The Ascendant Project

It was 2005, Katrina had just hit. I was listening to Air America in those days. I do not remember which show but I remember hearing about rumors of W declaring a National Emergency, FEMA camps, and the government plan to put dissenters into these camps — which would be concentration camps. When Martial Law would be carried out, it would be FEMA enforcing it.

Then Obama was elected.  This Conspiracy theory lived on, but it had changed. Now it was the Democrats who were going to declare a National Emergency and Conservatives were going to be rounded up.   You just can’t keep a good lie down.

I remember the Death Panels of Obamacare, Pizza Gate, JFK, and now we have Epstein*.   Growing up, in the 1980s there have always been conspiracy theories revolving around UFOs, aliens, Project Bluebook, MK-Ultra, abductions, George HW Bush being part of a One World Government because he said the words New World Order. In 2004 there were conspiracy theories that voting machines switching votes from Kerry to Bush gave Bush Ohio, then we heard those theories during the 2020 election except this time votes were switched from Trump to Biden. This contributed to the anger on January 6th. On August first of this year, I read a conspiracy theory that voting machines discarded votes for Harris in 2024.

Another one that just will not go away is that every protestor on the left is a protestor that is paid by George Soros. The amount of cognitive dissonance for that to persist is staggering.

Conspiracy Theories have been around since the dawn of time.  The Deep State conspiracy theory is very similar to the distrust of Free Masons and the Knights Templar if you think about it. It is as if the desire to have a distrust of an unseen enemy is a path to power itself.

Humanity is found in every institution, and therefore mistakes and corruption can influence the information we receive.  However, at some point, it should be remembered, we are always putting our trust in something….

But I get it. It is healthy to not always just accept common information as fact. It is important to have skepticism when it comes to things you hear, even from established reputable sources.   Humanity is found in every institution, and therefore mistakes and corruption can influence the information we receive.  However, at some point, it should be remembered, we are always putting our trust in something…. Even if it is a Conspiracy Theory. 

Developing a toxic skepticism leads one to only believe ones own confirmation bias.  If that bias does not trust anyone, well soon you find yourselves believing that lizard people run the Illuminati.   Or worse yet, walking into a pizza joint in DC with a loaded weapon because you believe Hillary Clinton is running a pedophile ring.

Conspiracy theories can be especially dangerous when they mix with religion. Of course the outcomes of cults like Heavens Gate and Jonestown come to mind, but much of interpretation of prophecy from Judeo-Christian texts can be especially destructive. 

Charles Darby came up with the idea of the rapture in the 1800s. Once that caught fire, the idea of judgement can easily over shadow the idea of grace. If you take the concept of ” If the world is evil, and everyone else is going to hell anyway” and mix it with “the rapture is right around the corner,” suddenly the impetus of trying to make the world a better place falls away. I would argue that Darbyism leads to a self centered immature faith. Modern day prophet interpreters look at the UN as the enemy because they view any One World Government to be a path for the anti-Christ.   So this view from the Evangelical Base affects how effective the United States is can be in the UN.

When one distrusts everything, no amount of evidence will sway your position. And in order to grow as a society, trust needs to be foundation. For anarchies give way to dictatorship, and an anarchy of knowledge and wisdom will be replaced with a single authority to rule your mind. Better to trust but verify as Reagan put it, then to distrust at every turn and find yourself believing in Chemtrails but not climate change, or using media that was made possible because of science (TV/internet) to say that we should not put stock in science.

It is so important to get information from credentialed sources that issue corrections. A skeptical scientific mind can change their world view as more evidence comes in. A conspiracy theory, in the end, is a sort of religion.

[17:15] Late Great Planet Earth. Available on Amazon. Here is a wiki article on the book.

[22:12] Maslow’s Heiarchy of needs.

[25:50] Cynicism vs Skepticism by Julius Knapp

[29:40] Gorbachev ribs Reagan about saying Trust but Verify so much.

[30:45] foreignpolicy.com article about the US and Allied Expeditionary Force that backed White Russian (anti-communist) against the Red Russian Bolsheviks in 1918. They fought in battles south of the Arctic Circle to Crimea. The force comprised of troops from the United States, Britain, France, Japan and 7 other countries. This Force would eventually total some 256K troops. Here is a wiki article on this forgotten moment of history as well. It should also be noted that almost all the soldiers that the United States contributed were from the state of Michigan.

[31:24] The US portion of the Allied Expeditionary Force landed 140 miles South of the Arctic Circle on September 4th, 1918. World War I ended November 11th 1918.

[56:46] NWO by Ministry

George Bush’s New World Order speech to Congress on 9/11/90.

I can’t believe that I didn’t mention Jade Helm in either the article or the interview where Texas Gov Abbot called out the National Guard to stay off a supposed coup of the Texas State Government by Barack Obama during US military exercises. The coup rumor was caused by Russian bots.

The Hexidecimal portion of the ID if translated to ASCII, should read as the Preamble to the Constitution. The Binary portion of the ID should translate to a portion of the Gettysburg Address. The Statue is of Columbia, which sits atop the US Capitol. The pictures are of a silhouette of a Donkey for Democrats, and a RHINO, because we all know true Republicans can’t belong in the Deep State. The QR code goes to The Stone Cutters Song from the Simpsons on YouTube. The Picture of Julius was taken with a cell in the 2010s at a campfire in Green Ridge State Forest. He is wearing a hoodie which made it more ominous. Cell phone cameras sucked then. I stole the Rank from masonry. I couldn’t resist Flanders as the Devil. Illuminatus Patriae should translate to Enlightened of the Country from Latin to English.

©2025 The Ascendant Project

Listen to this episode on:

www.theascendantproject.com

Spotify Apple Podcasts Pocketcasts

The post Of Conspiracy Theories and Toxic Skepticism appeared first on The Ascendant Project.

No Article with this post. Rather a discussion between Julius Knapp, Susan Smyers, and Brian Smyers on the reactions, coverage, social media impact, and implications of the Charlie Kirk Assassination.

These “Wednesday Insert Editions” are rare, meant to cover an event that has large potential to affect people’s world view, whether it be in areas of foreign policy (Zelensky Press Conference), a protest movement (No Kings) or in this case how we view each other, and our relationship with the government.

Please join the discussion by emailing [email protected] or comment below.

© 2025 The Ascendant Project

http://www.theascendantproject.com

Find us on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, and Pocketcasts.

The post Discussion: Charlie Kirk Assassination appeared first on The Ascendant Project.

Among the many companies I’ve worked for and roles that I’ve filled, was a brief time as a Teacher and Assistant Center Director at Huntington Learning Center. I worked there from 2001 to 2004, at just the right time to be part of the public debate around the passage of the NCLB, better known as the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, which was signed into law on January 8, 2002. I still have very fond memories of my time there and learned much about myself and about office life, office politics, and just how the education system so tightly straddles the line between everyday American life and American politics. The education system, in my opinion, is the lynch pin of the entire American socio-political system we have built, but I digress.

In the year 2000, then candidate George Dubya Bush ran in part on a platform of education reform. After he became President, Bush proposed a plan to reform the education system through the Department of Education. Among the many goals of the plan were to introduce a common set of measurable educational standards throughout the nation, to hold schools receiving federal funding accountable for achieving those standards, and to ensure every student had access to “highly qualified” teachers. These were lofty goals given our country’s historically and consistently poor performance on standardized tests compared to other countries. This bill was intended to unite the country, focusing it on a consistent set of performance and quality standards and ensuring that every student, regardless of race, religion, or income had access to a quality education. The conversation around my Learning Center, however, was quite mixed.

As you might imagine, many of the teachers at that Huntington Learning Center were current or former teachers themselves. Some were public school teachers and some were private. Others, like me, weren’t teachers at all, at least not outside of those walls. I was a college student at the time, a Mathematics major enrolled at UMBC, with a passion for my subject and a decent rapport with the other children. It probably didn’t hurt that I was also a former student of that very Huntington Learning Center either.

Many were confident that the introduction of new national standards was only an excuse to eliminate teachers who weren’t complying or wouldn’t comply with the Government’s narrative.

Before I discuss some of the varying viewpoints and perspectives, I should probably discuss some of how Huntington worked then. Struggling students would be assessed upon enrollment. We would identify skill gaps based on their grade and develop a program to bring them to match or exceed the expectation. That program would include individualized instruction with frequent assessments to ensure that they were making measurable progress. It was disciplined and regimented while also allowing some flexibility and independence.

Perhaps because of that rigorous learning environment, I found myself agreeing with much of what the NCLB was proposing. Perhaps because of my youth, being so soon after graduation from the public school system and still being in college at the time, I further found myself agreeing with the sentiment that allowing teachers to have near total liberty regarding the establishment of curriculum or enforcement of policy was not the way to ensure universal quality. Perhaps it was because I was at that point in my life as a young man, that almost all young men seem to endure, where I questioned the authority of the established political parties in and even supported some of the tenants of libertarianism. (As a short aside, long-time readers or listeners will recall that this was when I registered as “Unaffiliated” and in fact it was the bipartisan support for this bill that helped me realize that neither “side” was the villain I once thought they were.) Still, perhaps it was because September 11th was such a short time before then that I felt national unity, especially in the education system, was more important than ever. Whatever the reason, I will state unequivocally, I supported this bill.

At Huntington, however, support was not so strong. Many teachers were skeptical, even pessimistic, about the Government’s motives. Many were confident that the introduction of new national standards was only an excuse to eliminate teachers who weren’t complying or wouldn’t comply with the Government’s narrative. My opinion at the time was that these teachers were, at best, just afraid of the inevitable addition to their workload, or at best, afraid of being exposed as bad teachers who didn’t really provide any value to their students. (I cringe now at how naive I was. And I worry still at how naive I might still be.) Regardless of my opinion, however, I was confident that there was an educational crisis in this country. American students consistently performed worse than their international peers, especially in Science and Mathematics. If something wasn’t done, there could be a complete collapse of scientific discovery and technical innovation, or so I thought. And how can you solve a problem you can’t (or refuse) to measure. We had to find some way to understand why and then fix it, teachers and their own opinions be damned.

In any case, the rest is history. Almost every fear regarding how the NCLB would destroy the system of education has been realized. “Teaching to the test” is now the rule, not the exception. “Failing forward” to avoid the appearance of poor student outcomes is now the expectation, and there is intense pressure on teachers to accommodate parents and please the administration. Performance comparisons to international peers are still every bit as one sided and worrying. But the collapse I expected never came. The one thing this country seems to do REALLY well, finance, took care of that. Now, we just hire those more apt students from other countries, promising them life in a freer society and significantly greater earnings potential. The famous expression, voiced by Matt Damon in the movie “The Martian”, really should have been “I’m gonna have to finance the shit out of this!”

That is the real crux of why the NCLB hurt instead of helping our education system. It emphasized the economic problem and completely ignored the social one. In the intervening years since passage of the NCLB, I have witnessed the societal change in my peers, and most importantly, in my own children. College tuition has exploded, increasing year over year well beyond the rate of CPI inflation (see the below graph and note the very prominent inflection point right around 2002 when the NCLB was passed). The race to outperform peers to be awarded scholarship or grant money or to obtain an internship opportunity or to participate in competitive extracurriculars dominates primary and secondary education. Students and teachers are overworked well beyond the norm in most other professional settings. Teaching is no longer seen as an endeavor where adults can contribute back to the younger generation, imparting knowledge and wisdom; teaching is now seen as an endeavor that must add value to their students. I saw this change start even while I was working at Huntington as more SAT and college preparatory programs were added to the list of offered services. I saw this change continuing while my wife was a Student Support Assistant in the public school system. It seemed her colleagues were especially concerned with preparing their students for the next standardized test, or with allowing students more time to turn in assigned work, or with making accommodations for overburdened or distraught parents. And I saw this change with my own children, constantly pushed forward even when they had little to no grasp of the concept they were supposed to learn.

To be clear, I’m not blaming the students, the teachers, or the parents and those that do need to widen their window. To look at the situation now without any knowledge of the past is fool-hearty and callus. Students, teachers, and parents are all rational actors in an economic system, each doing the best they can with limited resources and support. And before you say “Ah, so it’s the government’s fault!” I don’t really blame them either. IT”S US! 

We have to stop assuming we can solve a social problem by making it an economic one.

We have to stop assuming we can solve a social problem by making it an economic one. Economics, while a useful tool for solving many problems, is not the catch all that it is often purported to be. And economic theory seems to be more and more aware of this fact. I recall a study by Shampanier, Mazar, and Ariely called “Zero as a Special Price: The True Value of Free Products”. The study reviewed the results of an experiment whereby students were offered candies either for free or for 1 cent. When the candies were free, the students took more only one on average. When the candies were 1 cent, the students took 4 on average. This study is often cited to indicate how people act in response to social norms (“Don’t be greedy”) as compared to market norms (“Maximize value”). In my opinion, a similar market response has occurred because of the passage of the NCLB (and now the Every Student Succeeds Act or ESSA passed in 2015 which basically retained the regulatory concept while making the executive framework the responsibility of the States). Of course, I still believe, as one might expect from a “Math person”, that measuring student achievement and teacher performance is critical to understanding the problem we face. But this isn’t an economic problem; making funding contingent on those metrics will only encourage a race to the bottom where every child is left behind.

Entrepreneur

Corrections, Clarifications, and Addendums:

[27:49] The Prichard Scale in Dead Poets Society was actually a paraphrase of a theory of measuring poetry by Laurence Perrine in this book.

[58:12] Musk talked about the H1b visas. There is no such thing as a 21b visa. Here is a CBS article on what companies use them most.

[58:45] Economic Policy institute agrees that companies underpay those on H1b visas. However, Forbes disagrees.

[59:25] Brian thinks it was this article on NPR that he heard about Apple and China.

[1:00:00] This is the Smarter Every Day grill brush episode that Julius talks about.

[1:06:00] Why Cats Paint: A Theory of Feline Aesthetics by Heather Busch and Burton Silver

[1:06:00] Musicophilia: Tales of Music and the Brain, Revised and Expanded Edition is most likely the book Julius was mentioning here.

[1:09:00] Sam learns geography by Coach. Cheers.

© 2025 The Ascendant Project

For more content and information:

Please visit www.theascendantproject.com

The post Left Behind appeared first on The Ascendant Project.

Racism.

It is always there.

You like to think it is not.  But it is.

It is the snake in the weeds.

The Alligator in the swamp.

The tick near your campsite.

The Elephant in the room.

We at The Ascendant Project have talked around this issue.

We alluded to it.

We referenced Black Lives Matter.

I’ve mentioned stories my coworkers told me about episodes of racism they have suffered.

However, we have not addressed it directly.  We haven’t made an episode of it — and there are reasons for that.

First, Julius and I are just two white boys bitchin’.  Our viewpoint is from the racial class that has historically oppressed others.  As a result, our views are incomplete.  Our bias is found in that we may learn the facts, but we will never truly feel the pain. We will never feel the pain that is passed from generation to generation.  This is because we won the genetic lottery.  We run the risk of being “Latte Liberals” as Al Sharpton would say. Out of touch, with a splash of all talk and no action.

Second, The Ascendant Project wants conservatives to contribute.  This means they need to write and read essays, sign their full name to it, and be willing to be interviewed for an hour about life experiences and everything else that leads them to their position.  To do that in this political environment already is a risk and could be even more so in the future.  The reason why The Ascendant Project, Braver Angels, and other political organizations that try to “bridge the gap” have found is that Conservatives actually expect to be called a Racist at some point.

But here we are.  There is an issue that is an undercurrent in today’s political environment that people do not want to talk about.  Well, I demand courage from contributors.  Perhaps I should demand courage of myself to talk about this issue.

So what is racism?  Is it prejudice?  Is it systemic?  Is it based on the color of your skin?  Is it some of that, or all of that? What is the difference between race and ethnicity? Are Jews a race or a religion?

We survived as a species from our days as rodents by not trusting what was unfamiliar.  If something didn’t seem right, we avoided it.  This has been part of our instinct and our intuition since before homo sapiens came on the scene.  This is evolution. And as a result racism is natural.  But like a bite from a poisonous snake, natural does not always mean it is good for you.

However, humanity has grown past our biological evolution and created civilization.  We no longer are fighting over the local watering hole while looking over our shoulders for lions.  With sentient thought, the call to be a better person becomes the foundation for a better society. Still I am reminded of the argument between Angel and Spike from the TV series Angel, if a fight broke out between an Astronaut and a Caveman, who would win?

Racism has been prevalent in America since its founding.  From the slaughtering of Native Americans to the importation of slaves in the early 1600s, man has subjugated man on the basis of race.  The Declaration of Independence refers to Native Americans as Savages, and Africans were viewed as inferior by many of those in power since the dawn of colonialism.  Slaves were considered 3/5ths of a person in the Constitution.   When the Bill of Rights was ratified, every state was a Slave state. The first Free State was Vermont, and it had banned slavery before joining the Union as the 14th State.

Slaves built many of our government buildings including the White House and the Capitol.  Today, many golf courses and college campuses are built on plantations where people were held in chains, whipped, beaten, and killed — sometimes en masse — for disobeying their masters.  People were sold to other slave owners separating families in the name of the Plantation Owner’s dime or as a means of control.

Native Americans suffered from repeated ethnic cleansing from the US Army.  The Trail of Tears comes to mind. It didn’t matter if they won in court, Andrew Jackson and other Presidents would refuse to enforce the judgements. Treaties were consistently broken once gold or other precious resources were found on lands granted to them.

It should also be noted that throughout the 1800s, Immigrants from Catholic Countries were looked down upon.  Irish, Italians, and Germans amongst other countries all suffered discrimination when they came to the states.  Most of the history of Western Civilization up until WWII was Protestant countries vs Catholic countries.  This attitude of Europe was exported into America.  Other races, like Chinese Americans, suffered similar fates.

Once slavery was banished after the Civil War, Jim Crow settled in.  The South would vote solidly Democrat, because the pain of the war would cause many Southerners not to vote for a Republican for over a 100 years solely because it was the party of Lincoln.

The first way to fight racism in yourself is by embracing the concept of personal responsibility.  Make a habit of not blaming others for one’s own hardships.

As a result, progressive Democrats in the North would come into power with this alliance with the South.  FDR was a fruit of the powerful alliance.  Dixiecrats would not really be in favor of all the social programs, but they were fine with it enough to pass legislation so long as they didn’t pass anything that ended segregation or pass a Civil Rights Bill.

Once the Civil Rights movements started gaining strength and popularity in the 1950s and 1960s, Republicans saw their chance.  They developed the Southern Strategy and Nixon and Goldwater would become household names as they preyed upon the hatred of Southern Racism during their campaigns.  With the Civil Rights Act that was passed under Johnson, the alliance of northern progressives with Dixiecrats was broken.  By the election of 1976, Dixiecrats would start the process of becoming Reagan-democrats, propelling Ronald Reagan to the Presidency in 1980. With the Republican revolution of 1994 the conversion of the South would be complete as the generational pain of Sherman’s March to the Sea would give way to the Contract with America.  The South has remained Republican ever since.  This isn’t to say that Racism is a Southern Problem. It is a problem everywhere.

Eventually some of these groups would be viewed as American.  With the election of JFK, religion as ethnicity didn’t matter as much as it did previously, but the concept of race still does.  Many African Americans to this day feel their lives do not matter as much as white people in the eyes of law enforcement and government policy, hence the name of the movement Black Lives Matter. The name is meant as reminder to those in power and to encourage African Americans when they look in the mirror.

Today, the most evident form of racism is directed at Hispanic populations. It should be noted though that most Hispanic immigrants do come from predominantly Catholic countries South of Texas, so perhaps there is an undercurrent of anti-Catholic sentiment as a component.  Every time President Trump brings up immigration enforcement he talks about how “they are sending us people from jails, and mental institutions”, but most people being picked up by ICE are people who go to work everyday and haven’t broken a law since crossing the border. They then are deported to third countries including to a prison in Sudan where rape and torture is common. During the 2024 campaign, the President mentioned how immigrants eat dogs.  Political rhetoric of taking “immigrants taking American Jobs” is prevalent.  The current Administration is making it harder to give immigrants due process in the courts, despite the Fifth Amendment stating No Person shall be deprived of life liberty or property without due process of the law.  The Fifth Amendment does not use the word citizen.

History is often viewed through a lens of triumphant progression.  MLK taught us to love each other. The first Black Supreme Court Justice (Thurgood Marshall) was appointed to the bench in 1967.  Jessie Jackson was the first African American to win delegates in his 1984 Presidential Campaign.  Employers and colleges started using DEI and quotas as tools to abolish the systemic racism of the past. And with the Election of Barack Obama in 2008, racism was declared dead by many.

But you can’t kill racism.  As mentioned at the start of this article, It is an evolutionary impulse. You have to decide to kill it in yourself and help those around you to fight it in their lives. Yes, sometimes that means calling them out. Primarily though, you need to look within. You have to learn to recognize those negative impulses and not always listen to your own first reactions.  Racism is a creeper like a snake in the grass that thrives in fields of homogeny.

When one lives and works in areas that have little diversity, it is easy for those evolutionary impulses to creep into your civilized brain.  Scapegoating becomes easier when minorities are not around to defend themselves or more importantly express they have lost respect for you.

When people get scared, it is easier to fall back into those evolutionary impulses. After 9/11, Muslim mosques and Sikh Temples were attacked in America. Being scared is an emotion. Courage is a decision.

The first way to fight racism in yourself is by embracing the concept of personal responsibility.  Make a habit of not blaming others for one’s own hardships. 

It is also important to make a habit of experiencing new things.  Travel to a different continent.  Experience a new culture.  Fall in love with the fact that your ways are not the only ways.  Learn to appreciate the things that you did not have the luxury to experience previously.   As Walt Whitman stated, “Be Curious, not Judgemental”. 

Embracing and understanding your own ignorance is the first step in being curious.

Another way is to fight homogeny. Homogeny is basically segregation by the free market.  It is found in our neighborhoods, our churches, our schools and many occupations have a pretty homogeneous demographic make up.  Racism thrives in these environments because it is so easy for one’s guard to fall.  It is important to have a diverse group of friends and mentors throughout your life.  As for me, I do have one African American mentor who is a colleague.  Also in my profession, there are a couple other people of color who I talk to on a regular basis. But for the most part, yes, most of my friends are white. But I long for a more diverse life experience.

Finally, learn to empathize with those of which you do not have a common life experience.  Embracing and understanding your own ignorance is the first step in being curious.   Develop an empathetic world view.  If you are looking to understand people, you will be slower to judge them. Make your starting point, “They are people like me”.

One of my personal heroes is Daryl Davis. He is an African American musician who has collected 200 KKK robes. He has done this by befriending them. Through love he brought people out of hate. He helped racists become better people. We need to follow his example and love all of humanity. For those who call themselves Christians out there, remember John 3:16. If God loved the world so much that he gave His only Son, it is your calling to follow His example. Love one Another. And love isn’t just a feeling. Like courage, it is also a decision.

I wish I could bring this article to an easy conclusion.  This article is already 1300 words over the target of 750, so the concepts of “what is race”, “race relations”, “racial reconciliation”, “generational wealth”, “privilege”, “What is DEI”, “How racism is passed down through generations”, and other topics will have to be addressed elsewhere. This article did not go into the history of lynchings, race riots like Tulsa, Rodney King, or the riots when Martin Luther King jr was assassinated. It may be easier to talk about racism in other parts of the world to make it less personal. I could see essays on the Rwandan Genocide and “Is the Israeli-Palestinian relationship apartheid?”. Perhaps these will be done in future essays and interviews. But perhaps that is chickening out of a hard conversation.

But really, what do I really know about racism? Not much. I may learn the history, I may do the research, I may listen to my friends and colleagues of color, but I will never feel the pain. In the end, I’m just a white boy bitchin’. And this podcast is in desperate need of more contributors. 

Biography.

General note: Homogeny is normally used to describe either coming from the same descendant (biology) or a homogeneous area. I used it to describe segregation caused by the free market.

[33:00] The study about credit ratings that I was thinking of was discussed in the Wall Street Journal. However, I misstated it. It actually shows how the areas you grew up affect your habits later on down the road leading to differing credit ratings.

[34:42] Daryl Davis

[1:02:50] Movies mentioned: American History X and Cry Freedom

[`1:09:00] It was Kelly Anne Conway who first mentioned “Alternative Facts” on Meet the Press

[1:27:30] Julius tries to reference “Don’t Push Me“

[1:29:00 and article] Angel and Spike argue about Astronauts and Cavemen

©2025 The Ascendant Project

http://www.theascendantproject.com

The post On Racism: A Limited History and Personal Prevention. appeared first on The Ascendant Project.

Entrepreneur

I still remember the first protest I saw. I was about 15 or 16 and had traveled to Long Island with my parents and siblings to visit my grandmother and other relatives. We went to Roosevelt Field Mall, memorable for the massive Zeppelin that hung above the food court, to get lunch and do some shopping. Almost immediately after walking through the door, we saw a small group of demonstrators holding signs and shouting. I don’t recall exactly what they were shouting or even exactly what they were protesting, although I believe it was a protest against animal cruelty and the sale of fur. The police were there, attempting to remove them from the mall and quiet the protest. I still remember the young woman who was being tackled to the ground and arrested while continuing to shout.

At first, I was scared; we had only just walked in and were immediately introduced to this small shouting crowd. And I still remember my father, a New York native, jokingly exclaim “Welcome to New York”. To be clear, I had already been to New York and Long Island many times by that point in my life but had never seen such a public demonstration. And my quiet life in the central Maryland suburbs did little to prepare me for the experience.

Almost immediately afterwards, however, as I was riding up the escalator and thinking about what I had just seen, I realized the importance of that moment. That kind of civic action, common throughout the United States (honestly, there’s a protest or demonstration happening every few days in this country if you look for it), is not a global experience. It’s somewhat unique to America that we can shout, get angry, demonstrate our displeasure at some public policy, and come together to address grievances. I’m sure to many outside the United States it seems chaotic at best and destructive at worst, but the reality is that it binds us together in our common struggle and encourages us to have the hard discussions.

I may not support your message, but I’m glad to have the opportunity to discuss

During almost every period of civil unrest in my lifetime- from the Iraq and Afghanistan war protests, the Occupy and Tea Party movements, and to the more recent Black Lives Matter protests- I have witnessed or been a part of some conversation with friends, coworkers, fellow parishioners about the subject of those protests. Rather than holding us back, it drives us forward. The developer in me would say “It’s not a bug; it’s a feature”. That’s why the more recent Hands Off and No Kings protests are so important. Not necessarily because of what they stand for, although those are worthy causes, but because they show that democracy is still alive, our republic is still strong, and that the discussion continues, like it or not. All Americans- those for and against those causes, those who showed up and those who didn’t- should be proud of that fact.

Regardless, we should not belittle the bravery of those protestors by hiding their faces or silencing their message. They knew the risks and showed up and spoke out anyway, and it would diminish their impact by trying to hide that fact. If you stand for a cause, regardless of message or party affiliation, I support you and I’m proud to call you a fellow American. I may not support your message, but I’m glad to have the opportunity to discuss. And at the risk of being controversial, if you just don’t want to have the discussion, if your view is that you don’t want people to bring that into your “safe space” or that you don’t want the issue “forced down your throat”, then you might be in the wrong place.

Now, if you’re still with me, let me provide some further guidance. Recent studies show that nonviolent campaigns, that is peaceful protests or civil resistance, are twice as likely to succeed as violent ones. Erica Chenoweth and Maria J. Stephan studied 323 major resistance campaigns from 1900 to 2006 and found the rate to be 53% versus 26%. Nonviolence is key to gaining public sympathy, lowering the barriers to participation, and gaining media attention (not every journalist is a war reporter; if you want the news to show up, make sure there is a safe environment for them to conduct interviews and record the story). Peace also requires planning and discipline which also helps to sustain the movement. Most importantly, though, remaining nonviolent is critical to realizing the second finding from Chenoweth’s and Stephan’s research. That is, that expanding the campaign to include at least 3.5% of the population, what Chenoweth and Stephan have dubbed the 3.5% rule, guarantees its success.

I am providing this guidance because current trends would suggest that we may need to continue the tradition demonstrated by that crowd at Roosevelt Mall, to peacefully and publicly protest the status quo. And it will require all of us, Liberals and Progressives, Libertarians and Conservatives, and all those outside and in-between, to further our gains while not losing what we have. Regardless, be proud of your fellow Americans, even if their being loud, rowdy, or obnoxious, and honor their participation. If nothing else, listen to some Sam Cooke, and take heart.

My more recent experience with protests is much more uplifting. Westminster, my hometown, is a strangely active community politically. Shortly after moving here, I witnessed a protest of Monsanto right in the center of town. Sometime after that, there was a Pro-Life rally. There have been several demonstrations by various religious groups and churches here. During Covid, many people protested masks and virtual learning. More recently, residents participated in both the Hands Off and No Kings protests. In a way, Westminster is a flashpoint for civic participation and civil discussion. It’s part of its charm, even if I sometimes must wait longer to get across Main Street, and I’m proud of my community. Every. Time.

[23:00] Here is a link to an ABC news article following up on Juli Briskman, who was the cyclist who flipped off Trump’s motorcade in 2017.

[41:00]Maria Stephan’s last name is pronounced Steh-fin.

[44:08] The Arab Spring started when Mohamed Bouazizi died of self-immolation (he set himself on fire). He did this to protest police harassment and government corruption in Tunisia. This started a pan-Arab protest movement that resulted in the Tunisian government being overthrown, Egypt’s and Yemen’s government being overthrown more than once, civil wars in Libya and Syria, Protests and governmental changes in Western Sahara, Morocco, Oman, and Lebanon.

[45:26] The Muslim Brotherhood did take power in Egypt but was overthrown by the military on July 3rd 2013.

[48:34} 5 million people attended the No Kings Rallies.

[53:35] The Koch Brothers funded the first Tea Party website in 2002 through their PAC Citizens for a Sound Economy. Further funding of the Tea Party movement came from another of their PACs, Americans for Prosperity

[54:00] Huma Abedin married Alexander Soros. AI messed up stating Alexander’s father, George was dating her. ugh. Another reason AI sucks donkeyballs.

© 2025 The Ascendant Project

For more content and information:

Please visit us at www.theascendantproject.com

The post Our American Tradition appeared first on The Ascendant Project.

Written by

Brian Smyers

Jaime Raskin takes on Donald Trump’s impeachment as a case manager while undergoing chemotherapy. Larry Hogan runs for Maryland Governor while fighting cancer and wins. Ruth Bader Ginsburg keeps her post on The Supreme Court of the United States despite her cancer diagnosis. She dies while still serving on the Court. Donald Trump survives an assassination attempt which results in the focusing of his campaign and he wins re-election. These are a few of examples of how mortality affects politics, and inspires us to be larger than ourselves. As for me, well, where to begin?

When my dad died, it spurned me to change jobs, causing me to eventually try my hand at management. I sucked at it, but I stretched myself and learned more of what my strengths and weaknesses are.

When my retina detached on the tennis court, it drove me to commit to The Ascendant Project in ways that had just been theoretical before. Vision was accompanied by action which was accompanied by personal investment and then a podcast was born.

Every moment that reminds us of our own mortality further changes the philosophical question of “What is the meaning of life?” into “What is the meaning of my life?”.

For most of my years, those answers were found in faith, specifically Protestant Christianity. But the older I get, the more I realize that my meaning — and my purpose — can not come from an external source. I have to create the meaning of my own life.

Legacy is not enough. Your family and your friends will eventually pass away, so this is not about your ego. This is about starting something or being part of something greater than yourself, that will last beyond your years or any vestiges of remembrance. It is about leaving this world in better shape than you found it and doing your part to ensure that outcome.

~”We were created in the image of God. Surely, you have been imbued with something unique and positive during your making”.~

It is making sure you are not pissing on your own personal Tree of Life which I would argue was cut down by saws of our vanity but whose wood makes up our hearts and our souls.

As Tim Booth sang in the song Of Monsters, Heroes and Men by James, Rambling Poets/ manning with vision/ we are the drivers/ yet we feel driven/ like moths in the moonlight/ fooled by a flashlight/ caught in a jam jar/ gasping for air, it is our mortality that drives us to immortal acts and movements, yet we are still human and will still always make mistakes. We hope that perfection is within us, but our humanity will ensure all our works, achievements, and any monuments built to us – whether they be in the halls of government or a simple headstone in the grass – will eventually crumble into dust along with our bones.

It is this dichotomy of meaning Vs meaninglessness, goodwill towards men Vs selfishness, action Vs apathy, and empathy vs sociopathic indifference that determines who we are as individuals. Yet I would argue that we are not the sum of our choices; We are the sum of our choices that are accompanied by action.

Perhaps it should be considered that mortality is the primordial ooze of politics.

We spend more time at work than we do with our families. Is your job how you want to be remembered? Find something outside of money that matters. Build something new. Create something original. Impact others.

We were created in the image of God. Surely, you have been imbued with something unique and positive during your making. Science tells us we are made of stars. Be luminous! Be the light created by the fusion of your relationships and of your efforts. I speak of the power of creating the meaning of your own life. As we say to death, “Fuck off!” as Bono’s dad did with his last dying breath, for in the end it may be both everything – and the only thing – that matters.

[10:15] During the sound editing portion of the production of this episode, I dug out Bill Flanagan’s U2 at the End of the World. After about 3 hours of searching through the book, I could not verify the memory I had of Bono stating that they would go to Vegas for the Fat Elvis period. So it is an altered memory, or a mis-attributed memory. Perhaps I saw it in a random interview and thought it was in the book. Or perhaps, I dreamed it up and thought about it enough to where I thought it was an actual memory. So disappointing. The closest thing I could find was Bono stating that fat Elvis was part of the inspiration for Bono’s Macphisto character during the Zoo TV tour (p.229). At any point, I can not source it.

[19:00] “Change happens through movement, and movement heals.” is the quote from Joseph Pilates that I was going for.

[22:15] The first time I heard the two boats and a helicopter joke was by Rev Wally Landis during a sermon at Bush Creek Church of the Brethren in Monrovia Maryland sometime between 1977 and 1985. I also think my mom referenced this joke during the interview for her article, “My Background and Reasons Why I am a Never Trumper”.

[26:00] I also kept a blog of my biking journey on the C&O Canal and other bike trails in the DMV. I may have kept spreadsheets and graphs of my rides.

[39:10] Here is the picture I took of the Cosmic Finger.

[42:27] It was Senator Joni Earnst who said that “Everyone dies” in defending cuts to Medicaid.

[45:34] ——————————————->

[46:09] Song Reference:

Of Monsters, Heroes, and Men by James from the Album Hey Ma
https://soundcloud.com/james-the-band/of-monsters-and-heroes-and-men

The lyric actually is Rambling poets manic with vision, not manning. oh well.

© 2025 The Ascendant Project

For more content and information:

Please visit us at www.theascendantproject.com

The post Of Monsters, and Heroes, and Men appeared first on The Ascendant Project.

written by

Julius Knapp III

“Protecting The Meaning And Value Of American Citizenship,” that is the name of the Executive Order directing that the Executive Branch shall not “issue documents recognizing United States citizenship, or accept documents issued by State, local, or other governments or authorities purporting to recognize United States citizenship, to persons:

The legal issues associated with this case are significant. I am not a lawyer, and I have not ever taken a course in public policy or civics (outside of the Maryland state mandated coursework), so I will not pretend to completely understand, let alone adequately explain, the complexities of those issues. Nonetheless, the importance of this case is so significant that it demands that we try. Other than the Trump v. United States case, also known as, the Presidential Immunity Case, or the Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission case, I cannot recall a more impactful case. This case could profoundly affect both how the people engage in politics and how the people understand the role of the legal system. And of course, there have been other impactful cases, I certainly do not want to suggest that those other cases are not also important. However, this case may completely reframe the relationship between Americans and the legal and political systems, making it impossibly difficult for justice to be served as it was.

At its core, the Birthright Citizenship case is about two things. First, is whether the Executive Branch can unilaterally determine the citizenship status of people born in this country. The public debate of whether the children born in the United States to non-citizen parents should be considered citizens themselves has circulated for many years if not decades or centuries. My most recent recollection of when this issue was most prevalent in the public discourse, was in the mid-to-late aughts. Then, President Bush had introduced a bill into Congress that would address the long-standing deficiencies of our immigration system. The bill ultimately failed, but two aspects of the bill, anchor babies and maternity tourism, were especially relevant to the idea of birthright citizenship. Considering those aspects, the Fourteenth Amendment seems prone to abuse. Again, I will not discuss the particulars of those aspects; I present them only as examples of the types of issues the Executive Order is trying to address. And here we begin to understand how problematic this is.

Executive Orders are not laws. They merely dictate the Executive Branch to execute the law by adopting some policy. The effect may be the same, but there is an important distinction. Executive Orders may be modified or terminated at any time by the President. So, assuming the Executive Order stands, birthright citizenship may be permitted or ignored on the whims of one person at any time. The implications of this are extensive and raise many new questions. If the children born in this country to non-citizen parents are not American citizens, what country are they a citizen of? If they are not citizens of any country, are they subject to our laws? This is what is meant by the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” in the Fourteenth Amendment, that for a child born in this country to be subject to our laws, they must be a citizen at birth. What of the children of infidelity, where an American man is claimed as the father and used to establish birthright citizenship, but it is later discovered that a non-citizen man was the father? Would those children’s citizenship be revoked? Moreover, would this eventually establish a “paternity tourism” industry? What if a future President rescinds or modifies the Executive Order? Will non-citizen children who were born in this country during a previous administration be granted citizenship? The uncertainty introduced by these questions, and many other reasons, is what led so many states to sue. Those states obtained an injunction, effective nationwide, preventing the Executive Branch from executing the Presidents Executive Order.

This introduces the second thing the Birthright Citizenship case is about: whether judges can issue national injunctions. Nearly every current Supreme Court justice has criticized the ability of individual judges to issue national injunctions. Indeed, it does appear to be literal judicial overreach. That is, a district court judge, who can only hear cases brought before the court in their district, can almost literally reach into every other judicial district and impose an injunction that every other judge would be obligated to uphold. For such an issue of birthright citizenship with the potential to impact every district, perhaps this should be permissible. The Supreme Court may, however, decide to limit this power. One option would be to limit the effect of injunctions to only the district or circuit where the case is brought. Under this scheme, a party obtaining an injunction in one district might still appeal to the Court of Appeals in that circuit where they could broaden the scope of their injunction. Of course, this would also significantly slow the ability of disparate individuals to obtain national injunctive relief. It could also prevent Judge Shopping, that is the practice of selecting a judicial district that may be sympathetic to the party suing.

Another option would be to limit injunctions to only the party or class bringing the suit. This would have far reaching effects on the ability of the American public obtain relief from an oppressive government. It would require every affected person to either join a class or bring their own suit. For birthright citizenship, the number of cases may be in the hundreds of thousands, creating a logjam in the courts that could stall the court system to the point of being completely ineffective. And for those believing this option to be the best for birthright citizenship, consider the case presented by Justice Sotomayor. That is, if a future president issues an executive order requiring all guns to be seized and destroyed, should it really be the case that each individual person or class would have to bring their own suit to seek relief?

Indeed, the issues surrounding the Birthright Citizenship case are far reaching and varied. It is unclear from the oral arguments how the nine justices may rule. If recent precedents are any indicator, they may choose a kind of middle ground (although, long time readers will recall the middle ground fallacy). This seems to have been the stance the court took in the Presidential Immunity case. In that case, it was ruled that the President had presumptive immunity for official acts. With the benefit of hindsight and additional legal opinion, this is a distinction without a difference. That is, the President is effectively immune from prosecution, full stop. Whatever the Supreme Court decides in this case, a middle ground may be possible, but it is imperative that they not effectively neuter the American public and the judicial system in the process.

This article was written and recorded on 5/24/25. Due to the coverage we gave the No Kings! protests, and the Declaration of Independence episode released on July 4th, this episode was released after the SCOTUS case addressing national injunctions which used the Birthright case as a vehicle to rule upon it. It should be noted that many of the concerns Julius brought up in the article would be repeated on national networks after the ruling came out. Julius was not the source, he was just stating the concerns he saw and others expressed similar concerns.

The Pierre Delecto Sticker mentioned at the beginning of the interview. Pierre Delecto was the handle that Mitt Romney used in his lurker Twitter account.

No Brian, it is dovetails.

[17:20] As of July 4th, Trump has issued 165 Executive Orders. They can be found at the Federal Register. On the other hand Whitehouse.gov shows 79 Executive Orders have been issued.

[19:49] The concerns raised about the Big Beautiful Bill restricting the ability of the Judicial Branch to hold administration officials in contempt would be pulled from the final version before final passage.

[24:07] The US Marshals serve as part of the Justice Department under the supervision of the Attorney General. Their mission is to protect the Judiciary -from judges to jurors- and to enforce court orders.

[27:20] Hitler won a poll on his dictatorship with 89.9%

[30:17] The executive orders that Brian was referring to were EO14281 and EO14283. By weakening civil rights enforcement, these executive orders could help foster a “separate but equal” system that was overturned in Brown v. Board of Education.

[46:07] Trump did state on May 4th that he will not be seeking a third term.

[57:58] The Laffer Curve was drawn on a napkin for none other than Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld in 1974 who were at that time officials in the Nixon Administration. It states that in terms of percent of income, tax revenues increase as you raise the percentage. However, once you reach a certain point the revenues peak, and then the more you increase, the less tax revenue is generated because you stifle growth.

[58:30] I also meant to say that the United States went from being the greatest creditor nation to the greatest debtor nation in the world under Reagan, but I couldn’t find the words.

©2025 The Ascendant Project

The post Birthright appeared first on The Ascendant Project.

by Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, et. al

In celebration of our nation’s 249th Birthday, Julius and I will be reading and discussing our nation’s Founding Document, The Declaration of Independence.

Clocking in at around an hour and 45 minutes, this is a long episode. The Declaration runs over 1300 words and our normal essay is about half that. As a result there is much to talk about. In our discussions, we attempted to interweave current events and history with the document.

The fact checking on our conversation shows that my grasp of the details of history are not as crisp as I thought. My last history class was three decades ago, so please forgive me. In our defense, despite being wrong on the details we were arguably right on the nose for the concepts. Corrections are below.

Nonetheless, please enjoy this reading, enjoy the Fourth, celebrate with a veteran and spend time with your family and friends. Finally, please be safe.

https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/declaration-transcript

Corrections, clarifications, and addendums:

Brian was basically the SNL sketch of “a girl you don’t want to have a conversation with at a party” in this episode.

Brian stated that the Revolutionary War ended in 1787 when in fact it ended in 1783.

Articles of Confederation were in adopted by Congress in 1777 and Ratified in 1781. It was in effect until the Constitution of the United States.

Battles of Lexington and Concord occurred in 1775 not 1774 so the colonies were at war for 1 year and almost 3 months not 2 years as I stated around the 5 minute mark.

I referred to the enslaved person that Thomas Jefferson was involved with as “Sally Fields” instead of Sally Hemings. At least I didn’t say Sally Struthers.

I also mentioned the Whiskey Rebellion as happening under the Articles of Confederation when it happened in 1794 under the Constitution and President George Washington had to send troops to put it down. It was Shay’s Rebellion that I meant to reference. It exposed the weakness of the Articles and the need for a stronger government which the Constitution would address. Shay’s rebellion occurred from 1786-1787.

Around the 23 minute mark, the poem that I could remember the meaning but not the title or author was “Carrying the Songs” by Moya Cannon

At 26 minutes I was also wrong about England being at war with Russia during the American Revolution. In fact, England was enticing Russia to send 20,000 troops to New England to fight on behalf of the British. They decided to stay neutral. England and Russia were at war during the Seven Years War, which the French and Indian War was a part of. England and Russia would be at war again from 1807-1812. So Seven Years war, and War of 1812, but not the War of Independence which was the war in the middle. I was so close.

It should also be noted that England was at war with France, Spain, and the Netherlands during the Revolutionary War.

So basically, much of the history that I bring up in this episode is wrong on the specifics. All the more important us to read the Declaration of Independence, and as always, verify what we think we know.

Just before the 53 minute mark, Julius cites the 5th Amendment as saying people have the right to get a hearing, but the 5th Amendment is about Quartering of troops. The 7th Amendment is about due process and uses the term “persons”.

Also just before 54 minutes, we did not know what historical event the Declaration of Independence was referring to. The answer was The Quebec Act of 1774 where the British Monarchy abolished the British legal system and instituted arbitrary courts without representation. They then tried to impose this system on the 13 colonies.

I also mentioned the war between Pennsylvania and Maryland. This war was known as Cresap’s War, and technically it lasted between 1730-1767, only 8 years before Lexington and Concord. The first part of the war happened locally with violence happening over property disputes. However, militaries from both colonies were involved from 1736-1738. King George II negotiated the cease fire in 1738 and the Mason-Dixon line was finally agreed upon 29 years later thus formally ending the war in 1767.

At the 1 hour mark, Perfidy means deceitfulness.

At 1:04, consanguinity means descended from the same ancestor.

At 1:15 Julius refers to Vermont as a colony. In 1749, the New Hampshire governor issued land grants in present day Vermont. However in 1764, King George III ruled that New York had jurisdiction, and the New York Governor sold the same tracts of land, eventually leading to armed conflict, with those with New Hampshire land grants led by none other than Ethan Allen and a militia called “The Green Mountain Boys”. In 1777, Vermont formed its own Republic named “New Connecticut”. (I didn’t see that one coming). Six months later, they changed the name to “Vermont” and promptly banned Slavery. They had their own coinage, public school system, postal routes and universal suffrage for all adult males. Vermont was admitted the Union as the 14th state in 1791.

At the 1 hour 24 minute mark, Brian marked January 16th, 1991 as the start of Desert Storm, but it was January 17th. Once again, so close.

After re-reading about the end of the Iraq War, The United States did come to a Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) that was signed by President Bush and ratified by the Iraqi Parliament in 2008. It laid out the US withdrawal of combat forces from Iraq by 12/31/11 and that withdrawal was completed two weeks earlier. It allowed for US contractors who worked for the US state department would remain immune while contractors for the US Defense Department would be subject to Iraqi law. It also stated that if the US held someone for more the 24 hours, they would have to charge them. Also, raids would be curtailed as the US would need a warrant for searching homes and buildings not related to combat. Any “major premeditated felonies” committed by US forces while off duty and off base would be subject to a joint Iraqi-US commission. wiki article

http://www.theascendantproject.com

© 2025 The Ascendant Project

The post The Declaration of Independence appeared first on The Ascendant Project.

by Brian Smyers

You are hanging out at a friend’s house watching your favorite team compete in your favorite sport, and something happens. A few years ago, it might have been someone kneeling during the National Anthem, but usually a political ad comes up or one of your friends brings ups a current event. You are on the opposite side of the political aisle than your friend. What do you do?

Usually the hair on the back of your neck stands straight up, the spine straightens and your heart rate rises. You are already feeling defensive. Before you speak a single word, you are already losing control of the situation as your biochemistry is being affected by your fight or flight response. This person who said this is someone you respect, and you don’t want a fight. However, you feel compelled to defend your point of view.

Measured words become more defensive. Tones become more aggressive. Before you know it, a full blown fight has occurred and once it hits it’s inevitable crescendo, apologies are made, but the hurt carries on — sometimes for days or weeks. The worst part is deep down, you know the cycle of abuse will continue. You will become the monster to defend yourself from a monster.

We’ve all been there. We all have had relationships harmed, damaged, and sometimes severed because of our passions and the passions of others. We feel right in our cause and so do your friends with different points of view. We all have asked ourselves, “Can this relationship endure? Is it worth it to remain friends? Or is this just a toxic relationship?”

It has been said, that “all politics is personal”. At The Ascendant Project, we try to turn that on its head by exploring the personal to understand the politics. It is why we have an hour interview after the 750 word essay. However, when you are put on the spot, it is hard to take that exact approach. I would argue though, you have a decision to make.

Are you going to be the listener, or are you going to be the person expressing opinions? It is important to choose your role. More often than not, you will need to be the listener, because the person spouting off their mouth has already claimed the roll of expressing opinions. So you need to set your feelings aside and ask questions.

A simple, “why do you feel that way?” or “Could you expand on that?” can go a long way in letting steam out of a conversation. Try not to debate, as their mind is made up. You can also ask what is their intent in starting a conversation over such a sensitive topic as politics. The answer to that can help you exercise the biggest benefit of the role of listener: setting the ground rules of the conversation.

You can say when things are getting too personal. You can remind them that the game is back on. You can end the conversation. My favorite — taught to me by Nick Fischer– is “I was not prepared to have this conversation today.” Always remember that nobody wins most political debates. No facts, logical arguments, or statistics will defeat feelings. The only thing that really defeats feelings and expectations is life experience, but your life experience does not beat theirs. The best you can do is remind your friend that you are an example of an average person from across the political aisle, so we obviously aren’t as bad as we are portrayed, because we are friends. You can use their friendship with you to bathe their arguments in respect. Remind them that when they make it personal, it means they are having trouble respecting you and that affects the relationship.

Nobody wins a political fight between friends or family. It always hurts. Usually it is best practice to choose the role of listener.

So what happens when you visit your racist grandfather who won’t shut up? Sooner or later, these tactics will fail. Sooner or later you will stand up 100% for yourself. Just always remember, you need to express to them that it is affecting your relationship and if they want to maintain relations, either views need to change or things must not be brought up.

Now let us consider that you are the one bringing up politics. Ask yourself some questions as soon as possible. You most likely have already blurted something out, but you need to ask yourself these questions anyway. “What is your intent in bringing this up? Am I trying to learn something? Am just reacting? Am I picking a fight?” What ever your intent, it is important to express it. That way, your defensive and potentially offended friend knows a little more about how to react accordingly. At worst, this means a fair fight instead of a surprise attack. At best, it means a productive discussion full of listening and respect. If possible, preface the political discussion with “I want your opinion on this: I feel this way, would you mind telling me how you feel?” Never underestimate the power of asking for permission. Finally, no matter the case, always try to limit the discussion to a single topic. Don’t let it widen, keep it focused.

In summary, remember why the relationship is important to you. Make any arguments with that in mind. Relationships are fragile and you must care for them. All parties involved must remember what made the friendships and family relationships great, and focus on those things. Sometimes it is better just to deny the battle and move forward with love.

© 2025 The Ascendant Project

www.theascendantproject.com

Interview Corrections, Clarifications, and links

Here is the song and the famed Line brawl I referenced in the interview:

2016 Vancouver Canucks and Calgary Flames Line Brawl. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g9msPMWONpw&t=121s

John Tortorella sings Don’t Push Me. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LprzxFAoH9w&t=2s

It should also be noted that John Tortorella did change his stance on players kneeling in support of Black Lives Matter. https://www.espn.com/nhl/story/_/id/29293541/john-tortorella-reverses-hardline-stance-kneeling

Finally, Here is a link to the lyrics for Bruce Springsteen’s Born in the USA. https://genius.com/Bruce-springsteen-born-in-the-usa-lyrics

The post Ambushed!!! How to Survive a Surprise Political Conversation appeared first on The Ascendant Project.

by Julius Knapp III

Wooh! You sure gotta climb a lot of steps to get to this Capital building here in Washington, but I wonder who that sad little scrap of paper is.” And so Bill was born, alive as much as any other character, in the minds of a generation of students. From those first few lines, I’m sure many readers will leap with glee, instantly recognizing the cartoon from which it came, the nostalgia becoming almost palpable.

I’m also sure almost all those readers will be able to recite the next line, the first line of the accompanying song. “I’m just a bill. Yes, I’m only a bill. And I’m sitting here on Capital Hill.” (For all those readers who will have that song stuck in their head for the next hour, I’m sorry and you’re welcome.)

For many of us, that song and the many other songs produced by Schoolhouse Rock, was our first exposure to the inner workings of government. That song was also our first introduction to a kind of civic participation that is critical to the constitution of our country: direct legislative influence. This kind of civic participation is necessary for us, the American public, to influence law. As Bill suggests, this is no easy process. Bill must first go to the House of Representatives. The House may or may not decide to consider Bill and many bills are never considered. As the song continues, however, Bill is sent to a House committee where he is debated. In practice, the House committee may vote not to bring a bill before the full House. Bill on the other hand is introduced to the full House of Representatives where he is debated again. Being passed, as opposed to rejected, by the House of Representatives, Bill then must repeat the process in the Senate. Even passing the Senate, Bill does not become a law. The President must either veto or sign Bill. Fortunately, the President signs Bill and Bill becomes more than just a “sad little scrap of paper”. Bill becomes law with much fanfare and the country is better for it.

Direct legislative influence is perhaps the most critical form of civic participation, but unfortunately, its use seems to have waned. (I say “seems” because the number of bills sent to Congress for consideration is not directly tracked.) In fairness, the process to pass a bill is long, it’s involved, and it’s never assured that a bill will ever become law. Moreover, although Schoolhouse Rock did a fantastic job of presenting the overall process, it only barely discusses how enormous the task truly is. The site wikiHow details the process a private citizen may follow. In addition to what Schoolhouse Rock describes, researching the issue, gaining grassroots support, and talking to legislators are also key parts of the process. From start to finish, completing the process would be daunting, to say the least, for the average person to pursue. It requires a huge commitment that would ultimately penetrate into every aspect of that person’s life.

For that reason, other forms of civic participation have grown in popularity. Many of these, such as SLAPP suits, straw men, trolling, and lobbying, are more nefarious and can only serve to poison the country we have built. They stifle debate and prevent honest discussion. Some other alternatives, such as public protests, town halls, boycotts, and petitions are less nefarious but offer limited usefulness in terms of their ability to directly influence change.

Our ability to directly propose and influence the passage of legislation cannot be forgotten. Not only is it one of the most effective forms of civic participation, but it also enhances the effectiveness of those other forms. A bill can give the public a singular voice, allowing protests and petitions to be more narrowly focused. With their voices resonating together to communicate with lawmakers, they can also overcome the influence of lobbyists. It may even provide lawmakers with the political “cover” to support their constituents while doing something that may be less popular among their donors. After all, what politician would want to explain to their district that they deliberately ignored or opposed a bill proposed by their own constituents?

For this reason, I would propose an independent commission formed by Congress and funded by donors, to provide legal and financial support for any citizen to draft legislation and coordinate with Congress. Such a commission would be function similarly to a public defender, assigning a team of people- a lawyer, an advocate, and an accountant- to help send more “sad little scraps of paper” to Capital Hill. The commission may also coordinate with national grassroots organizations to solicit and foster support from and among the American public. Such a commission might also be a model for similar state and local commissions. Regardless, we, the American Public, must renew our commitment to this process. Generous use of this form of civic participation and engagement can and will make our government one of and by the people.

© 2025 The Ascendant Project

The post The Birth of Bill appeared first on The Ascendant Project.