Whether it’s just or fair, “-isms” are ideologies held by the individual. Racism and Sexism are prominent examples of -isms that have hindered progress in our nation. To disallow a “that’s just how things are” state of the nation, we must assert this: there is no right or wrong belief, just society evolving side by side, and engaging in realistic activism.

Reaffirming this core belief proves, the lack of understanding that right and wrong are opinion-based, is why there is a strain between Right-wing conservatives and Left-wing progressives. 

Hot Take: Progress is about evolution, Liberal for liberating out of oppression. To be a Traditional Republican is safe—to be an extremist, I hope that is not what the party orients their party around . . . 

Regardless, how politics is conducted is not simply a blue v. red issue. If American politics, in its foundation, declared independence from being governed, how is the current state of politics blurring the line between individual declaration and infringement on someone’s rights?

Despite a lack of renouncing -isms in extreme, modern politicians have instilled hope in me that our modernizing government aims to band together as much as possible. Unfortunately, whether we like it or not, “-isms” are still ideologies held by persons as facts of life.

Take Eugenics for example. Eugenics was taught to me as a Nazi ideology. In actuality, Eugenics simply argues, “Anglo-Saxon/white people are the superior race.” In practice, people wielded Eugenics to pillage and colonize Africa, in addition to advancing antisemitism during WWII.

You may view discourse around Eugenics as an archaic topic, however, it is evident in modern immigration laws, the church’s stance against same sex rights, and women’s health care regulation; these all originate from a neo-chosen people ideology.

‘neo’ simply means the revival of an original concept or belief. Even neo-Nazis do not inherently view themselves as present-day Germanic National-Socialists; however, the subculture is being streamlined from generation to generation since fascism’s inception nearly a century ago.

To better understand ‘political revivals,’ I will highlight acclaimed blues musician, author, and activist Daryl Davis’. Daryl Davis’ work explores lingering Ku Klux Klan beliefs, arguably demonstrating there is a direct link between replacement conspiracies and cultural polarization.

In going around the country to sit with Klans members, he did not set out to convert them, he wanted to understand ‘How can you hate me when you don’t even know me?’ With the rise of Trump he expanded, “When was ‘again?’ Was it back when I was drinking from a separate water fountain? Was it when I couldn’t eat in that restaurant over there?… ‘Make America Great Again’ – before I had equality?”

Daryl Davis’ initiated the mission to replace the hate. Davis exposed that changing the system requires “[Keeping] in mind, when two enemies are talking, they’re not fighting, they’re talking. . . It’s when the talking ceases that the ground becomes fertile for violence” (Daryl Davis TEDTalk, 18:32-18:39).

Postmodernism is no longer upon us. In our post-postmodernism, compromise is to give-and-take. This expanded scope is about inclusion, not one’s capacity to include. If no one is willing to compromise, maybe this is why we end up fighting to take up space. 

Bottom line– street law, civil engagement, and activism are mutual efforts. We cannot fixate on -isms, individual discourse, and opinion-based political preference. Yes, the government must abandon ‘composite-ism’ and leverage consensus. 

There can be no melting pot. Americans can no longer allow a push against the evolving majority. 

To campaign for -isms’ decline into obscurity, the power of your tongue and wield of your action can create a future where progress forces these attitudes into the margins—the majority, into the center.This center is Social Justice Reform. This sociological structure is the people’s issue, not “the publics” or a marginalized issue. This understanding is a nonpartisan one that makes bipartisanship nonpolarizing.