Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Your take: What are you willing to sacrifice to protect democracy around the world?

Your take: What are you willing to sacrifice to protect democracy around the world?

Ukraine continues to dominate news coverage with multiple streams of information in play, influencing our beliefs and actions. This week, we asked:

Given the nexus of events surrounding oil, higher gas prices, advancing green energy, taking a stand against Russia to help protect democracy across the globe, etc., what is your willingness to absorb higher gas prices or sacrifice by changing your personal habits?


Most respondents indicated a willingness to change their behavior and saw such changes as supportive of democratic rule, generally. Many noted personal circumstances that allowed them to more easily do so. But not everyone. As expected, we have many opinions about this topic. A sample of responses is below, edited for length and clarity.

I have NO problem with higher gas prices. Bring it on — especially if it encourages Americans to think about and decrease their energy consumption and shift to public transit (and advocate for improvements in public transit if they don't have or like it). I'm sympathetic to low-income Americans who have no alternatives to driving as a result of poor public transit systems where they live and work. Subsidize them if necessary, but don't cut gas taxes. ~Deborah Brodheim

I am more than willing to pay more, wait in lines and change related personal habits in order to support efforts to get Vladimir Putin to reconsider his Ukraine invasion. I realize (and am grateful) to be in a position to do this without dramatically altering my life and daily routine while others may not be. In other words, “easy for me to say.” But I do feel strongly that, short of starting a war between the U.S. and Russia, all must be done to drive Putin to stop this aggression. ~Bruce Bond

Personally, I am prepared to make considerable sacrifice in terms of price increases for food, fuel and beyond. The reason is simple: Liberty is a delicate gift and protecting it and the democratic forms of government that aspire to providing it is essential even to the point of funding safety, medical care and education, which are essential to the restoration and actualization of a human life. The reason I take this position is because we are currently facing the misunderstanding in our own social system that freedom is about individual rights without consideration for assuming social responsibilities. In other words the preservation of Ukrainian independence and responsible shelter for Ukrainian refugees is critical because in another time and another place we could be “them.” In fact, in another time many of our ancestors were “them.” ~Craig Lindell

I am a zero-waste cyclist who composts. But I’m willing to sacrifice nothing for Ukraine. This is a false choice — our sacrifice will do nothing to help the Ukrainian people. We could and should end this now by stating NATO will not accept Ukraine. That was true before Russia invaded, and there isn’t going to be much Ukraine left anyway if this continues further. ~Lisa C

Whatever it takes. It is the right thing to do. The Purpose of Life:

  • To make the world a better place to live.
  • To make your life and the lives of those around you more enjoyable.

~Ray A. Curtis

Yes I am willing to accept higher gas prices if they will actually impact the Ukrainian war in a manner that weakens Russian abilities to conduct the war. This is easy for me as I am retired, drive a car that gets 26/42 MPG and live within a couple of miles of most of the places I need to go to. However, I know people who drive pickup trucks and commute 100 miles or more a day. For these folks this will be an economic hardship. ~Bruce Jewell

Not willing to sacrifice anything. We have no business being involved in this war. If our leaders would act for the benefit of our country we would be completely energy independent, produce all we need here and not have to lose our people in foreign wars. ~Arthur Schleinkofer

Pay those higher prices at the pump. I don't mind feeling the sting. It's minor compared to living in fear in a basement with your children and little to no food, no water, and no light, while your husbands, sons and brothers (and in some cases wives, daughters and sisters) fight to maintain a fragile democracy, to retain freedom of thought and expression. It's the least we can do. ~David Soubly

I will sacrifice whatever it takes to end war and strengthen democracy worldwide. Our grandchildren are of draft age. Given all the privileges my generation has taken for granted for decades, it is long past our turn to step up and work for democracy, peace and the environment. We owe it to our ancestors and our heirs. ~Ellen Chaffee

I have previously done virtually all I can to reduce my use of gasoline and minimize the effects of fluctuations in the price of gasoline. As for the current situation with Russia, I support the effort to maintain Ukraine's national integrity any way I can. ~Niel Leon

I am all in! Quite ready, quite willing, and quite able to absorb all it takes to help Ukraine! ~”Gator” Jack Schuler

Read More

news app
New platforms help overcome biased news reporting
Tero Vesalainen/Getty Images

The Selective Sanctity of Death: When Empathy Depends on Skin Color

Rampant calls to avoid sharing the video of Charlie Kirk’s death have been swift and emphatic across social media. “We need to keep our souls clean,” journalists plead. “Where are social media’s content moderators?” “How did we get so desensitized?” The moral outrage is palpable; the demands for human dignity urgent and clear.

But as a Black woman who has been forced to witness the constant virality of Black death, I must ask: where was this widespread anger for George Floyd? For Philando Castile? For Daunte Wright? For Tyre Nichols?

Keep ReadingShow less
Following Jefferson: Promoting Inter-Generational Understanding Through Constitution-Making
Mount Rushmore
Photo by John Bakator on Unsplash

Following Jefferson: Promoting Inter-Generational Understanding Through Constitution-Making

No one can denounce the New York Yankee fan for boasting that her favorite ballclub has won more World Series championships than any other. At 27 titles, the Bronx Bombers claim more than twice their closest competitor.

No one can question admirers of the late, great Chick Corea, or the equally astonishing Alison Krauss, for their virtually unrivaled Grammy victories. At 27 gold statues, only Beyoncé and Quincy Jones have more in the popular categories.

Keep ReadingShow less
A close up of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement badge.

Trump’s mass deportations promise security but deliver economic pain, family separation, and chaos. Here’s why this policy is failing America.

Getty Images, Tennessee Witney

The Cruel Arithmetic of Trump’s Immigration Crackdown

As summer 2025 winds down, the Trump administration’s deportation machine is operating at full throttle—removing over one million people in six months and fulfilling a campaign promise to launch the “largest deportation operation in American history.” For supporters, this is a victory lap for law and order. For the rest of the lot, it’s a costly illusion—one that trades complexity for spectacle and security for chaos.

Let’s dispense with the fantasy first. The administration insists that mass deportations will save billions, reduce crime, and protect American jobs. But like most political magic tricks, the numbers vanish under scrutiny. The Economic Policy Institute warns that this policy could destroy millions of jobs—not just for immigrants but for U.S.-born workers in sectors like construction, elder care, and child care. That’s not just a fiscal cliff—it is fewer teachers, fewer caregivers, and fewer homes built. It is inflation with a human face. In fact, child care alone could shrink by over 15%, leaving working parents stranded and employers scrambling.

Meanwhile, the Peterson Institute projects a drop in GDP and employment, while the Penn Wharton School’s Budget Model estimates that deporting unauthorized workers over a decade would slash Social Security revenue and inflate deficits by nearly $900 billion. That’s not a typo. It’s a fiscal cliff dressed up as border security.

And then there’s food. Deporting farmworkers doesn’t just leave fields fallow—it drives up prices. Analysts predict a 10% spike in food costs, compounding inflation and squeezing families already living paycheck to paycheck. In California, where immigrant renters are disproportionately affected, eviction rates are climbing. The Urban Institute warns that deportations are deepening the housing crisis by gutting the construction workforce. So much for protecting American livelihoods.

But the real cost isn’t measured in dollars. It’s measured in broken families, empty classrooms, and quiet despair. The administration has deployed 10,000 armed service members to the border and ramped up “self-deportation” tactics—policies so harsh they force people to leave voluntarily. The result: Children skipping meals because their parents fear applying for food assistance; Cancer patients deported mid-treatment; and LGBTQ+ youth losing access to mental health care. The Human Rights Watch calls it a “crueler world for immigrants.” That’s putting it mildly.

This isn’t targeted enforcement. It’s a dragnet. Green card holders, long-term residents, and asylum seekers are swept up alongside undocumented workers. Viral videos show ICE raids at schools, hospitals, and churches. Lawsuits are piling up. And the chilling effect is real: immigrant communities are retreating from public life, afraid to report crimes or seek help. That’s not safety. That’s silence. Legal scholars warn that the administration’s tactics—raids at schools, churches, and hospitals—may violate Fourth Amendment protections and due process norms.

Even the administration’s security claims are shaky. Yes, border crossings are down—by about 60%, thanks to policies like “Remain in Mexico.” But deportation numbers haven’t met the promised scale. The Migration Policy Institute notes that monthly averages hover around 14,500, far below the millions touted. And the root causes of undocumented immigration—like visa overstays, which account for 60% of cases—remain untouched.

Crime reduction? Also murky. FBI data shows declines in some areas, but experts attribute this more to economic trends than immigration enforcement. In fact, fear in immigrant communities may be making things worse. When people won’t talk to the police, crimes go unreported. That’s not justice. That’s dysfunction.

Public opinion is catching up. In February, 59% of Americans supported mass deportations. By July, that number had cratered. Gallup reports a 25-point drop in favor of immigration cuts. The Pew Research Center finds that 75% of Democrats—and a growing number of independents—think the policy goes too far. Even Trump-friendly voices like Joe Rogan are balking, calling raids on “construction workers and gardeners” a betrayal of common sense.

On social media, the backlash is swift. Users on X (formerly Twitter) call the policy “ineffective,” “manipulative,” and “theater.” And they’re not wrong. This isn’t about solving immigration. It’s about staging a show—one where fear plays the villain and facts are the understudy.

The White House insists this is what voters wanted. But a narrow electoral win isn’t a blank check for policies that harm the economy and fray the social fabric. Alternatives exist: Targeted enforcement focused on violent offenders; visa reform to address overstays; and legal pathways to fill labor gaps. These aren’t radical ideas—they’re pragmatic ones. And they don’t require tearing families apart to work.

Trump’s deportation blitz is a mirage. It promises safety but delivers instability. It claims to protect jobs but undermines the very sectors that keep the country running. It speaks the language of law and order but acts with the recklessness of a demolition crew. Alternatives exist—and they work. Cities that focus on community policing and legal pathways report higher public safety and stronger economies. Reform doesn’t require cruelty. It requires courage.

Keep ReadingShow less
Multi-colored speech bubbles overlapping.

Stanford’s Strengthening Democracy Challenge shows a key way to reduce political violence: reveal that most Americans reject it.

Getty Images, MirageC

In the Aftermath of Assassinations, Let’s Show That Americans Overwhelmingly Disapprove of Political Violence

In the aftermath of Charlie Kirk’s assassination—and the assassination of Minnesota state legislator Melissa Hortman only three months ago—questions inevitably arise about how to reduce the likelihood of similar heinous actions.

Results from arguably the most important study focused on the U.S. context, the Strengthening Democracy Challenge run by Stanford University, point to one straightforward answer: show people that very few in the other party support political violence. This approach has been shown to reduce support for political violence.

Keep ReadingShow less