stances or policy.
Trump is someone who has long been known for an aggressive, contemptuous style of leadership. (To learn more about that, I recommend Trumped!, a book about his Atlantic City days.) Trump has said several varieties of the idea that when someone hits him, he’ll hit back ten times as hard: that’s the very definition of someone who amplifies conflict.
And one can see this aspect of Trump even while being a Trump supporter. A gung-ho pro-Trump acquaintance told me he saw Trump’s personality as being like “gasoline on the fire” of our divides.
It’s easy to see how Trump’s aggressive rhetoric could shift some liberal stances. For example, his way of talking about immigration can help explain Democrats becoming more pro-immigration. Seeing him as cruel and aggressive on that issue would result in Democrats feeling more protective of immigrants.
It’s possible to debate Trump’s level of bigotry, but there’ve been many things he’s done that can understandably be perceived as bigoted. To name one example: the time he told four Democratic congresspeople to “go back and help fix” the countries they came from—even though only one of the four was born in a foreign country. He has associated with extreme people like Nick Fuentes, and has said that immigrants are “poisoning the blood” of America.
Trump’s personality and decisions, whether due to significant bigotry or not, have made it easier for people to believe the “racism explains his popularity” narrative. That view in turn increased demand among anti-Trump Americans for ideas that purported to find evidence of all the racism around us—racial equity and other antiracism-associated ideas—even as many of those ideas can easily be criticized as simplistic and divisive.
Trump’s aggressive personality has created a lot of dislike (even among those with similar views). And when we dislike people, we find ourselves wanting to be unlike them. Another possible example of this dynamic playing out: After Trump’s 2016 win, the Democratic Socialists of America reported a big upswing in membership.
As journalist Damon Linker has argued, Trump’s election resulted in Democrats “staking out positions understood to be the diametric opposite of Trump’s stated stance.” (An important word there is “understood,” as it’s common for us to have distorted, overly pessimistic perceptions of our opponents.)
Pro-Trump Republicans should be willing to consider that Trump’s contemptuous manner has been a factor in making liberal-side beliefs more extreme. And Democrats should be willing to examine how liberal-side contempt has led to making Republicans more extreme.
Of course this isn’t the only factor that explains changes in stances or in partisan hostility over the last several decades. There are many more factors (social media, for one)—but it’s a piece of the puzzle more of us should consider. When we see how intertwined and connected our political groups are, it helps us see that contemptuous approaches don’t just amplify conflict; they’re self-defeating.
If we want to avoid worst-case scenarios in America and build a brighter future, we’ll need more people to think about the role they play in amplifying toxicity. We’ll need more people to see that it’s in their own best interest—and the country’s—to work towards their political goals while avoiding demeaning those on the “other side.” We’ll need more people to push back on divisive approaches among their political peers and allies.
This isn’t easy. Many forces, both internal and external, push us toward more conflict and provocations. But leaders bold enough to inspire us to transcend toxicity may one day be celebrated as true American heroes in the history books.
Zachary Elwood is the author of “Defusing American Anger” and the host of the psychology podcast People Who Read People.
Keep ReadingShow less
Load More