#be discriminated against for that instead?

[trillgendermetaphor]

I’m being a little nitpicky, but the Girl Scouts of America doesn’t discriminate against atheists. As the source you linked above states, “For much of their history, the Girl Scouts [discriminated against atheists], but in 1993, the national organization had the sense to stop this unfair and distinctly un-American practice.” As best I can tell, that discrimination was in the form of asking Girl Scouts to promise to serve God. However, as this article from 1993 says, “Promising to serve the Creator instead of God, or simply to serve, is now okay for Girl Scouts.”

Also, I think the University of Washington headline that “Muslims, atheists more likely to face religious discrimination in US” is misleading. The study was on the biases of public school principals, which (while still significant) is not representative of all types of discrimination. Additionally, only four different (non-)faiths were tested: Protestantism, Catholicism, Islam, and atheism. Given a wider study, it’s possible that there would be equal or greater discrimination found against other religious minorities, and/or that the discrimination would be different across different areas of society.

Cultural Christianity: Some Thoughts

The question of whether someone can be both an atheist and a Christian is relevant only in some very specific contexts. In theocratically Christian countries (which has been the normative way to Do Government in Christendom for most of its history), apostasy is literally a crime; if you're an atheist in one of those places you're probably going to keep your mouth shut about it and if you do open it you can expect to be repudiated by your former community.

In countries that aren't theocratically Christian, Christianity frequently functions at least in part as an ethnic indicator. In Northern Ireland it makes sense to ask an atheist whether she's a Catholic or a Protestant atheist. In places where Christians are a minority, they are frequently an ethnic minority, and that will be bound up in their culture.

The only places where the question is relevant are some culturally Christian countries that are not theocratic and where for the most part Christian membership is not ethnically marked. In the United States (which is what I'll be focusing on), that means white American Protestants. (And not even all of them. A born-in Jehovah's Witness may be a white American Protestant, but her culture is definitely not the dominant Christian culture in this country.)

One of the weirder things about this debate, to me, is that on tumblr this debate seems to be largely between gentile atheists and Jews. It's not something I see coming from Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, or Sikhs. It's definitely not something that Christians care about.

As far as I can tell, no one is arguing that the United States is not dominated by (white American Protestant) Christian culture or that everyone who lives here is not to some degree affected by that. The debate seems very much to be about whether a specific person can (or should) be called a cultural Christian.

There are, obviously, some atheists who accept the label. Richard Dawkins is the obvious example (and I'd argue that Dawkins' embrace of the label should give people pause in applying it to others). Those atheists are not part of the debate. They have already been convinced that the term can (and should) be applied to them.

Notably missing from the debate is whether members of other religious minorities can (or should) be called cultural Christians. If I'm raised a Reform Jew in a Christian-majority area and go to a public school, I will be almost as exposed to Christian culture as someone raised a Methodist. But no one is arguing that assimilated or partially-assimilated Jews (and I'd argue that almost all non-Haredim are to some extent partially assimilated) should be called cultural Christians.

The atheists have noticed that. And they really don't like it. The implication it carries is that anyone raised (white American Protestant) Christian will remain so, unless they convert to a different religion and atheism doesn't count.

But the fact that it rankles doesn't mean it's not true. However, it does mean that a lot of atheists see the application of the term to themselves as a denial of their atheism and of the significant work it took to leave Christianity. Because in the United States, even now, leaving Christianity is hard. In some cases it's dangerous, but more commonly it "just" means risking the loss of your entire network of friends and family. This is less so today than it was, say, forty years ago, but it's still a thing.

Further, atheists in the US are a minority religious group. One that experiences oppression and suppression by the dominant religious group. Calling an atheist a cultural Christian identifies her with the group that is actively oppressing her. Which is bound to raise some hackles.

I don't really have a conclusion here. My sense is that applying the term "cultural Christian" to people who don't like it is, at best, counterproductive and, at worst, a microaggression. It doesn't seem to be helping anybody to use it in those cases and may be counterproductive to a discussion of the hegemony white American Protestantism has over US culture. Which is a conversation that is more important now than it has been in decades.

[stilljuststardust]

Hey so why aren't tefs allowed in the shifting community?

Why can't people have their own opinions about something and move on? You don't have the right to tell other people that they can't be a shifter just because they believe in something you don't like.

That's like telling a Christian that they can't be a shifter because they believe in God... What about the homophobic Christians? What about the non Christian s the tefs you talk about? Anyone can be a shifter regardless of belief ,race, gender and sexuality. Let people have their beliefs! Let people live! That doesn't make them A bad person unless they voluntarily do things that are bad if yk what I mean..

The shifting community should be about shifting why are u bloggers stressing over others people s opinions/beliefs 🤦 we should be respectful to each other no matter what we believe in. Anything is possible with shifting therefore all beliefs are valid. I saw sheezu a blogger shifter, and it always seems like they

Continuously write with people who aren't on the same page as them its really annoying and stupid. like bruh why do u care so much bro? Your supposed to be a shifter helping other people correcting misinformation and allat. But instead they continue to argue about things i don't give a f#ck about?

Stop this madness! from anon 😎

If you want tolerance so badly, how about you tolerate my boot up your ass

I will NOT sit here and debate about something that literally boils down to "if tolerant left,🤔 why no like bigot? 🤔"

If you're silent about transphobia but can speak up to defend bigots, remember to wipe the cum off your mouth when you're done. You're pathetic.

⚠️This blog PROUDLY discriminates against transphobes, racists, homophobes, misogynists and other such people.⚠️

[heleentje]

Breakdown

I actually wrote a thing! For @revalinkweek day 6, have a ficlet!

Word count: 1261

Notes: on-screen panic attack, mentioned discrimination against people with disabilities.

I have many headcanons about the way Link uses sign language and one day I’ll get around to sharing them.

———————

The party is too loud.

Revali is used to noise. Rito Village has little use for walls, and so the chirping of fledglings and the chattering of their parents is a constant background melody to his daily going-ons, but this party is loud in a way that only a formal event can be loud: music that takes up too much space and shouted whispers that echo between the confining walls. Revali hates every second of it. Were it not for the status bestowed upon him, he never would have deigned to be present at an event organised by the Hylian King. As it stands, he had only planned to put in a courtesy appearance before absconding towards the open air, but in the hour since he arrived, he has been accosted by noble after noble, all eager to congratulate him on rising so high from such humble beginnings.

He bears it with ill grace and doesn’t bother to conceal his annoyance; as if he doesn’t soar higher than any of them. He isn’t Mipha or Urbosa, raised from birth to navigate these situations with ease. He isn’t even Daruk, whose good-natured words are enough to disarm even the sharpest of barbs. And he certainly isn’t anything like the little knight, who must be thriving on the attention even while remaining aloof as ever—

Revali pauses, thought process brought to a screeching halt. Where is their chosen knight? He’d been there when the party had started, following the Princess’ footsteps like the loyal little knight he is. He’d seemed content to stand in Daruk’s shadow for a while, and Mipha had of course tried to involve him in the conversation, but Revali hasn’t seen him since the main formalities have ended.

He’s not with the Princess. There’s something there to be said about dereliction of duty, but Urbosa is standing at her shoulder, so she’s probably safer than she could ever be in the knight’s presence. He’s not with Mipha or Daruk either. It only takes Revali a minute to ascertain that, no, he’s not even in the room anymore.

How peculiar.

Some of the more oblivious Hylian nobles make an attempt at conversation when he leaves the room, but Revali doesn’t even grace them with a reply. Certainly they will be offended. He’ll be long back in Rito Village by the time they manage to complain about it. 

The halls of the castle are no better than the dining room was. Too tall and wide by any sensible Hylian measure, yet far too small for a Rito. He abandons them quickly, choosing instead to scour the outside walkways of the castle.

In truth, he hadn’t expected to find Hyrule’s chosen knight. He should have been at the party, or perhaps at one of the more private gatherings of Hyrule’s elite. So spotting him tucked away next to one the castle’s many waterfalls comes as something of a surprise. He’s clearly trying not to draw attention and failing miserably. However small he tries to make himself, Revali would still be able to pick him out of any crowd.

For a moment, Revali hovers, but curiosity gets the better of him. He lands a little ways away, making no attempt to conceal his presence. From the way Link keeps himself — entirely still, not a single move — he’d already noticed Revali’s presence as well. 

“Shouldn’t you be among your admirers?” he asks. This does get a flinch. The knight draws further in on himself, eyes squarely fixed on a point in the distance. Several seconds tick by without a response and Revali scoffs. Of course he wouldn’t warrant a reaction. 

“—too loud.”

 Revali almost doesn’t hear him over the sound of the waterfall. It’s a rarity to even hear him speak, let alone to have his thoughts so closely mirror Revali’s own. That gives him pause. Why is he here, hidden away from the crowds that came out specifically to celebrate them? 

“… Are you okay?” he asks. The question almost pains him, but the way Link curls in on himself shows he made the right call. He may not be an expert on Hylian body language, but some things are universal. 

Link lifts a hand, fingers spread, then abruptly clenches it into a fist and drops it to his side. He finally looks at Revali, eyes haunted, as if he’s been caught doing something he shouldn’t have. 

And Revali, with sickening clarity, understands.

However aborted the sign may have been, he recognises it. He’s seen Mipha use it whenever he saw her talk to her fellow Zora about the imminent Calamity. Trouble. 

Mipha’s used the underwater sign of the Zora with Link before; Revali’d assumed it was some sort of in-joke coming from their shared childhood. The last time he’d seen them do it, Link had been chastised for it later and Revali had taken some pleasure in seeing him be treated like an ordinary mortal. 

Seeing Link now, terrified at being seen making a single sign, makes his stomach burn uncomfortably at the memory of his own glee.

The Hylian army has always valued conformity above anything else. How do they treat a soldier unable to speak? 

He’s waited too long to respond: Link’s breath comes out faster and faster, eyes still fixed on Revali but entirely unseeing. 

“It’s fine,” Revali says quickly. He tries to follow it up with one of the other signs he’s seen Mipha make: thumb and index finger held together to form a circle — it’s okay, it’s okay. But his pinions don’t lend themselves to the Zora’s language; he can only muster a clumsy curling of his wings that Link clearly doesn’t recognise for what he wants it to be. 

“Why should I care about your Hylian rules?” he tries again, but Link no longer even hears him. 

… There’s one other. One that he saw Mipha make when the Princess stumbled under the burdens placed upon her. One that even he might be able to make.

“Breathe,” he snaps, spreading his wings and moving them from his beak and back. The first time, Link’s eyes remain unseeing, but when Revali repeats the motion, they abruptly snap back into focus. 

“Breathe,” he mouths, hands shakily coming up to mimic the sign. Revali drops his wings after another few iterations, when he’s sure Link can continue the gesture on his own. 

It feels like several minutes before he finally drops his hands, uncurling in the same motion. His breathing has normalised again and when he meets Revali’s eyes, it finally looks like he’s seeing him.

“Thank you,” he says, shifting to make room on the little outcropping. Revali takes him up on the invitation after only a moment’s pause.

“Don’t mention it,” he says. He still wants to ask why Link is here, but he doesn’t want to send the knight into another spiral.

Surprisingly, Link speaks of his own accord: “I don’t like them. Too many people.” 

“With the pompous twits that pass for nobles in your court, who would?” Revali scoffs. Link, instead of being offended, actually lets out a small huff of laughter. 

“Only them,” he says. Revali guffaws, and Link actually grins in return. It barely even resembles a proper grin, but it’s the most expression Revali’s ever seen on him. A rush of pride runs through him. He did that. 

“Clearly you require better company.” 

Link’s grin turns into a smile, small and only barely aimed at Revali, but it turns his pride into something heated, settling deep in his chest. 

“I’ll stay here, then.” 

[mitigatedchaos]

It's 2025. An issue like this already came up during the 2024 U.S. Presidential campaign.

Of course, "I want most of the people around me to be assimilated into my national culture, so that I don't feel like a foreigner in my own homeland, but what race they are in specific isn't important," and, "I want a statement that we have a moral right to restrict immigration if we want to," are coherent, however, that's 2018 positioning.

In the early 2020's, U.S. progressives supported explicit institutional race-based healthcare rationing [The Atlantic] and the Biden administration supported explicitly racial farm aid [Reuters].

The position that each and every group on Earth is completely, perfectly distinct (race essentialism) naturally lends itself towards attempts at racial discrimination and treating individuals based on their race instead of their individual moral character, leading to racial injustice.

However, the position that everyone is the same apparently also leads to attempts at racial discrimination and racial injustice.

Is this a contradiction? No.

To use an illustrative example: if a train is always stopped, then it is possible to load packages, but they will never go anywhere, while if a train is always moving at 60 mph, then even if packages are onboard, they cannot be safely unloaded, so in both cases, no packages are delivered.

What is needed is a driver, someone who can observe the context and accelerate or decelerate the train according to the situation.

You can't stop people from teaming up to hurt or exploit each other with a rule as simple as "everyone is exactly the same."

Rather than a binary, peace is better viewed as a layered set of agreements that need to be forged, maintained, and enforced. Sometimes it means acknowledging trade-offs. Other times, it means enforcement action, and not only against the right.

something you'll hear from racists who are pretending not to be racist is that "i don't have a problem with immigrants, just illegal immigrants", which if taken seriously could be a call for open borders

[aroaceleovaldez]

one of the things that I found particularly interesting in Demigods of Olympus is that it finally gives the best direct comparison we've seen so far between Percy and another character's experiences in terms of academics and particularly ableist discrimination.

The way Zane describes his experiences and what we see in his POV is that, while he is similarly discriminated against for his "atypical" behavior and blame is placed on him, the only sorts of punishments he receives for this are relatively benign, such as an increase in counseling. (It is also notable that Zane is somewhat autistic-coded, such as having the "incorrect" scripts when speaking with adults and Sam explicitly reminding him to remember to make proper eye contact.) Percy, on the other hand, similarly experiences discrimination for "atypical" behavior, but whereas Zane is treated as "too smart for his own good" and given slaps on the wrist, Percy is automatically labeled as aggressive, destructive, and a trouble-maker based on preconceived assumptions about him and is more severely punished, such as being frequently expelled.

We rarely get this level of direct comparison between Percy's experiences and that of another character, particularly such similar experiences, so looking at the differences is really interesting to gauge what their different experiences with ableist discrimination is like - and how it could potentially tie into intersectionality and other forms of discrimination at play for them.

For instance, Zane's parents are generally heavily implied to be middle-class and/or generally financially secure, versus Percy who grew up poor, so it could be classism in combination with ableist discrimination. Alternatively, it could be intersectionality with racial discrimination, as neurodivergent behavior in people of color is significantly more likely to be punished more severely and labeled as aggressive or disruptive behavior due to racist preconceptions - particularly since we know Percy's experiences with ableist discrimination are also somewhat based on assumptions people make regarding his appearance. Both Zane and Percy are racially ambiguous - Zane's appearance essentially being completely unspecified, but Percy at least having some notable details such as having a deep tan complexion. If not racism, it could also be colorism, which in this context often has similar intersectionality. There's a lot of potential options.

It's just very interesting to me! I love having such a direct point of comparison to examine the experiences of two characters within.

[sunnyshinesunshine]

The real reason the Rings of Power Elrond is so excluded from Gil-Galad’s court:

He kept interjecting to point out that not everything in the world can be blamed on the Fëanorians.

Unfortunately this was not a popular take.

[millimononym]

I wish the queer community would stop with the “trying to demonize ”the other sex“” bullshit. every trans discourse is just "reinventing girl vs boy nonesense but now its woke i swear"

[archaeos]

Tory party stop being fucking fascists for one minute challenge (immediately failed)

[tobeabatman]

you’ve fallen right into my trap my guy!

You do know that almost all fat people will statistically regain all of their weight loss in a few years? And you do know that there isn’t a lot of long-time research on how many people are able to maintain weight-loss, because researchers are struggling to find a group of people who’ve been able to maintain weight-loss for more than 5 years.

And the thing is, I myself haven’t found a single study that proves that fat people are able to maintain weight-loss long-term, but I’ve found studies that say the opposite (and people always claim that it’s false science if I say this and ghost me when I ask them to link me studies that disbute what I’m talking about, even when I’ve bothered to link some studies that prove my point. I won’t bother to do that know considering my reblogs never get as much attention anyway). That makes sense though, since there is also research on how almost all diets fail, and a big part of weight-loss is diet.

So no, this isn’t a valid argument against anything. Even if fat people were able to lose weight, do you think that genuinely erases the terrible stigma around fatness that affects every single fat person, the media, fiction, everything? I think you need to take the time of your day to listen to fat people with open ears instead of denying everything we see. Our discrimination is extremely similar to how disablism works even if we believe fat people are able to maintain long-term weight-loss.

And by the way, you never mentioned anything about my whole argument about how disability or medical conditions aren’t a negative thing, and I doubt that you’re a disability activist based on the way you mentioned how ”some people are walking into it” or smth. Your whole comment sounds like you’re trying to disbute me in the name of disability without even being disabled, I’m sorry if this is wrong but that’s the vibe I’m getting.

As a queer AFAB with ADHD, fatphobia has definitely been the cause of most discrimination and alienation I’ve ever felt.

A lot of fat activists are disabled and speak for both disabled people’s rights and fat people’s rights, but I’m concerned by the amount of people who support disability justice who don’t recognize the struggles of fat people.

I’m personally not disabled, I’m chronically ill, but from how I see it there’s a lot of aspects of disablism that are also apparent in fatphobia. Both disablism and fatphobia use the ”health“ ” of a body of another person as an excuse for discrimination.

And I’m not saying that we should start thinking of fatphobia as a disability (a lot of fat people are able-bodied!) or that disabled people should constantly bring up fat people every time they speak of their own struggles. I’m saying that people who fight against disablism and ableism should at some level recognize anti-fatness as a form of discrimination.

I see fat and thin disabled people talk about how they should lose weight, etc., without thinking further about the way they see weight as if weight was a terrible disease that would destroy their health...

Why exactly do we think becoming fat would “destroy our bodies” even though I’ve seen multiple fat people who are completely healthy despite their fatness? Why do we hate fatness so much in the message of health when we as a society are learning to view chronic illnesses and disabilities as a neutral thing despite how they affect the people’s bodies? Why do we hate fatness even if the supposed reason we hate fatness is because of the possibility of diseases or disability???? Shouldn't we be neutral towards fatness as well, guys??

What’s so different about fatness that it should be demonized and looked down upon, even though like with disabilities, fat is something anyone could one day become? And research says long term weight loss is mostly unobtainable, so if it’s not even ”curable”, why do we hate it?

Disability is also tied to fatness in a way that a lot of disabled people are more likely to be fat. E.g people with Down syndrome are more likely to be fat. Even how we view conditions like diabetes because of weight stigma, should be a big red flag since the way we see diabetes and view fat people with diabetes (with type 1 as well as type 2) is so connected to fatphobia.

I hope this doesn’t come off as me hating on disability justice or speaking for another community. I just thought that this needed to be said. Maybe a disabled person might be able to say this better

That’s all!

[clementimetodie]

Why does the right constantly believe they are not being idealistic, the world needs to conform to your beliefs for them to work too, things are not going to just turn on a dime because you think you're intellectually superior for not thinking about the impact your changes would have on other people

[lilalilan]

I don't know how to get the average American Jewish person to understand that like. Hatred of Israelis is not just antisemitism.

There is a specific hatred and anger and push towards violence towards Israelis in addition to and separate from just the antisemitism. Israeli Americans have been facing the dual problems of antisemitism yes, but also specifically anti Israeli hatred and calls to genocide of specifically Israeli citizens and residents.

If you are not Israeli stop taking the focus away from the specifically anti-Israeli hatred when it's happening. Stop centering yourself in the conversation by claiming that it's all secretly antisemitism. Some of it is, but some of it is very specifically hatred towards Israelis, that you as an American Jew have not had to deal with the full brunt of because you are not Israeli.

Not everything that has to do with hatred of Jewish people is about American Jews or mainly affects American Jews. Y'all aren't the only Jews who exist, stop holding Israelis up on a pedestal while simultaneously never letting anything that happens to Israelis just be about Israelis for one goddamn second.

If you're not Jewish your thoughts and perspectives aren't welcome here.

[phagodyke]

god I was thinking well I have some old voicemails from when the disability services tried to call me (before they realised I was deaf) so I can test how difficult mobile audio is for me to listen to without lipreading by going thru them! :-) but it just sounds like a big crackly tangle of gibberish. it's so over </3

[randomnameless]

@zeroabyss replied to your post “Reading a certain script and spotting things I...”:

For me this situation is a lot more nuanced than others, since Soren by his own past was treated as an outcast by Laguz as a Branded. It’s not great of course, but he’s an actual victim of prejudice as a child who ended up impacted by that. It’s one of the reasons the Laguz treat Branded is such a flaw of theirs continuing the cycle. Branded as a whole generally don’t like their Laguz side as a result, which we know. Since they can at least “pass” for being human and will be treated as people. Whereas Laguz can tell by instinct alone.

​Indeed, Soren has his own reasons to be prejudiced against the Laguz, and iirc since he was around Gallia when he was young/meet Ike, he already faced the beast laguz's brand of indifference when he was younger - which is why he, most likely, so viciously attacks and insults Mordecai, aka, blue teddy tiger bear, when they first meet.

While his backstory with Laguz is not comparable to Jill's - who was legit raised/indoctrined since her wee days to think they're subhumans so to her it's a natural thing to call them there is no animosity, and who has to "unlearn" what she grew up with - Soren's BG isn't developed at this point (I think? i don't remember if POR supports are chapter timed?) so we have a situation where Ike (the player) is very severe and angry at people who insults and discriminate at the Laguz (Jill and several NPCs), but some members of the cast still insult/discriminate against Laguz, and by the end of this game (FE10 shows some growth!), even doing all optional conversations, they do not grow - which is sort of rich, given how the protagonist wants people to grow out of their initial prejudices and ultimately work together.

Hell, even Shinon, the loudest Laguz "hater" in FE9 gets to support a Laguz, Janaff, and they ultimately sort of make-up, with Shinon wanting to learn more about Janaff's life experiences.

I know Soren's growth will happen in FE10, he will ultimately help Skrimir - a laguz - without calling him a subhuman or any names, and even suffer/tolerate his stupidity.

And yet, in FE9, his behaviour sticks out, maybe more strongly, because he is supposed to be close to Ike and Ike actively fights against any discriminatory prejudices/feelings in his own group.

So while Soren has his own reasons - that explain his behaviour but doesn't justify it in the slightest - FE9 fails to adress and condemn his prejudice like it does to Jill, Shinon, Lethe and even Stefan* - who has a similar background! -, save for that line where Ike gets a minor injury due to Soren insulting Mordecai and Lethe.

Jill talks to Lethe and her character arc is growing past her prejudices, Lethe talks to Jill/Ike and finally accepts to have Beorc allies/friends, Shinon talks to Janaff and sees him at the end of their support as a fellow being with life experiences and not a suhuman anymore, Stefan talks to Mordecai and they ultimately became friends...

I know the devs always intended for Tellius to be a duology, so maybe they reserved his character growth for the second game (I still hope they didn't want to nuke supports as they did from day 1 !) - but as FE9 stands, it's as if we're told "Soren can still be prejudiced as fuck in this game and it won't cause any problems because he will grow in the next game".

Which is... sort of meh tier writing.

*Just like Soren, Stefan is a branded who "insults" Mordecai, but he later talks to him, shares more about his POV and own prejudices (why he thinks Laguz hate Brandeds on a racial level), saying he and Mordecai cannot be friends, until Mordecai says he doesn't give a fig about his universe laws and will befriend Stefan nonetheless.

[skhardwarevers1]

robot culture is becoming a lawyer for other robots

[marvelsmostwanted]

There are people – some in my own Party – who think that if you just give Donald Trump everything he wants, he’ll make an exception and spare you some of the harm. I’ll ignore the moral abdication of that position for just a second to say — almost none of those people have the experience with this President that I do. I once swallowed my pride to offer him what he values most — public praise on the Sunday news shows — in return for ventilators and N95 masks during the worst of the pandemic. We made a deal. And it turns out his promises were as broken as the BIPAP machines he sent us instead of ventilators. Going along to get along does not work – just ask the Trump-fearing red state Governors who are dealing with the same cuts that we are. I won’t be fooled twice.

I’ve been reflecting, these past four weeks, on two important parts of my life: my work helping to build the Illinois Holocaust Museum and the two times I’ve had the privilege of reciting the oath of office for Illinois Governor.

As some of you know, Skokie, Illinois once had one of the largest populations of Holocaust survivors anywhere in the world. In 1978, Nazis decided they wanted to march there.

The leaders of that march knew that the images of Swastika clad young men goose stepping down a peaceful suburban street would terrorize the local Jewish population – so many of whom had never recovered from their time in German concentration camps.

The prospect of that march sparked a legal fight that went all the way to the Supreme Court. It was a Jewish lawyer from the ACLU who argued the case for the Nazis – contending that even the most hateful of speech was protected under the first amendment.

As an American and a Jew, I find it difficult to resolve my feelings around that Supreme Court case – but I am grateful that the prospect of Nazis marching in their streets spurred the survivors and other Skokie residents to act. They joined together to form the Holocaust Memorial Foundation and built the first Illinois Holocaust Museum in a storefront in 1981 – a small but important forerunner to the one I helped build thirty years later.

I do not invoke the specter of Nazis lightly. But I know the history intimately — and have spent more time than probably anyone in this room with people who survived the Holocaust. Here’s what I’ve learned – the root that tears apart your house’s foundation begins as a seed – a seed of distrust and hate and blame.

The seed that grew into a dictatorship in Europe a lifetime ago didn’t arrive overnight. It started with everyday Germans mad about inflation and looking for someone to blame.

I’m watching with a foreboding dread what is happening in our country right now. A president who watches a plane go down in the Potomac – and suggests — without facts or findings — that a diversity hire is responsible for the crash. Or the Missouri Attorney General who just sued Starbucks – arguing that consumers pay higher prices for their coffee because the baristas are too “female” and “nonwhite.” The authoritarian playbook is laid bare here: They point to a group of people who don’t look like you and tell you to blame them for your problems.

I just have one question: What comes next? After we’ve discriminated against, deported or disparaged all the immigrants and the gay and lesbian and transgender people, the developmentally disabled, the women and the minorities – once we’ve ostracized our neighbors and betrayed our friends – After that, when the problems we started with are still there staring us in the face – what comes next.

All the atrocities of human history lurk in the answer to that question. And if we don’t want to repeat history – then for God’s sake in this moment we better be strong enough to learn from it.

I swore the following oath on Abraham Lincoln’s Bible: “I do solemnly swear that I will support the constitution of the United States, and the constitution of the state of Illinois, and that I will faithfully discharge the duties of the office of Governor .... according to the best of my ability.

My oath is to the Constitution of our state and of our country. We don’t have kings in America – and I don’t intend to bend the knee to one. I am not speaking up in service to my ambitions — but in deference to my obligations.

If you think I’m overreacting and sounding the alarm too soon, consider this:

It took the Nazis one month, three weeks, two days, eight hours and 40 minutes to dismantle a constitutional republic. All I’m saying is when the five-alarm fire starts to burn, every good person better be ready to man a post with a bucket of water if you want to stop it from raging out of control.

Those Illinois Nazis did end up holding their march in 1978 – just not in Skokie. After all the blowback from the case, they decided to march in Chicago instead. Only twenty of them showed up. But 2000 people came to counter protest. The Chicago Tribune reported that day that the “rally sputtered to an unspectacular end after ten minutes.” It was Illinoisans who smothered those embers before they could burn into a flame.

Tyranny requires your fear and your silence and your compliance. Democracy requires your courage. So gather your justice and humanity, Illinois, and do not let the “tragic spirit of despair” overcome us when our country needs us the most.

Sources:

• NBC Chicago & J.B. Pritzker, Democratic governor of Illinois, State of the State address 2025: Watch speech here | Full text

• Betches News on Instagram (screencaps)

[azisfan]

Terminally online weirdos are actually losing their shit over this? Lol.