It seems so ironic that the United States, a proud country with tons of “swagger” and one which describes itself, in its own national anthem no less, as “the land of the free and the home of the brave” (Key, 1814) has gradually become alarmingly skittish in response to just about everything. 
Perhaps this collective anxiety began with the lack of a decisive “win” to end the war in Vietnam or maybe it was the jarring effects of 9/11 that shook the nation’s confidence. Another possible explanation is, however, a bit more disturbing despite its plausibility. For at least two decades the United States Census Bureau and other researchers have widely shared a history-making prediction, that so-called “white” Americans will become a minority in this country, probably before we enter the second half of the 21st century (Frey, 2018). When this seemingly innocuous statistic is combined with the rise of black, brown, and Asian people in the worlds of media, business, and politics and culminated, in 2008 by the election of Barack Obama, the first African-American POTUS, some, especially in several very specific segments of “white America”, seem to have begun “freaking out” in ways that are becoming increasingly bizarre.
Much of the hysteria seems to be connected with the perceived loss of opportunities, both economic and otherwise. Affirmative Action has long been vilified because of the largely irrational fear that “deserving” whites will lose their “rightful places” within corporations and universities in favor of “unqualified” people of color. It always seems strange to me, however, that opponents of Affirmative Action seem to assume that it is a forgone conclusion that even the most qualified black person is automatically inferior, even to white people who are at the bottom of whatever scale of measurement is being applied (education, experience, or even integrity). The only exceptions to this dubious “rule” are within the fields of musical entertainment and sports. However, based upon my own firsthand experience with Affirmative Action during a twenty-six-year career in the insurance industry, I would counter that it is actually only the decidedly mediocre white workers who are “losing” as a result of Affirmative Action. Given the immense pressure that is placed upon management to constantly meet profitability and other quality-related measures, no one in their right mind would fill the vacancies within their teams with unqualified “diversity” candidates. In fact, at least in the company for which I worked, the opposite seemed to be true – minority hires were generally unbelievably (some might argue overly) qualified, only being hired if they could significantly outpace their white counterparts in every conceivable measure.
The unwarranted panic among some whites also seems to have been fueled by the paranoid and largely erroneous belief that marauding hordes of Mexican and Central American immigrants are streaming toward our southern border in droves, ready to strip U.S. citizens of their jobs and decimate the U. S. economy when they descend upon our generous welfare programs like a swarm of hungry locusts. Spurred on by President Trump’s scare tactics and the histrionics of right-wing pundits such as Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh, and combined with a woeful level of ignorance about what the word socialism actually means, the terrified masses that comprise Trump’s ever-loyal base somehow believe that the mere act of ensuring that everyone has access to quality healthcare and other basic necessities is going to, at best, result in widespread, tax-induced poverty for the white working-class, and, at worst, plunge the U.S. into full blown communism and the obliteration of human rights on levels that rival China, North Korea, and the former Soviet Union.
Finally, just to make sure there is sufficient fuel to keep this fire of anger, hate, suspicion, and fear from extinguishing itself any time soon, we cannot forget to throw in a dash of 2nd Amendment rights activists. Recently, I was watching a local news report about a pro-gun rally held at the capitol, in Springfield, Illinois (Buchman, 2019) I experienced my own “panic attack” as I listened to these folks loudly proclaim that gun ownership was their “God given right” (I must have been absent the day that they covered that particular gem in Sunday School) and that if asked to give up their guns they “would not comply.” When one of the main speakers proposed to the reverberating cheers of the large crowd that “downstate Illinois should separate itself from Chicago”, I actually shuddered, feeling more threatened in that moment by the fanaticism of my fellow Illinoisans that I ever have by terror groups like ISIS.
I understand that change can be scary, and that the fabric of America is being altered in ways that many could never have imagined even as recently as thirty years ago. What I find equally curious and distressing, however, is the mentality that the advance of one group can only be achieved through the oppression of another. How did our society come to create this myth that there is only so much wealth and prosperity to go around and if I am to win then someone else must lose?
When I was a child, one of my favorite stories was a book called Stone Soup 
in which what begins as only a pot of boiling water with a stone at the bottom, evolves into a delicious and nourishing delight as one-by-one neighbors contribute whatever meager ingredients they have (McGovern, 1968). In today’s climate I wouldn’t be surprised if the right called for Stone Soup to be banned from America’s schools for its dangerous promotion of “socialism.”
The truth, however, is that when liberals suggest programs such as Medicare for all and generous food assistance programs for children, it doesn’t mean that we condone laziness and irresponsibility. It is simply that we believe that if people are sick or hungry, they aren’t going to be able to contribute much of anything to society and in their despair, may turn to drugs and crime which negatively impacts everyone in the long-run. In addition, it is astounding to me that while the U. S. likes to boast about its status as a “Christian nation”, there seem to be significant segments of our population that support the idea of “punishing” the poor for their poverty.
Conservatives often make the counterargument that the Christian charge to feed the hungry and care for the sick should be accomplished through contributions to private charities and not through tax-funded social support systems since such a strategy would give government “too much control” over the lives of citizens and would automatically result in the formation of autocratic dictatorships and complete economic meltdown. Private charities are great and many of them do wonderful work, but others are poorly run and do not result in the necessary aid being applied where it is needed most. Add to that the sorry fact that a fairly significant number of Americans are stingy and selfish, preferring to spend $1000 on a new smart phone every few years rather than give to poor people whose poverty “is their own fault” and the suggestion that private charities can help the growing needs of the poor is completely ludicrous.
“Don’t let us become like Venezuela!” is the current conservative rallying cry. However, it is unclear to me why this particular chain of events is so widely regarded as the inevitable outcome to suggesting that government take some role in ensuring that the most vulnerable among us are protected. The theory, as far as I can decipher, is that poor people who become reliant on generous social programs would be seduced into supporting an oppressive dictator if they believe that said dictator will continue to reward them with “free stuff” and that this erosion of work ethic will destroy capitalism and lead to the obliteration of democracy. While I suppose that such a scenario is possible, is it likely? Wouldn’t it also be possible that Americans, freed from financial worries triggered by non-existent access to affordable health care and the crushing burden of student loan debt would become more civically engaged, demanding greater accountability from their government officials?
We have touted the virtues of American ingenuity, strength, and persistence for generations. George Washington and his rag tag Continental Army 
successfully staved off the tyranny of King George III and the full force of the powerful British Empire. Why then do conservatives believe that efforts to ensure that all Americans have fair access to basic necessities would somehow render modern day Americans powerless to defend ourselves against the potential of power-grabbing political dictators?
I think we, as a nation, should soundly reject the notion that prosperity is a zero-sum game and that a social safety net that seeks to reduce the effects hunger, homelessness, mental illness, and substance abuse will end in a total collapse of not only our economy but also our freedom and way of life. Is there a fraction of society that might take advantage of the social safety net? Of course. Is that a reason to deny help to others who truly need it? I would argue, “No!” Relieving poor people of some of the stresses of poverty in the short term will undoubtedly allow a majority of them to add their contributions to the overall success of America. Rather that worrying about whether our “slice of the American pie” 
will shrink as a result of inviting more people to the table, why not make it easier for everyone to contribute whatever they have in order to bake a bigger one?
Works Cited
Buchman, C. (2019, March 27). Pro-gun advocates march to Capitol for annual lobby day. Peoria Journal Star. Retrieved March 31, 2019, from https://www.pjstar.com/news/20190327/pro-gun-advocates-march-to-capitol-for-annual-lobby-day
Frey, W. H. (2018, March 14). The US will become “minority white” in 2045, Census projects. Retrieved from Brookings Institute Website: https://www.brookings.edu/blog/the-avenue/2018/03/14/the-us-will-become-minority-white-in-2045-census-projects/
Key, F. S. (1814). The Star Spangled Banner. Baltimore, Maryland.
McGovern, A. (1968). Stone Soup. New York: Scholastic Inc.
quietlyradical 