Mamdani’s Twisted Priorities: Focusing on "Bigotry" While Dodging Islamic Terror at Gracie Mansion

OPINION- In a press conference that will live in infamy, New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani addressed the “Gracie Bombing” with the moral clarity of a man reading from two different scripts. An anti-Islam protest organized by Jake Lang outside the mayor’s official residence turned chaotic when two men hurled improvised explosive devices at the crowd. The attackers, Emir Balat and Ibrahim Kayumi, traveled from Pennsylvania, allegedly pledged allegiance to ISIS, and hoped to top the Boston Marathon bombing. NYPD and federal prosecutors are charging them with ISIS-inspired terrorism—yet Mamdani’s first instinct was not to name radical Islam.

Instead, the mayor opened by branding the protest “a vile protest rooted in white supremacy” and “rooted in bigotry and racism.” He called it appalling. Only then, almost as an afterthought, did he condemn the violence that actually put lives at risk. He did pause to affirm that even those he abhors have a “sacred” right to peaceful protest—effectively patting "white supremacists" on the head while the chaos from Islamist IEDs that failed still lingered in his own neighborhood.

Conveniently absent from Mamdani’s remarks: any mention that the bombers were Muslim. No condemnation of the ideology that radicalized them. No acknowledgment that the very protest he smeared as racist was warning against the exact threat that was just about to explode on his doorstep. As the city’s first Muslim mayor, he had a golden opportunity to draw a bright line between peaceful Muslim New Yorkers and the jihadists who tried to maim their critics. He chose selective silence.

This is more than tone-deaf. It’s dangerous. When Islamist terrorists attack Americans exercising their First Amendment rights, the response cannot begin with lectures about “white supremacy.” New York’s communities and especially Latino communities—large, vibrant, and often on the front lines of urban crime and terror threats—deserve better than a mayor who prioritizes identity politics over public safety.

If local leadership refuses to call radical Islam by its name, perhaps it’s time for federal intervention. Donald Trump may indeed need to step in to protect all New Yorkers from the very ideology Mamdani refuses to confront. Free speech is sacred. So is the truth.

The Role of Spanish Colonization in Preserving Latin American Indigenous Languages and Cultures

OPINION—It’s always entertaining to hear progressives declare that the Spanish colonized Latin America and obliterated its languages, as if many indigenous cultures uniformly operated with written systems. Most pre-Columbian societies in Latin America were oral societies. This posed inherent challenges to preserving their linguistic and cultural heritage which colonization further impacted the survival and interpretation of these traditions. Modern understanding of surviving pictographs, glyphs, and symbols is therefore inevitably shaped by subjective perspectives.

For societies with writing systems or other forms of physical record-keeping, documentation was greatly facilitated; however, this primarily benefited larger indigenous empires or a few well-organized smaller societies.

Yes, the Spanish engaged in warfare—both with and against indigenous groups—but ironically, their documentation efforts have become an indispensable resource for modern scholarship on pre-Colombian languages and cultures that survived their conquest. Loanwords in Spanish today bear testimony to the rich linguistic communication of indigenous societies, preserved through colonial texts. It’s worth noting that without Spanish record-keeping, we’d have far less insight into the intricate dialects and traditions of these oral societies.

While colonization undoubtedly came with atrocities, including bloody violence and losses of lives and many cultural traditions, blaming the Spanish for failing to preserve what oral societies themselves could not document is a reductive oversimplification that ignores the complexities of history. Oral traditions are invaluable for sharing stories and culture; however, physical record-keeping transcends the limitations of a human lifespan.

We can acknowledge the harms with coercive assimilation and the near-total destruction of indigenous languages and traditions, but we cannot dismiss the cultures and records that have survived or been expanded upon after Spain’s conquest.

Donald Trump is NOT Wrong: The Gulf of Mexico should be renamed The Gulf of America

OPINION - Donald Trump has made a bold announcement stating that we should change the name of the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America. It may sound odd, but there are some valid points to support this change.

The Gulf of Mexico, an expanse of water vital to North America’s economy and ecosystem, deserves a name that reflects the power and stewardship of the region’s most dominant force—the United States. Renaming it the Gulf of America would better align with the realities of influence and investment in the area.

Mexico’s inability to protect its borders and maintain internal security has undermined its claim to such a significant body of water. The persistent control of vast swathes of Mexican territory by cartels and organized crime illustrates a systemic failure that hampers Mexico’s capacity to assert authority over its land, let alone its surrounding waters. This failure casts doubt on whether Mexico is capable of managing such a critical regional resource effectively.

History also demonstrates Mexico's inability to resist external forces. During the 19th century, the United States invaded Mexico multiple times, resulting in significant territorial losses, including the modern states of California, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas. Despite Mexico’s defeats in these conflicts, the United States opted not to annex the entirety of the country, leaving Mexico as a fragile and fragmented state. The Gulf, strategically important, remained under shared dominion even as U.S. dominance in the region grew.

Further solidifying this influence, the United States has invested heavily in military and economic expansion along the Gulf Coast. American naval bases and infrastructure along the Gulf form a critical part of national defense and global power projection. The U.S. has consistently protected shipping lanes and responded to disasters in the Gulf with unmatched resources and coordination. Mexico, in contrast, lacks both the political will and capacity to match this level of stewardship.

Renaming the Gulf of Mexico as the Gulf of America reflects the true power dynamics and responsibility within the region. It is not just a matter of asserting dominance but recognizing which nation has invested the most in ensuring the Gulf’s safety, accessibility, and economic viability.

Gadsden County: The Latinization of the Black-Majority County In Florida

Gadsden County, Florida, shares a unique perspective, unlike most other places in Florida. As the sole black-majority county in the state, its history intertwined with Spanish expansionism and aggressive American colonization. Its population size hasn’t changed much since the 1960s, with a black population percentage of around 62-66% over thirty years. Yet, as immigration policies falter and as Latinos get more status in the United States, this may drastically change the future of Gadsden County’s reputation as the only black-majority county in Florida. Considering floridanophobia promoted by the media, other ethnic groups are moving to Florida.

Latinos have been in the United States for several hundred years due to the colonization of Spain of the Americas and the mixing of different racial and ethnic groups. Although, in the United States, they weren’t always labeled Latinos or Hispanics. In the context of race, it may be difficult to determine someone’s race within the confines of the American racial system. The systems in place remain incapable of adequately defining, characterizing, or registering Latino and Hispano people. With that said, continuing with its current iteration in the eyes of the United States census, the population of Latinos and Hispanos in Gadsden County is increasing dramatically.

From the 2000 Census to the 2020 Census, the population of Latinos or Hispanos in Florida has almost doubled. Latinos represent 11.6% of the population compared to 6.2% in the 2020 Census for Gadsden County. With the population of Latinos increasing and the population of those who identify as Black or African-American decreasing, it is likely that Gadsden County, Florida, will lose its black-majority title in the next census in 2030. It will be a shift and a culture change for the people in Gadsden County. This may be a concern for black American activists who likely react with blackalgia against other minorities with different perspectives on race.

Floridanophobia Unmasked: The Disconnect Between Democrats and Floridanos

By Luis Albert Rosales

OPINION—Democrats have attempted to shame Florida with their floridanophobia, but that will not stop Florida from succeeding as a state. In their attempts to villainize Florida within the Latino community in the United States, Latinos in Florida are speaking out. Cubans, Puerto Ricans, and Peruvians are rejecting the narrative that Florida is an unsafe place for Latinos or minority immigrants. Floridanos are taking a stand.

Florida was one of the first regions in the Americas conquered by Spain (known as Spanish Florida or La Florida); there is this historical association that many Latinos have for Florida. Other than Florida's connection to Spain, Latinos from the Caribbean, Caribeños, have also settled here and call this region their home. Ron DeSantis has been open to discussions with the Latino community as he has had many with minority Republicans within the State of Florida. Democrats have used immigration as a fearmongering tactic for decades, but it does reveal something about Democrats.

Democrats are culturally removed from the Latino community when there are cultural jabs at our customs, such as referring to Latinos as Latinx, undermining our stances on the economy, or insulting our catholic faith (most Latinos are Catholic). So disconnected as they are, they affirm that they have our best interests in their hearts. Ideally, we would desire to think so; however, the Democrats only rely on Latinos when it is election season, and if we do vote for them and they succeed, the economic results don't change for us.

Although Florida may have issues, most of them do not stem from corruption, authoritarianism, or police brutality. Florida has a unique perspective on managing the economy and its people. It is the America First mindset; Floridanos have a "Florida First" mindset. As we discussed cultural perspectives, the Floridano perspective differs from most American liberals. Although mainstream political pundits in the Democratic Party would affirm to make Florida more like California, specifically San Francisco, the people here, including Latinos, are taking a stand against Democrats.

When Democrats spread dread about how Florida is a horrible place, saying that Latinos should fear Republicans in Florida and telling Latinos they should reject their faith due to the rejection of conservatism—that is odd. It is unwarranted.

My time experiencing the political struggles and the economic rollercoaster in Florida has been great. In over twenty years in Florida, Ron DeSantis is the best governor I've ever lived under. It is odd for Democrats to lecture me regarding how horrible Florida is as a Latino who lives here. It reminds me that sometimes I need to put my phone down, disregard the ignorant political and racial views of people in some tower in New York City or some progressive newsroom in San Francisco, and enjoy the roller coasters right in front of me or the beaches an hour away.

They fear Latinos who may have an excellent opinion about Florida that contradicts many mainstream news media outlets. From 2000 to 2020, the population of Latinos and Hispanos increased by 3 million, according to the United States Census. The percentage of Latinos by population in Florida has increased for every census that has recorded Latinos and Hispanos. Considering this information, if the notion that Florida is racist and not safe for Latinos is prevalent in some Democrat circles, we may have to ask why Latinos would like to live in the State of Florida.

Two philosophies come to mind. If we are to take the narrative from Democrats seriously, then we can assume Latinos who live here don't care. Yet, the likely answer is that Latinos don't feel this heightened level of fear in the State of Florida because the government and Republicans are not a threat to most Latinos who live here. Both can be true—fair.

Now, we cannot tolerate floridanophobia. It is irrational and manipulative to push propaganda to scare young Latinos about what goes on in Florida. If that is the agenda that Democrats want to assert about my state, then I have no reason to take them earnestly.

What Is Racial-Cultural Exclusivity? | Define Racial-Cultural Exclusivity

In our quest to find an identity and to join a collective, we see traits among our community that unite us but also reveal our protective nature. By belonging to this community we confide in our upbringing and our understanding that sometimes our culture or ethnicity is not mutually inclusive and that there is a racial element to certain things we do. Of course, this is a perception of the culture we grew up in and how people protect their ideals. In that protection, you may see belittlement or an excluding nature. Protecting one's culture, a culture that they perceive as having a racial attachment can lead to racial-cultural exclusivity.

What is Racial-Cultural Exclusivity?

Racial-cultural exclusivity arises from protectionism. By being a part of a community, such as the black American community, there is a racial element attached to their culture. They view their culture as a part of their race, thus a part of their blackness (as understood in the United States). By having aspects of their culture a part of their race, they assert that certain actions are black actions; certain behaviors are black behaviors, and certain sociological traits or practices are black sociological traits or practices.

Examples:

“A white girl cannot wear box braids because it’s a black hairstyle.”

“Hip-hop is a black-only music genre.”

“Stop worrying about black people, stay in your community.”

Racial-cultural exclusivity, in these examples, focuses on the black fragility and the black American experience and it shows how racial-cultural exclusivity works in practice. These sentences or racially exclusionary content are typically experienced by those outside the black American experience or culture.

Define Racial-Cultural Exclusivity

Racial-cultural exclusivity can be defined as a phenomenon where or a belief that racial groups create environments and communities that support their culture and preserve it from others, even if those “others” are other minority groups. They maintain that people, culture, and ethnicity must be separated for them to be preserved. Excluding others can include physically removing them from a community, ignoring them, or outright exclaiming to them that they do not belong to a community due to their race.

As we’ve discussed, racial-cultural exclusivity can be expressed by any race. It manifests as a response to something someone may perceive as being racial-culturally exclusive. As we understand more about racial-cultural exclusivity, it’s important to know that it is a natural feeling, however, as more isolated communities racially mix, these concerns diminish.

Black Fragility and How it Operates Through The Black American Experience

Black Fragility and How it Operates Through The Black American Experience

By Luis Albert Rosales 

Black fragility is a common feeling for some black Americans, primarily activists when they are faced with the challenges of discussing racial dynamics outside of the United States. In their focused knowledge of African American studies or black American history, they fortify their concept of race in some of their shared history. Since the turn of the century, the black American movement has gotten much support as opposed to the centuries before. After cases like Tamir Rice and others, there is merit for change. As black American culture evolves and grows and expands on the history that focuses on their blackness, they likely fall into a conditional cycle of fragility.

Black fragility operates behind a strong collective wall of blackness. Unique in the individual, they retort and exclaim or shame someone; however, some accept the tension between them—the fragility they share. How can you face others who look like you or have had a different history and say that their racial perspectives should be isolated within the radius of American blackness? The sense of collective priority can be felt in black American efforts, yet they will defend the racial structures established by early Americans. A dilemma that must be remedied, yet it cannot.

Black Americans may collectively share their grievances when challenged. The mere idea of black fragility is met with disdain and racial-cultural exclusivity. For example, if they discuss racial dynamics with a Haitian or a Hispano, these Latinos would have a different perspective on racial dynamics. A black American would react defensively or dismissively towards their views on racial dynamics due to their perspective that they are foreigners; which may not be the case for many. As they undermine them as foreigners, they also undermine them on a racial level.

For biracial or mixed people, it can often be difficult to reason with an activist-minded black American who internalizes opposition to their racial views as upholding white supremacy—the American flavor that one must submit to. They would rather them renounce their racial concepts and submit to the orthodoxy of blackness—American blackness. Collective racial unity often drives them to racial-cultural exclusivity that alienates other dark-skinned people.

Light-skinned people or white people are easily dismissed in these discussions in the eyes of black American activists because they do not have the attributes of a “typical black American”, which is incredibly subjective. Their black fragility contributes to the alienation of entire groups of people including biracial and mixed people.

Unconvinced, the Haitian and the Hispano may persist in their views, but the black American activist may fall further into black fragility. Blackness is the primary manifestation of black culture in the United States and it must be preserved under a black American society, so they assert. Pressuring the two, the black American activist will press forward in their view that foundational black American society must be preserved and the racial structures they adopted be with it. By being “foundational black Americans”, they assert they hold authority over the black identity within the United States; they claim the identity of blackness. Protectionism can grow strongly among black American activists and it further leads to division. Xenophobic and accusatory reactions may come against migrants and people of minority cultures due to their subjectivity. The black American activist, in their fragility, may dissuade them both from their identity in an attempt for unity.

In the likelihood of engaging with someone who is a multi-generational black American who disagrees with their racial concepts, such as a biracial American, they question their allegiances. To be black in America is to be a member of their society; they assert their authority and social orthodoxy among other black Americans. Biracial and other mixed families feel ostracized as a result of the black fragility expressed in black American activist circles.

Black fragility forms and evolves as discussions expand with migrants coming to the United States. During our time to reconcile past issues, we live in a time when black fragility accelerates. In this acceleration, black fragility will operate aggressively. The dilemma between social acceptance, black fragility, and racism will blur the lines as ethnocentrism will take center stage. Black fragility will operate and evolve among these changes. Black American activists will continue exposing their fragility as they reveal themselves to different racial ideas outside of their foundational black American ideals. The concept of living under the “black American experience” will change. The fragility shared among American activists to preserve foundational black American concepts will be challenged by Latino and Hispano migrants, who too share their views on race and racial dynamics.

Black fragility operates out of the fear that stems from this identity change. Will foundational black American concepts be preserved? Will the concepts be respected? Will they be challenged and will they evolve? Fear is what drives the xenophobic tendencies of black fragility. How does black fragility operate? Black fragility operates through the black American experience under the guise of authority and fear of ethnicities within the orthodoxy of blackness.

Black Fragility in American Activism

By Luis Albert Rosales

Black fragility isn’t as common as one may believe. Black fragility is prevalent in activist communities in the United States and it doesn’t express the general sentiment of most black Americans. Expressed primarily in black American activist discussions of culture, ethnicity, and race, racial-cultural exclusivity complicates relationships within dark-skinned communities in the United States.

Read more here if you want to know: "what is black fragility?".

These activists may define a “black person” differently or have different causes either related to reparations for descendants of slavery or policies that benefit the ‘black’ race as a whole, the latter being more extreme. Yet, many of these Americans are confronted by different perspectives from people of the same or similar race. For example, two immigrants, a Haitian and a South African may have different views on racial dynamics, terminology to refer to various races, and perspectives on social and economic views than a multi-generational black American. As these ideas intersect, they blur the lines on what it means to be ‘black’ in the United States.

Through this mixture, black Americans, as we understand them in the United States, will shift in their views on blackness. Some will rather identify far more with a nationality, an ethnicity, or a general culture. Considering this, those who call themselves “foundational” black Americans consider opposing ethnic views on race as a concern to the progress of their social movements.

Often black American activists will undermine Latino, Criollo, African, and other voices to prioritize black American activism. Black fragility leads to some activists being defensive over alternative views on race, race-mixing, and racial dynamics. For example, some Latinos from the Dominican Republic who may have dark skin may view race as a minor detail. In contrast, some multi-generational black Americans will view race as a primary identifier of one's race and culture. Due to this difference, black Americans would try to exclude dark-skinned Dominicans or undermine their experiences and social or racial views.

In conclusion, as we explore black fragility and how it intersects with racial dynamics outside of American-centric racial views, black American activists have to consider the effects of immigration and how racial views can shift dynamically over time. Black fragility will likely rise in the coming years as American Black communities may have a sense of protectionism as more migrants come to the United States. The understanding of a ‘black’ identity will be challenged in the next few decades as progressive activists must make concessions to alternative perspectives.

Donald Trump Found Guilty In Hush Money Trial But It Will HELP Him!

OPINION - Donald Trump was found guilty of 34 felony charges by a New York jury. This brings us to a close of this drawn-out saga of state manipulation by Alvin Bragg. The Deep Blue state of New York and the deepest blue sectors of New York City have proven how diabolical judicial power can be. Juan Merchan, a Colombian-American judge, has tied the defense through the entire case proving how this kangaroo court is a sham.

As a result of this decision, Democrats are ecstatically celebrating before sentencing has been decided. Traditional larger news companies will use this opportunity to raise their falling ratings; Since Donald Trump got into power, that's been the only way to keep viewers tuned in. However, their celebrations are too early. Stormy Daniels, Michael Cohen, and the like aside, Donald Trump will appeal this decision by the jury. This will open a new saga into the drama as we close in on the 2024 presidential election. Trump supporters have already begun fundraisers to help him fund his campaign and the international community is stunned at the result.

Democrats are behaving as if the United States were a third-world country. Using the judicial system to go after a political opponent—the direct rival to the presidency—is unimaginable. American citizens have to sit back in awe at the immense distortion and favoritism that the judicial system seems to have for Democrats and establishment shills.

After losing ground with Latinos and with their support of Israel, they have but one final move to try and protect their control of the White House. Democrats have become desperate; their despair began long before Donald Trump took office. Considering Bill Cosby and the findings regarding P. Diddy and his relationship with Democrats and other artists, you would think there would be some charges. Why are there no serious charges against Democrats close to Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell? Ponder on these questions while Donald Trump is presented as a martyr. 

Block Out 2024 | Block Mainstream Celebrities Movement

OPINION — #BlockOut2024 is a new movement and trend on TikTok and other social networks by people who want to block mainstream celebrities from participating in events such as the Met Gala. It originally stemmed from some pro-Palestine sentiment but has evolved and joined with other boycott movements, such as Boycotting Disney for alleged LGBT propaganda in children's entertainment within conservative American communities.

The general premise is that these people who attend the Met Gala spend upwards of millions of dollars in total for entry to the event just for that money to be donated to an artistic organization instead of valuable causes. It is an example of how disconnected rich media elites are from common people. Many advocates call on these musicians, artists, and media juggernauts to put their money where their mouth is. They also want them to use their platform to advocate for relative peace overseas. Many advocates are calling for a ceasefire between Israel and Palestine, which will be unlikely, but that passion is what has ignited this angst against the Met Gala. To be fair, most celebrities at the Met Gala are not experts on geo-political affairs. As musicians, models, artists, and filmmakers, you couldn't expect them to be well-versed in something well out of their expertise, however, their ignorance can only be justified if the people weren't so vocal about the issue. 

Regardless of our personal opinions of the affairs in the Middle East, the progressive faction that has called for this movement has a very just position. In my opinion, I think they are absolutely right and conservatives should join them in their protest against the Met Gala. The media elites have been manipulating our movements; they have even been the centerpiece for why conservatives and progressives don't see eye to eye even if it's issues that we agree with. I think blocking celebrities, whether for Palestine or Israel, or because they are anti-Christian, anti-ethical, or just alleged child abusers, is absolutely warranted. 

I've already begun blocking many mainstream creators, as I've already been boycotting most mainstream production films and musicians. I cannot, in good conscience, continue supporting companies, brands, and individuals who are just morally bankrupt. It is extremely tough, most mainstream corporations are just that—very bankrupt, morally. We need a serious shift in power dynamics in this country and I think it's fine for the people to become the media. 

Should Latinos in Florida or California Support Palestine or Latino Issues?

OPINION - On various social networks I've been noticing a trend of Latinos and indigenous Americans overwhelmingly showing their support for Palestine. Many people, especially fanatics, change their profile biography and their profile image into something related to Palestine. Their energy for this movement is thoughtful, but I see a major problem. Many times Latinos get tricked by the mainstream media to reject their own interests, look at their attempt with "Latinx". 

Throughout the years, the Republican party in the United States has called on the American voter to strongly consider who they support. Shall we vote for people that take human trafficking seriously or should we vote for politicians that call other politicians racist for bringing up the topic of human trafficking at the southern border? Democrats have always responded to calls about child abuse and women abuse at the southern border as if they were nonexistent. They don't believe any atrocities are happening in Latin America while lecturing us that it is tantamount for us to get involved in overseas conflicts. Ukraine, or Palestine, they want us to follow into whatever their short attention span is attracted to in the moment. 

Now, to return to the abundance of pro-Palestine Latinos, these Latinos truly disturb me. I suppose there is some good as some Latinos oppose Joe Biden over Palestine. However, the Latinos, who are willing to prioritize bringing awareness to and sharing discussions about the Palestinian conflict (as if society didn't already know), would rather prioritize Palestine than their own Latino country or their home state (for US-born Hispanics). Our issues, as Latinos, range from drug cartel issues to underaged births, the indigenous community, specifically, suffers far more from poverty and human trafficking. Why is there no strong movement at the national level or international level to stop human trafficking and sex trafficking? It's probably because the people who run the media are the ones sheltering the child abusers.

It's no wonder it took this long to take down Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislane Maxwell, and with that, we still don't know much. I don't have confidence in a system that constantly tells me I need to be worried about conflicts overseas when the US standard of living is decreasing compared to the world and people are struggling in the Americas. Other Latinos may want to prioritize Palestine, but I am not one of those Latinos. Latinos should be focused on bettering our community instead of a war about five thousand miles away.

Democrats Are LOSING The Latino Vote!

OPINION — Democrats need to better engage with the Latino community, or else they will lose their vote for good. Latinos overwhelmingly support the Democratic party, but President Joe Biden is tarnishing their reputation. Latinos are increasingly upset with the Democratic Party, and it's leading to some internal conflict.

Lexit is a popular movement in California where many Latinos are coming together after feeling alienated by the atrocious policies promoted by California Governor Gavin Newsom. This movement is gaining influence as the more Catholic traditional Latinos have been very vocal regarding the direction of the Democratic Party. They feel that the Democratic Party no longer represents the interests of blue-collar Latino workers—especially entry-level laborers. The Democratic party has been focusing more on social issues, like promoting transgender ideology in schools and defending black and brown abortions that lead to their depopulation instead of the economic interests of legal Latino migrants.

The economy is also on the minds of many Latino voters. Inflation has slowed after breaking records earlier in Joe Biden's presidency, but Latinos are unhappy with Joe Biden's inflation. Many food truck workers and restauranteurs feel the pinch as all their raw groceries have increased in cost. Bad economic policies and the effects of the COVID-19 lockdowns have created a recipe for financial disaster.

Joe Biden has attempted to distract the public by talking negatively about former President Donald Trump, but nothing Biden has done is redeemable. I believe Joe Biden will have a tough time courting Latinos in the 2024 election. He may be able to offer immigrants amnesty or try to please the progressive faction of the Democratic party, but I do not believe it will be enough. Latinos are upset at the Democratic party; it is only a matter of time until Latinos drop the Democrats.

What Is Latinx? The Linguistic Complexity of 'Latinx': A Battle Between Cultural Tradition vs Cultural Subversion for 'Progress'

What is Latinx? The term "Latinx" has garnered considerable attention, in recent years, especially within progressive circles in the United States. Its advocates argue that it represents a more inclusive and gender-neutral alternative to the traditional "Latino" or "Latina." However, a closer examination of the term reveals a complex linguistic and cultural conundrum, raising questions about its appropriateness and relevance within the Latin American and Hispanic communities.

The Linguistic Conundrum with Epicenity

The primary argument put forth by proponents of "Latinx" is that it rectifies the gender bias inherent in the Spanish language. They contend that the "o" in "Latino" is inherently masculine and excludes non-binary and transgender individuals. However, this argument overlooks a fundamental linguistic concept known as epicenity, which allows Spanish nouns to adapt their gender based on context.

Epicenity, a crucial concept in Spanish linguistics, allows nouns to acquire masculine and feminine connotations depending on the context. For instance, the word "persona," which may appear feminine, can take on a masculine form, "el persona," when referring to a male individual. In essence, "Latino" already encompasses all Latin American people, irrespective of gender.

The Unexplored Neutralization Of Other Spanish Words

While proponents of "Latinx" emphasize the need for gender-neutral language, they have not considered the existence of Spanish terms such as "genero" (gender) and "no-binario" (non-binary). These words inherently end with "o" due to the gendered nature of the Spanish language, yet the proponents have not promoted the use of "generx" or "no-binarx." This inconsistency raises questions about the logical coherence of their argument.

How Do You Pronounce Latinx?

One particularly challenging aspect of "Latinx" is its pronunciation and practical usage within the Spanish language. How does one pronounce "Latinx" in Spanish, and how can it be used naturally in a sentence when referring to a specific individual? These questions remain unanswered, highlighting the impracticality of imposing non-binary language within a language structured around binary gender distinctions.

Progressive Elitism and Cultural Protectionism

The paradox arises when examining the progressive ideals behind promotions of "Latinx." Progressives advocate for cultural sensitivity and the respect of minority cultures. However, pushing a term that rejects the linguistic structure of the Latin American and, especially,  Hispanic communities seems contradictory. It raises the question of whether progressive Democrats truly speak for the Latino community and the skepticism on how valuable their information is regarding Latino culture.

In their pursuit of inclusivity and gender neutrality, the term "Latinx" has been touted as a solution. However, a deeper analysis reveals its failure to align with the linguistic intricacies of the Spanish language or the cultural nuances of the Latin American and Hispanic communities. While promoting inclusivity is a noble endeavor, it is essential to consider the linguistic and cultural contexts in which these changes are proposed. In the case of "Latinx," apparently the term's proponents may need to reevaluate their approach to ensure that it genuinely respects and reflects the diverse cultures it seeks to represent.

In conclusion to these observations, we have provided a proper 21st-century definition for Latinx.

Ron DeSantis Is NOT Running For President in 2024

There has been plenty of speculation coming from the media that Ron DeSantis will be running for President in 2024 to challenge the possible return of Donald Trump in the Republican Primaries. News organizations that has been touting the idea include MSNBC, CNN and Fox News. Is it too early to call?

It isn't too early to call on this issue because it just simply is not going to happen. Ron DeSantis has openly expressed that he will be running for reelection to keep his seat as the Governor of Florida. Protecting the freedoms of Floridians, according to him, is his top priority in this state. According to polls, and the viewpoints of many Floridians, Ron DeSantis is doing quite a fair job. Gaining in support from Latino communities in South and Central Florida, there is a very strong chance that he will succeed in his reelection bid this year in 2022. With the assumption that he will succeed, that will destroy any chance that he would run in 2024 for US President. 

Ron DeSantis has also not expressed any support in the idea that he will be running in 2024 for US President, including not even running as a Vice President under a different candidate. There is also speculation that he may run under Donald Trump to be his Vice President, again it is just speculation without evidence. Ron DeSantis is likely going to continue riding out his fair approval ratings in the state to promote a new kind of American Populist Conservatism that is attracting many centrists who feel as if the current Democrat Party has lost its way.

The speculation from the media is more about driving some division in the Republican party while also padding their advertisement earnings and views for their articles or news stories. Speculation is a good thing, at times, however, fabricating the idea out of thin air doesn't serve a good purpose to the American people. This doesn't mean that Ron DeSantis cannot be a great President, instead, this means that Ron DeSantis may be planning for something like that in the future after he completes his second term as the Governor of the great State of Florida.

Will Donald Trump Run For President In 2024?

OPINION - Many people are anticipating and talking about the possibility that Donald Trump may be running for President in 2024 to finalize his 2-terms as the leader of the free world. Will Trump run in 2024?

Donald Trump during the 2020 election was hit with a major loss after allegedly many Americans voted in Joe Biden even after a scandal that had broken out regarding Biden's son and his use of illicit drugs before the election, which Hunter Biden has admitted to after the election. Americans across the country were kept from many different truths regarding the Biden family thanks to some major news network's bias against Donald Trump. Trump wasn't accepting of the results of the election and has publicly rejected the results. Social networking sites, like Facebook and Twitter, hammered down against Donald Trump after the January 6th protest where many trump supporters "stormed the capitol", which Trump did not support but instead called for peaceful protests. These social media sites banned him while he was still in office, essentially keeping the general public hidden from important information given by the President on their networks. Donald Trump had responded to being "deplatformed" by creating his own blog where he can share his current views on political matters. 

Although Donald Trump has not publicly stated that he will run for President on his network, it's for certain that he will be a very active voice in the Republican Party for years to come, as he remains a key leader for the dominant faction of the GOP. Liz Cheney and other Republicans have been in the hot seat due to rejecting Trump's narrative that he won the election and one by one they are losing influence in the party by doing so. Trump continues to assert his position in the Republican Party as he has been endorsing various politicians who, he believes, serves the American people and their interests. 

Trump, a populist Republican, is likely to run again in 2024, but at this point, he has been primarily focusing on the 2022 Midterm elections, where some believe Republicans will gain more seats due to a change in the census where Republican states have gained more seats than Democrat states due to population changes. Trump is very poised to run again in 2024, yet time will tell if he does. There are very strong indications that he will run again, but if he does run again it will be very unlikely that Mike Pence will be his running mate as Vice President of the United States. Trump may be expected to announce his run during campaigns for Republicans who plan to run in the 2022 midterm elections.

What do you think about the future of his possible candidacy?

Black Lives Matter Isn't About Social Justice

OPINION - Black Lives Matter, as a movement, has been notorious for claiming to be the fighters for social justice in the black community, however, these groups are demanding far more than what they deserve, while also bringing havoc to some communities across this great nation.

Black Lives Matter has been around protesting for almost a decade already. There are numerous examples from the Michael Brown incident to the recent George Floyd riots. It stemmed from accusations of police brutality where individuals, who may have done criminal activity in the past, were, in some people's eyes, mistreated by law enforcement. In some of these cases, the one they protested for ended up being killed at the hands of police officers. These individual cases are then shared throughout social media before the truth comes to the public, and protests ignite where some of them have ended in destruction and death. Quickly, Latinos, and Hispanics, with other Americans take to the streets in what they call "solidarity".

Black Lives Matter, the movement, is very impulsive with their opposition. Their calls for justice are well-intentioned but surrounded by rhetoric that makes it seem as if the police are the problem. Police and authority figures who promote unjust laws that criminalize everyday actions, yes, that's very much a problem; That is only one place where I can sympathize with Black Lives Matter. Yet the destruction that has brought Portland, Oregon to its knees is a shining example - a bright example - of "flaming passion" that I cannot support. Looking at Black Lives Matter's reign of destruction throughout the country, from my perspective here in Florida, shows me that the real threat to our society and minorities isn't the police, even though they do need improvement, it is Black Lives Matter itself and racial organizations that reject American values - libertarian values.

Many minority businesses and minority communities have been affected by Black Lives Matter violence. Although they claim to fight for these communities, mostly Black communities, they ultimately destroy the chances that people had to improve themselves locally regardless of their race, religion, or ethnicity. The Black Lives Matter organization itself has been very vocal about its opposition to American values and focuses on fighting "systemic racism" with what I perceive as more racism. They don't focus on improving the economic and social liberty of minorities as a whole. The calls to defund the police are admirable, but Black Lives Matter does not want that wealth to return to the pockets of hard-working citizens, instead, they prefer more welfare for failed social programs that hurt minority communities. Perhaps, they may want that money to make victims out of habitual violent criminals who have served as a liability not only to their communities but the country.

There's a lot to be said about improving policing in America. Yet, the riots throughout the country are not justified. Black Lives Matter, including the general community, and the organization, seem very opposed to the ideals that made this country great. They seem to be opposed to the nuclear family, and free speech - they are opposed to liberty. Black Lives Matter isn't about social justice; Black Lives Matter is about envy, jealousy, and victimization.

Mars Will Unify America

OPINION - With the onslaught of political unrest, and uprisings from questionable "social justice" groups, the American dream seems quite bleak. It could be cliche to call it a nightmare but America is 'woke', woke to an ideology destroying the foundations of what made this country great. America is in an interesting position as it tries to battle the scars of its former self and trying to regain the strength to find common ground for a greater cause, the colonization of Mars.

America is united in many ways and broken in others. If you were only to go based on the current media climate where pundits and commentators share their opinions of this country you would think that this country is collapsing and that there is no hope for the future of free speech, classical liberalism, and freedom. If you were to listen to social justice activists you would think this country is racist and fascist, but if you were to seriously look at the situation you would realize things aren't so bad and there is a light at the end of this tunnel; This country is merely demoralized. It has been a tough 2020 for the entire globe and everyone is at a tipping point but we may have something to look forward to for the next decade.

The space industry has made a multitude of advancements for the past decade, companies in the US such as SpaceX, Virgin Galactic, and more have made great strides in reusable space rocketry and making space travel economical. These advancements and cost-cutting ventures have sparked a new curiosity in the American people, a curiosity similar to that of the Space Race to the Moon. Donald Trump has also openly expressed his support for further US investment in space-related matters as he has formed the United States Space Force which will handle many military satellites and other related operations. Americans across the country feel that social justice is essential, and it is important to remove regulations and to lower taxes so that individuals are not harassed by public authorities, but there is a burning passion for uniting to explore the cosmos that we cannot ignore. Mars is our best bet not only for uniting Americans behind a grand cause but also to ensure the expansion of life support systems to combat further diseases that may plague Earthlings and Martians alike. 

Mars has been in the eye of the American people since the days of the American flag being planted on the moon. Yet, for us terrestrials who have no daredevil tastes, many of us can do our part by starting businesses or organizations that can help the cause of space colonization. Anyone can do it from being a trucker that brings the goods that astrophysicists need, a teacher to teach the next astronaut, or the miner getting the essential metals for the world, its a united effort that we all can get behind, but it must be a passionate effort; One that we all must strive for. It will stimulate the economy and help Americans get back to work, not in "non-essential industries" but in industries that will stand the test of time! It isn't just enough to say you want to support space colonization, you have to actively want to pursue this venture within our lifetime.

Let's bring America together for this grand cause, a righteous cause for all of humanity, where America will land the first human on Mars - where humanity lands the first American on Mars!

Is Antifa A Terrorist Organization?

(OPINION) - There is no question that many of our readers know who the Antifa are, and there's a lot of people suggesting that we should classify their group as a terrorist organization. In many ways, I can support that sentiment, and in others, it would be tough to classify them as such.

There are a lot of things to consider when characterizing a group as a terrorist organization. Naturally, just by the general definition of terrorism and the FBI's description of domestic terrorism, we can see a great deal of violence coming from Antifa groups against people who peacefully support the United States President, Donald Trump, and these attacks are inspired by political motives. These attacks include throwing "milkshakes" at people, throwing cement at commuters, and outright violent confrontations with other protesters where weapons such as hammers, crowbars and other blunt objects are used. For some Antifa members, the political motive is due to having a "white nationalist" president and opposing him, others are more directly opposed to our current economic system as they support blatant anti-capitalist values. Of course, these attacks on people are not justified but are they uniform or are they organized?

We can view some of their attacks, where they unjustly attacked people, as an act of domestic terrorism, not extreme violent terrorism that has led to mass murder but politically-inspired assaults. Generally speaking, most individuals who claim they are Antifa are just riding the bandwagon. This doesn't mean their concerns are not just but it does suggest that they are easily influenced by organized Antifa rhetoric. Not every single member of the Antifa participate in these attacks, but many within their ranks condone these attacks. The 'organized' Antifa members or those who allegedly may have gained their funds from rich donors are the primary suspects for the violence and this has naturally created a wedge between the moderate left and far-left, even within the Democratic Party. Most Antifa groups tend to not be organized; in fact, many are locally grown communities and they tend to be "leaderless" even though they do have public speakers who represent said local Antifa groups.

These leaderless groups are not classified as a registered organization, and if the US Federal authorities were to try and declare them as such, they may inadvertently place innocent Antifa protesters in the crosshairs of a nasty political war. It would be tough to classify them as a terrorist organization with no leader and no real chain of command. This doesn't suggest that they can't be arrested but it's a slippery slope to classify them all as a domestic terrorist threat, and if we do classify them as such their ranks will grow as they continue to spread misinformation through social media sites.

There is no question that Antifa engages in terrorist actions, and so far they have not directly resulted in mass murder as a collective but I think it's important to monitor the groups further as a possible Homegrown Violent Extremist (HVE) threat. I do consider them to be far-left wing terrorists, however, we must be certain to separate the militant Antifa group from the peaceful protesters who oppose Donald Trump. We need to be certain of whom we are classifying and if we target them all, this will lead to a far worse unintended consequence.

Anarchism Is Not 'Extreme'

OPINION - Anarchism isn't the 'extreme', it is the natural 'order' of the world. What is extreme is the millenniums of abuse by governments to try and submit the will of the people to its own doctrines or rules of what is 'moral' for society.

Anarchism has had a very negative connotation especially when it comes to statist Americans defining them within in the United States. The typical anarchist in the eyes of authority is just a group of violent individuals who want to seek the destruction of common way of life, even though the vast majority of anarchists are actually community-oriented individuals working together to better each other's lives including their own. Anarchism and chaos go hand-in-hand according to conservatives and Democrat liberals that dominate our two-party system yet its this very two-party system that has led to major disasters across the globe. They both blame the anti-war crowd for their own failures, or they point the blame at the opposing party without taking any responsibility for the violence they promoted. Who are truly the violent ones? The violent ones have been consistently those who advocate for violence against peaceful people, no matter if you're on the left or the right, the violence has been here for centuries and it has continued in many of our communities whether white, black, or Latino (and for others).

Anarchism is no more extreme than you telling your neighbor that you don't wish to be oppressed by their political views, naturally, your neighbor won't care because at the end of the day the democracy or the constitutional republic that we are in, are filled with people who do not want to protect your rights, and will ultimately not care about your personal individual feelings of oppression by the system that they defined, defend and prop up. That very system is the authority, or the force, that comes in with armoured personnel with armoured vehicles ready to turn on the hoses and force the community away from the protests they justly formed. Again, they force this action against the public who has very just concerns. Why is nonviolence an extreme for one group, but the system can exhibit all forms of censorship and violence, and yet do not get the same treatment for the rhetoric and the actions they actually have committed? Why is anarchism generally an 'extremist' ideology and statism is not?

It's unjustified to claim Anarchism is extremist in most cases, unless you truly believe living peacefully and nonviolently without fear of government coercion is extreme in our society. I don't believe it is extreme, we were all born free, it was a 'society' that pushed their thoughts and bigotry onto the individual, it wasn't the individualist anarchist.

The 'ANTIFA' Are Against Free Speech

OPINION - The Anti-Fascists, or ANTIFA, are notorious for being against free speech while claiming to be champions of decentralized democracy and liberty.

I've noticed over the years researching the ANTIFA movement, and their "decentralized" mobilization of violent attacks against opposing protestors and journalists, that they truly are against free speech. I'm not one to defend racists or ethnicists and sexists but given the circumstances and looking at this issue from a purely free speech perspective, the ANTIFA movement are adamant in shutting down opposing views, with unjustified violence. Since I am Latino with mixed blood thanks to my ancestors, and I am one who also supports the LGBTQ community, I feel as if there is a need for me to be vocal about how dangerous the ANTIFA are when they demand individuals to be deplatformed simply because they disagree with someone else. The ANTIFA don't really care about minorities and lots of times its primarily white ANTIFA members who try to speak for minorities and when a minority speaks out against their rhetoric, they (ANTIFA) smear any individual and threaten them with violence, even if they are minorities. It's pretty sickening to say the least, especially when they believe they speak for me and the Latino community, among other communities.

I am against racism, however, I am not against individuals speaking freely. If an individual wants to carry themselves as a racist then so be it, it doesn't have any effect on me until that individual gets into a seat of power where they can use their racism to attack minorities or races and ethnicities that are not of their own. This is where I and the ANTIFA don't see eye to eye, it's purely a free speech issue. I'm first and foremost not afraid to speak out but I know that eventually when ANTIFA members see this they will likely demand tech giants to deplatform me from various social networks for calling them out.

The ANTIFA are not arbiters of truth, and for certain they would be the first to demand the government to use its power to steal from and tax blacks and Latinos because of their utopian world view simply because of a disagreement. As a hyper-capitalist, the ANTIFA movement is just a band of unsuccessful people blaming the world and the "system" for their own lack of ambition. I am certain that the ANTIFA will continue attacking free speech activists and will eventually oppose me as well. The ANTIFA do not care about the rights or the freedoms of individuals, they will smear white people and belittle Latinos and blacks who oppose their views. They cannot be trusted at the end of the day.