Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

When winning is everything, we all lose

When winning is everything, we all lose

Molineaux is co-publisher of The Fulcrum and president/CEO of the Bridge Alliance Education Fund.

Winning feels good. REAL GOOD. It feels so good that when we don’t win some of us look for a way to win in another way. We might pick a fight (verbal or physical) with someone we can “take.” Or we might numb ourselves with substances to feel “less bad.” We have made winning so important in our culture that a “winner” can be president and call everyone else a “loser.”


*SIGH*

I’m tired of all the winning at the expense of our integrity. To me, having integrity, dignity and honor is how I define winning. In each interaction I have, am I satisfied with myself? Did I add to the dignity of others? Did I avoid adding to the toxic polarization? Are my actions that no one sees still showing my personal integrity with who I want to be or become?

As I watched the Super Bowl this past weekend, I realized that we’ve normalized lying for the glory of winning something. Yeah, I know this is obvious to many of you. This conundrum between our desire to win and our personal integrity. Is our personal integrity worth so little? And what might this mean for our national integrity?

For our nation to have integrity, we need elected leaders to commit to the process of democracy as more important than “winning.” Democracy is the process of self-rule; it is not the domination of our beliefs over others, infringing on their freedoms. Like anything else in life, if positive traits are carried to the extreme they can be harmful. The pursuit of pleasure and sensual self-indulgence becomes hedonistic and that is dangerous to the self and to society. If admiration for an individual becomes blind hero worship or if rugged individualism ignores the plight of those in need, the potential for those on the left and the right to accept autocracy is increased.

We need more imagination in our world to expand our definition of “winning.” What is the point of winning, beyond a dopamine rush? Similarly, how does winning help you, those near you and our community? What is the cost-benefit analysis of winning? One wins an argument, did it cost a relationship? One wins a game, did it cost camaraderie? One wins a campaign, did it cost societal trust?

What about this missive appeals to you, if any? Are you as angry about it as I am? Is your conscience pricked? Please dig in and don’t look away. Our comfort is not serving us or society in this time of turbulence. Transformation of society requires discomfort – and a willingness to self-examine our own roles in it.

The soul of our nation depends upon our ability to reflect and course correct. By my estimation, continuing to defend our current belief systems on the right and left will probably end with a mix of winners and losers; but also with a nation that as a whole is worse off. Our inability to imagine a new paradigm for “winning” will leave us in the frame that winning is everything.

Winning for the sake of winning means we all lose.

Perhaps refocusing on our collective, human goals and asking ourselves if winning actually brings us closer to the goals we agree upon will be more likely to diffuse tension and increase the probability of success - i.e. winning.

I love the idea of reframing winning (and the acquisition of power) to be of service to others. What does a healthy political system of self-governance look like? What does it feel like? We need to imagine this future and find others to imagine with us.

And perhaps we can develop a healthy winning attitude as a nation; the ability to focus on our long term goals even though the short-term results are not yet evident. We can foster the ability to do so with graciousness and concern for others. Yes, develop a winning attitude and success will follow. You may wonder and ask what I want to win. I want our future to win – a future where we live into the ideals upon which the United States was founded; equal opportunity with liberty and justice for all. I want us to respect each other, to offer generous listening to those different from ourselves. Lastly, I want a dignified life for every person. For you. For our children.

Will you join us to make it so?


Read More

The Future of DEI in Higher Education: Unpacking Recent Federal Restrictions
A group of people standing in a circle with their hands together

The Future of DEI in Higher Education: Unpacking Recent Federal Restrictions

This nonpartisan policy brief, written by an ACE fellow, is republished by The Fulcrum as part of our partnership with the Alliance for Civic Engagement and our NextGen initiative — elevating student voices, strengthening civic education, and helping readers better understand democracy and public policy.

Key Takeaways

  • Diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs serve diverse student populations at colleges and universities across the nation. DEI programs in higher education have traditionally supported first-generation college students, students with disabilities, veterans, low-income students, and racial and ethnic minorities through offices, scholarships, cultural centers, and accessibility services.
  • Federal initiatives, such as TRIO or the Full-Service Community Schools program, are facing cuts to funding due to DEI-related federal policy, affecting students across the nation.

Defining DEI

From debates surrounding race-conscious admission policies to questions about the role and funding of identity-based student centers, Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) has become a widely debated topic in higher education policy. DEI refers to institutional policies and programs–such as mentorship opportunities, cultural centers, and support programs–which improve campus climate and student access for underrepresented groups. Though many colleges and universities across the United States have developed DEI initiatives aimed at shaping student access and institutional priorities, recent legal and policy developments have raised questions about how these efforts align with federal law.

Keep ReadingShow less
Rear view of teenage boy walking with arm around friends

Why many young men feel politically and socially adrift, how changing gender roles affect masculinity, self-esteem, relationships, and the future of society.

Maskot / Getty Images

Lost Boys - What Is the Role of a Man in Today's Society?

A recent New York Times article stated that young males who provided an important swing vote for Trump in 2024 are discouraged by what Trump has done and not done while in office. But they are nevertheless not particularly inclined to vote Democratic because they don't see the Party as welcoming their view of masculinity and they don't know where they fit in this society.

These young men assume that because the Party supports equality for women in the workplace and because many young women no longer have marriage and having children at the top of their agenda, the Party would not be a welcoming home for them. They see themselves as striving for the masculinity of their fathers' or grandfathers' day, where the man was the breadwinner in the family and had respect and authority. Not the weaker half in relationships with women.

Keep ReadingShow less
Showing Up and Staying: Disaster Relief in an Age of Distrust

NECHAMA volunteers in Western North Carolina after Hurricane Helene.

Showing Up and Staying: Disaster Relief in an Age of Distrust

As the Atlantic hurricane season officially began on June 1, disaster response organizations across the country are preparing for the next storm. That preparation includes coordinating logistics, purchasing supplies, training volunteers, and strengthening partnerships. It now also requires planning for an environment shaped by misinformation, distrust, and competing narratives.

A recent 60 Minutes segment examining extremist groups in disaster zones highlighted how quickly public perceptions can form after a disaster. Recovery efforts are now followed by outside groups and online networks attempting to influence how events are understood while communities are still in crisis.

Keep ReadingShow less
How State Courts Can Help Deflect the Supreme Court’s Latest Blow to Multiracial Democracy

Black and white illustration of voters

State Court Report

How State Courts Can Help Deflect the Supreme Court’s Latest Blow to Multiracial Democracy

With its April ruling in Louisiana v. Callais, the Supreme Court delivered yet another blow to the Voting Rights Act, specifically Section 2, which governs race in redistricting. The decision was sad and utterly predictable, but still nothing short of astonishing. Justice Samuel Alito wrote for the Court’s conservative supermajority, stealthily setting aside 40 years of legal precedent under Section 2 largely on the belief that racism is a thing of the past and extreme partisan gerrymandering is, in effect, a fundamental right of state lawmakers. Callais had a tortured path to the Court, a feature of the case that has undoubtedly been eclipsed by the lawless nature of the ruling itself, all of which reveals that the Supreme Court represents the gravest threat to multiracial democracy in the United States. (I argued as much in a law review article, predicting the outcome and analyzing the ways a Court gone rogue might get to that ruling.)

What’s more? In recent years, the Court has played fast and loose with a “principle” purportedly meant to limit chaos around elections, known as Purcell. But instead of limiting chaos, the Court’s Purcell jurisprudence will hasten and aggrandize the already-problematic impact of the Callais ruling. As the nation’s redistricting wars inevitably continue — in this election season, the 2028 presidential campaign, and even the next decade — state courts can help stave off democratic erosion by resisting the urge to invoke Purcell.

Keep ReadingShow less