WHY IS META HATING ON DESKTOPS: WTF NO APPS FOR THREADS AND INSTAGRAM

 

WHY IS META HATING ON DESKTOPS: WTF NO APPS FOR THREADS AND INSTAGRAM 

In a world where technology is constantly evolving, the battle between desktops and cell phones has been raging on for years. But why has Meta, formerly known as Facebook, abandoned the desktop market? And why is Zuke, the CEO of Meta, hating on old people? Let's dive in and find out.

Firstly, let's address the elephant in the room - why has Meta turned its back on desktops? Well, it's simple really. They've realized that people are spending more time on their cell phones than they are on their desktops. It's just a matter of convenience. You can take your cell phone with you everywhere you go, whereas a desktop is stationary. It's like comparing a turtle to a cheetah - sure, the turtle may be reliable and sturdy, but the cheetah is faster and more agile. And in today's fast-paced world, speed and agility are everything.

But what about those who still prefer to use desktops? Well, tough luck. Meta doesn't care about you anymore. They've moved on to bigger and better things, like virtual reality and augmented reality. It's like they've broken up with desktops and moved on to a younger, hotter model. So if you're still clinging onto your old desktop like it's a life raft in a sea of cell phones, it's time to let go.

Now onto Zuke. Why is he hating on old people? Is it because they still use desktops? Is it because they don't understand how to use cell phones? The truth is, Zuke isn't actually hating on old people - he's just trying to appeal to a younger demographic. By making Meta more mobile-friendly and focusing on newer technologies, he's hoping to attract a younger audience. It's like when your dad tries to use slang to sound cool - it may be cringe-worthy, but he's just trying to fit in.

But let's not forget about the older generation. They may not be as tech-savvy as their younger counterparts, but they still deserve respect. After all, they're the ones who paved the way for all the technology we have today. So let's not leave them behind in this race to be the most mobile-friendly. Let's help them out and show them the wonders of cell phones. Who knows, maybe they'll even start using emojis.

In conclusion, the battle between desktops and cell phones may never end. But one thing is for sure - Meta has abandoned the desktop market and is focusing on newer technologies. And while Zuke may not be hating on old people, he's just trying to appeal to a younger audience. So let's embrace the change and move forward into this mobile-friendly world. And who knows, maybe one day we'll all be using virtual reality headsets instead of cell phones. But until then, let's not forget about the trusty old desktop. After all, it's been there for us through thick and thin (and countless hours of procrastination).

Introducing Threads: A New Way to Share With Text | Meta https://about.fb.com/news/2023/07/introducing-threads-new-app-text-sharing/ 

CAN AMERICA SURVIVE ANOTHER TERM OF THIS COURT? WE'RE NOT SO SURE

 

CAN AMERICA SURVIVE ANOTHER TERM OF THIS COURT? WE'RE NOT SO SURE

Ladies and gentlemen, buckle up because American democracy is in for a wild ride. The question on everyone's mind is: can America stand another Supreme Court term? Well, let's take a look at the changes made by the court since Trump appointed three conservative justices and see if we can come up with an answer.

First of all, let's just say that the Supreme Court has been busier than a one-legged man in a butt-kicking contest. They've taken on cases that range from LGBTQ+ rights to abortion to immigration. And let's not forget about the recent confirmation of Amy Coney Barrett, which has brought the total number of conservative justices to six.

Now, some people might argue that having a conservative majority on the court is a good thing. After all, they're just interpreting the Constitution, right? Wrong. These justices have been making decisions that would make even Judge Judy raise an eyebrow.

For example, they recently ruled that LGBTQ+ people can be fired from their jobs just for being who they are. And let's not forget about their decision to uphold a Louisiana law that would have severely restricted access to abortion. These decisions are not only harmful to marginalized communities but also a direct attack on our democracy.

So, can America stand another Supreme Court term? Honestly, it's hard to say. But one thing is for sure: something needs to change. Here are a few ideas:

1. Expand the court: This might sound radical, but it's been done before. In fact, the number of justices on the Supreme Court has changed several times throughout history. By adding more justices, we can create a more balanced court that reflects the diversity of our country.

2. Term limits: Justices currently serve for life, which means that their decisions can have an impact on our country for decades. By implementing term limits, we can ensure that new voices and perspectives are brought to the court on a regular basis.

3. Get involved: We can't just sit back and wait for the Supreme Court to make decisions that affect our lives. We need to get involved in our communities, support organizations that fight for justice, and vote in every election.

In conclusion, the damage done to American democracy by the current Supreme Court cannot be ignored. But we still have hope. By taking action and demanding change, we can create a more just and equitable society for all. And who knows, maybe one day we'll look back on this time and laugh at how crazy things were. Or maybe we'll just cry. Either way, let's keep fighting.

A look at Supreme Court term that ended affirmative action, debt relief https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2023/07/10/stats-supreme-court-student-debt-relief-takeways/70378410007/ 

THE DEFT DIVE

Some of the most controversial cases of the 6-3 Roberts court are:

• - **Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization (2022)**: The court overturned **Roe v. Wade (1973)** and **Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992)**, which had established a constitutional right to abortion and prohibited states from imposing an undue burden on women seeking to terminate their pregnancies. The court upheld a Mississippi law that banned abortions after 15 weeks of gestation, except in cases of medical emergency or severe fetal abnormality, finding that the state had a compelling interest in protecting fetal life and that the law did not impose an undue burden on women¹.
• - **Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College (2023)**: The court overturned **Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978)** and its progeny, which had allowed colleges and universities to use race as one factor among many in their admissions policies to promote diversity and remedy past discrimination. The court struck down Harvard's holistic consideration of race as part of an applicant's background, holding that it violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and that any use of race in admissions was subject to strict scrutiny¹.
• - **Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee (2021)**: The court upheld two Arizona voting laws that restricted ballot collection and invalidated ballots cast in the wrong precinct, rejecting claims that they violated Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act and discriminated against minority voters. The court adopted a narrow interpretation of Section 2, finding that it required plaintiffs to show that a voting rule caused a substantial disparity in opportunities for minority voters, and that other factors, such as the state's interest in preventing fraud, could justify such rules².
• - **Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. Bonta (2021)**: The court struck down a California law that required nonprofit organizations to disclose their major donors to the state attorney general, finding that it violated the First Amendment right to freedom of association. The court applied exacting scrutiny to the law, finding that it imposed a widespread burden on donors' privacy rights and chilled their participation in expressive activities, and that the state had failed to show a sufficiently important interest or a narrow tailoring of the law².
• - **Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid (2021)**: The court ruled that a California regulation that granted union organizers access to agricultural employers' property for up to three hours per day, 120 days per year, amounted to a taking of private property without just compensation under the Fifth Amendment. The court rejected the argument that the regulation was merely a limitation on the right to exclude others from one's property, and held that it created a permanent physical occupation that triggered a per se rule requiring compensation².

These cases are controversial because they reflect a sharp right turn by the court on issues such as abortion rights, affirmative action, voting rights, campaign finance, and property rights. They also show the influence of Trump's appointees, who have joined forces with the other conservative justices to form a solid majority that often overrides the dissenting views of the liberal justices¹². Some critics have argued that these rulings undermine democracy, civil rights, and social justice, while some supporters have praised them for protecting constitutional freedoms, state sovereignty, and public safety¹².

I hope this helps you understand some of the most controversial cases of the 6-3 Roberts court. If you want to learn more, you can follow these links:

Bing, 7/10/2023

(1) The Roberts Court Isn’t Getting More Moderate. https://washingtonmonthly.com/2023/07/10/the-roberts-court-isnt-getting-more-moderate/.

(2) How John Roberts exhibited his power in the Supreme Court ... - The Hill. https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4085653-how-john-roberts-exhibited-his-power-in-the-supreme-courts-biggest-decisions/.

(3) Roberts Court - Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roberts_Court.

The major 6-3 decisions of the Supreme Court since Trump's appointees. Here are some of the cases that have been decided by a 6-3 conservative majority:

• - **Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee**: The court upheld two Arizona voting laws that restrict ballot collection and invalidate ballots cast in the wrong precinct, rejecting claims that they violated the Voting Rights Act and discriminated against minority voters¹².
• - **Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. Bonta**: The court struck down a California law that required nonprofit organizations to disclose their major donors to the state attorney general, finding that it violated the First Amendment right to freedom of association¹².
• - **Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid**: The court ruled that a California regulation that granted union organizers access to agricultural employers' property for up to three hours per day, 120 days per year, amounted to a taking of private property without just compensation under the Fifth Amendment¹².
• - **Jones v. Mississippi**: The court upheld the sentence of life without parole for a juvenile offender who was convicted of murder when he was 15 years old, holding that the Eighth Amendment does not require a finding of permanent incorrigibility before imposing such a sentence².
• - **Fulton v. City of Philadelphia**: The court sided with a Catholic foster care agency that refused to work with same-sex couples as potential foster parents, ruling that the city of Philadelphia violated the agency's free exercise of religion by terminating its contract².

These decisions are controversial because they reflect a sharp right turn by the court on issues such as voting rights, campaign finance, property rights, criminal justice and religious liberty. They also show the influence of Trump's appointees, who have joined forces with the other conservative justices to form a solid majority that often overrides the dissenting views of the liberal justices¹². Some critics have argued that these rulings undermine democracy, civil rights and social justice, while some supporters have praised them for protecting constitutional freedoms, state sovereignty and public safety¹².

Bing, 7/10/2023

(1) Major 6-3 rulings foreshadow a sharper Supreme Court right turn - CNN. https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/01/politics/supreme-court-6-3-conservative-liberal/index.html.

(2) Trump's appointees are turning the Supreme Court to the right with .... https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/26/politics/trump-kavanaugh-gorsuch-barrett-supreme-court/index.html.

(3) Trump’s legacy is now the Supreme Court - POLITICO. https://www.politico.com/news/2020/09/26/trump-legacy-supreme-court-422058.

(4) Trump’s judges will call the shots for years to come. The judicial .... https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/oct/25/trump-judges-supreme-court-justices-judiciary.

(5) June 30, 2023 SCOTUS blocks Biden's student loan plan and limits ... - CNN. https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/supreme-court-decisions-06-30-23/index.html.

VULTURE PHILANTHROPY: BILLIONAIRES BUYING DEMOCRACY FOR PROFIT

 

VULTURE PHILANTHROPY: BILLIONAIRES BUYING DEMOCRACY FOR PROFIT

Ah, philanthropy. The act of giving away money to make the world a better place. Or is it? In the world of venture philanthropy, it seems that billionaires are buying democracy for profit. And let's be real, who doesn't love a good profit?

Venture philanthropy is like venture capitalism, but instead of investing in businesses, you invest in social or environmental causes. It's like Shark Tank, but instead of Mark Cuban yelling at you, you get Bill Gates nodding approvingly. And who wouldn't want that?

Some examples of venture philanthropy funding include the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, which invests in global health and education initiatives. They also provide grants, loans, equity, and guarantees to support innovative solutions and partnerships. New Profit is another venture philanthropy fund that supports social entrepreneurs who are addressing systemic challenges in areas such as education, workforce development, public health, and democracy. And then there's Acumen, which invests in social enterprises that serve low-income communities in developing countries. 

But wait, there's more! Venture philanthropy can have negative consequences too. It can undermine democracy and public accountability by influencing social policy without proper scrutiny or participation from the public or affected communities. It can also perpetuate inequality and injustice by reinforcing the power and privilege of the wealthy elite over marginalized and oppressed groups. And it can fail to address the root causes of social problems by focusing on symptoms rather than systemic change.

So why do billionaires love venture philanthropy so much? Maybe it's because they hate public education. Some billionaires see public education as a source of waste, inefficiency, and failure that doesn't prepare students for the global economy. They believe that private or market-based alternatives, such as charter schools or online learning, can provide better outcomes and more choices for students and parents. 

Or maybe they see public education as a source of taxation, regulation, and accountability that limits their freedom and wealth. They oppose paying taxes that support public schools and social programs that benefit the majority of the population. They also resist any oversight or scrutiny of their donations or influence on education policy.

Or perhaps they see public education as a source of diversity, democracy, and dissent that challenges their power and privilege. They fear that public schools may foster critical thinking, social justice, and civic engagement among students and teachers. They also favor a narrow curriculum and pedagogy that aligns with their interests and values.

And let's not forget about corporate education reform. This is a set of policy proposals that aim to change the way public education is organized, funded, and delivered. Some of the main features include increased test-based evaluation of students, teachers, and schools of education; elimination or weakening of tenure and seniority rights for teachers; closing low-performing schools and replacing them with publicly funded but privately run charter schools; replacing governance by local school boards with various forms of mayoral and state takeover or private management; vouchers and tax credit subsidies for private school tuition; increases in class size; and implementation of Common Core standards.

These proposals are supported by various foundations, think tanks, political groups, and corporations that have a stake in the education market. They claim that these reforms will improve student achievement, close the achievement gap, increase accountability, and foster innovation. However, critics argue that these reforms are driven by profit motives, ideological agendas, and standardized testing regimes that undermine public education and harm students, teachers, and communities.

So who are some of the billionaires behind corporate education reform? Bill and Melinda Gates are one example. They've spent billions on various education initiatives, such as breaking large high schools into small schools, promoting the Common Core standards, funding charter schools, and developing teacher evaluation systems based on test scores. Eli and Edythe Broad are another example. They've spent hundreds of millions on training school leaders, expanding charter schools, influencing state and federal policies, and sponsoring research and advocacy groups that advance their agenda. The Walton family is also involved in corporate education reform. They've spent hundreds of millions on promoting school choice, expanding charter schools, supporting voucher programs, influencing state and federal policies, and sponsoring research and advocacy groups that advance their agenda. 

But let's not forget about Dick and Betsy DeVos. They've spent hundreds of millions on promoting school choice, expanding charter schools, supporting voucher programs, influencing state and federal policies, and sponsoring research and advocacy groups that advance their agenda. Betsy DeVos is also the current U.S. secretary of education under President Trump. 

So what are some of the effects of their donations? They create a powerful lobby that influences legislators, policymakers, and regulators to adopt pro-market reforms that favor corporate interests over public interests. They undermine the democratic governance and oversight of public education by weakening or bypassing local school boards and empowering private operators and managers. They distort the evidence and knowledge base for education policy by producing, disseminating, and promoting research, data, and narratives that support their agenda. They alter the conditions and practices of teaching and learning by imposing narrow curricula and scripted pedagogy that are aligned to standardized tests. And they increase inequality and segregation in the education system by creating a dual system of winners and losers.

So what's the solution? Maybe we should start a venture philanthropy fund to buy back democracy from billionaires. Or maybe we should just tax them more. Either way, let's not let vulture philanthropy take over our democracy. After all, who wants to live in a world where Mark Zuckerberg decides what our kids learn in school?

THE DEFT DIVE

Venture philanthropy funding is a type of philanthropic investment that applies the principles and practices of venture capital to support social or environmental causes. Venture philanthropists typically provide financial and non-financial support to start-up, growth, or risk-taking social ventures that aim to create positive social impact. Venture philanthropists also seek to measure and improve the performance and sustainability of their investees¹².

Some examples of venture philanthropy funding are:

• - The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, which invests in various initiatives related to global health, education, and development. The foundation also provides grants, loans, equity, and guarantees to support innovative solutions and partnerships³.
• - New Profit, which is a venture philanthropy fund that supports social entrepreneurs who are addressing systemic challenges in areas such as education, workforce development, public health, and democracy. New Profit also provides strategic advice, network access, and policy advocacy to its portfolio organizations⁴.
• - Acumen, which is a venture philanthropy fund that invests in social enterprises that serve low-income communities in developing countries. Acumen also provides management assistance, leadership development, and impact measurement to its portfolio companies.

These are some examples of venture philanthropy funding. However, there may be more examples that are not yet known or recognized. Therefore, it is important to be aware of the potential and challenges of venture philanthropy funding for social change.

Bing, 7/10/2023

(1) What Is Venture Philanthropy? (Definition and Examples). https://www.indeed.com/career-advice/career-development/venture-philanthropy.

(2) Venture Philanthropy: What it Means, How it Works, Origins - Investopedia. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/v/venture-philanthropy.asp.

(3) Venture Philanthropy - New Profit. https://www.newprofit.org/approach/venture-philanthropy/.

(4) VENTURE PHILANTHROPY DONE RIGHT - Harvard Business School. https://www.hbs.edu/kraft-accelerator/assets/pdf/Aug_Venture%20Philanthropy%20Done%20Right_v3.pdf.

However, venture philanthropy can also have negative or unintended consequences, such as:

• - Undermining democracy and public accountability by influencing social policy without proper scrutiny or participation from the public or the affected communities. Venture philanthropists may also bypass or weaken democratic institutions and processes that are meant to represent the public interest .
• - Perpetuating inequality and injustice by reinforcing the power and privilege of the wealthy elite over the marginalized and oppressed groups. Venture philanthropists may also divert public funds and resources from public services and social programs that could benefit the majority of the population. Venture philanthropists may also exploit tax loopholes and subsidies that reduce their fair share of taxes .
• - Failing to address the root causes of the social problems they claim to solve by focusing on symptoms rather than systemic change. Venture philanthropists may also impose their own agendas and values on the recipients of their donations rather than listening to their needs and preferences. Venture philanthropists may also neglect or harm other important areas of social good that are not aligned with their interests .

These are some possible consequences of venture philanthropy. However, there may be more consequences that are not yet visible or documented. Therefore, it is important to be critical and vigilant of the motivations and impacts of venture philanthropy on society.

Venture philanthropy can be a powerful tool for social change, but it can also pose risks and challenges for the areas it seeks to disrupt or dismantle. Some of the areas where billionaires have used venture philanthropy to disrupt or dismantle existing systems or structures are:

• - Education: Some billionaires, such as Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, and Eli Broad, have invested millions or billions of dollars in various education initiatives, such as charter schools, online learning, standardized testing, teacher evaluation, and curriculum reform. They have also influenced education policy and public opinion through their foundations, media outlets, and advocacy groups. However, critics have argued that these initiatives undermine public education, erode democratic governance, distort evidence and knowledge, harm teachers and students, and increase inequality and segregation¹².
• - Health: Some billionaires, such as Bill Gates, Michael Bloomberg, and George Soros, have invested millions or billions of dollars in various health initiatives, such as vaccine development, tobacco control, drug policy reform, and reproductive health. They have also influenced health policy and public opinion through their foundations, media outlets, and advocacy groups. However, critics have argued that these initiatives bypass public health systems, ignore local contexts and needs, impose foreign agendas and values, and create dependency and accountability problems³⁴.
• - Democracy: Some billionaires, such as George Soros, Pierre Omidyar, and Jeff Bezos, have invested millions or billions of dollars in various democracy initiatives, such as promoting human rights, civil society, journalism, and civic engagement. They have also influenced democracy policy and public opinion through their foundations, media outlets, and advocacy groups. However, critics have argued that these initiatives undermine democracy by using their wealth and power to shape social policy without proper scrutiny or participation from the public or the affected communities. They have also argued that these initiatives perpetuate inequality and injustice by reinforcing the power and privilege of the wealthy elite over the marginalized and oppressed groups .

These are some of the areas where billionaires have used venture philanthropy to disrupt or dismantle existing systems or structures. However, there may be more areas that are not yet revealed or understood. Therefore, it is important to be critical and vigilant of the motivations and impacts of venture philanthropy on society.

Bing, 7/10/2023

(1) Would the World Be Better Off Without Philanthropists?. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2022/05/30/would-the-world-be-better-off-without-philanthropists-paul-vallely-emma-saunders-hastings.

(2) How tech founders are trying to disrupt — and replicate - Vox. https://www.vox.com/2019/4/22/18491577/founders-giving-pledge-tech-philanthropy-billionaires.

(3) How Tech Entrepreneurs Are Disrupting Philanthropy. https://www.bcg.com/publications/2016/innovation-strategy-how-tech-entrepreneurs-are-disrupting-philanthropy.

(4) The trouble with charitable billionaires | Philanthropy | The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/may/24/the-trouble-with-charitable-billionaires-philanthrocapitalism.

The Venture Philanthropy Network is not a specific organization, but a term that can refer to various networks or associations of venture philanthropists and organizations that practice or support venture philanthropy. Venture philanthropy is a type of philanthropic investment that applies the principles and practices of venture capital to support social or environmental causes. Venture philanthropists typically provide financial and non-financial support to start-up, growth, or risk-taking social ventures that aim to create positive social impact. Venture philanthropists also seek to measure and improve the performance and sustainability of their investees.

Some examples of venture philanthropy networks are:

• - AVPN: The Asian Venture Philanthropy Network is a leading ecosystem builder that works to increase the flow of capital towards impact in Asia, ensuring that resources are most effectively deployed. AVPN has over 600 members from the private, public, and people sectors, covering 33 markets in Asia. AVPN provides various platforms and services to help its members connect, learn, and lead the sector to achieve systemic change¹.
• - EVPA: The European Venture Philanthropy Association is a community of organizations and individuals committed to practicing and promoting venture philanthropy and social investment across Europe. EVPA has over 300 members from 30 countries, representing a wide range of sectors and interests. EVPA offers various opportunities and resources to help its members increase their social impact².
• - SVP: The Social Venture Partners is a global network of local partners aligning passion and purpose. SVP helps individuals realize greater impact with their giving, strengthens nonprofits, and invests in collaborative solutions to social challenges. SVP has over 40 affiliates in nine countries, with more than 3,400 partners. SVP provides various programs and events to help its members engage, learn, and grow as effective philanthropists³.
• - New Profit: New Profit is a venture philanthropy fund that supports social entrepreneurs who are addressing systemic challenges in areas such as education, workforce development, public health, and democracy. New Profit also provides strategic advice, network access, and policy advocacy to its portfolio organizations. New Profit has invested in over 100 social enterprises since 1998, leveraging over $1 billion in follow-on funding⁴.

These are some examples of venture philanthropy networks. However, there may be more networks that are not yet known or recognized. Therefore, it is important to be aware of the potential and challenges of venture philanthropy for social change.

Bing, 7/10/2023

(1) About AVPN / Who We Are - AVPN. https://avpn.asia/who-we-are/.

(2) The Nuts and Bolts of Venture Philanthropy - Giving Compass. https://givingcompass.org/article/nuts-bolts-venture-philanthropy.

(3) Venture Philanthropy Partners - Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venture_Philanthropy_Partners.

(4) Asian Venture Philanthropy Network - ANDE. https://andeglobal.org/organization/asian-venture-philanthropy-network/.

There are many Americans who are involved in venture philanthropy, either as donors, funders, managers, or recipients. Venture philanthropy is a type of impact investment that takes concepts and techniques from venture capital finance and business management and applies them to achieving philanthropic goals. Venture philanthropists typically provide financial and non-financial support to start-up, growth, or risk-taking social ventures that aim to create positive social impact. Venture philanthropists also seek to measure and improve the performance and sustainability of their investees.

Some examples of Americans who are most involved in venture philanthropy are:

• - Bill Gates: The co-founder of Microsoft and the Gates Foundation, which is the largest private foundation in the world. He has invested billions of dollars in various initiatives related to global health, education, and development. He has also influenced policy and public opinion through his foundation, media outlets, and advocacy groups. He is one of the founders of The Giving Pledge, a campaign that encourages billionaires to give away most of their wealth to philanthropy¹.
• - MacKenzie Scott: The ex-wife of Amazon founder Jeff Bezos and one of the richest women in the world. She has donated over $8 billion to various causes, such as racial equity, gender equity, economic mobility, public health, and climate change. She has also supported hundreds of organizations across the country with unrestricted grants. She is one of the signatories of The Giving Pledge².
• - Dustin Moskovitz and Cari Tuna: The co-founder of Facebook and his wife, who are the founders of the Open Philanthropy Project, a venture philanthropy fund that supports causes such as global health, animal welfare, criminal justice reform, and effective altruism. They have also supported various organizations with grants and investments. They are also signatories of The Giving Pledge³.
• - Jeff Skoll: The first president of eBay and the founder of the Skoll Foundation, which is a venture philanthropy fund that supports social entrepreneurs who are addressing global challenges such as poverty, health, education, and environment. He has also supported various organizations with grants and investments. He is also a signatory of The Giving Pledge.

These are some examples of Americans who are most involved in venture philanthropy. However, there may be more Americans who are not as visible or public about their involvement. Therefore, it is important to be aware of the potential and challenges of venture philanthropy for social change.

Bing, 7/10/2023

(1) VENTURE PHILANTHROPY DONE RIGHT - Harvard Business School. https://www.hbs.edu/kraft-accelerator/assets/pdf/Aug_Venture%20Philanthropy%20Done%20Right_v3.pdf.

(2) America’s Top Givers 2022: The 25 Most Philanthropic ... - Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbeswealthteam/2022/01/19/americas-top-givers-2022-the-25-most-philanthropic-billionaires/.

(3) Venture philanthropy - Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venture_philanthropy.

Some possible reasons why some billionaires may hate public education are:

• - They see public education as a source of waste, inefficiency, and failure that does not prepare students for the global economy. They believe that private or market-based alternatives, such as charter schools, vouchers, or online learning, can provide better outcomes and more choices for students and parents¹².
• - They see public education as a source of taxation, regulation, and accountability that limits their freedom and wealth. They oppose paying taxes that support public schools and social programs that benefit the majority of the population. They also resist any oversight or scrutiny of their donations or influence on education policy¹³.
• - They see public education as a source of diversity, democracy, and dissent that challenges their power and privilege. They fear that public schools may foster critical thinking, social justice, and civic engagement among students and teachers. They also favor a narrow curriculum and pedagogy that aligns with their interests and values¹⁴.

These are some possible reasons why some billionaires may hate public education. However, there may be more reasons that are not yet revealed or understood. Therefore, it is important to be critical and vigilant of the motivations and impacts of these billionaires on the education system.

Bing, 7/10/2023

(1) Billionaires Are the Biggest Threat to Public Schools. https://progressive.org/public-schools-advocate/billionaires-threat-public-schools/.

(2) U.S. views of billionaires now somewhat more negative than in 2020 .... https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2021/07/28/americans-views-about-billionaires-have-grown-somewhat-more-negative-since-2020/.

(3) Texas: Two Billionaires Want to Destroy Public Education and Replace It .... https://dianeravitch.net/2022/07/25/texas-two-billionaires-want-to-destroy-public-educatuon-and-replace-it-with-christian-schools/.

(4) Billionaires Against Public Education - LA Progressive. https://www.laprogressive.com/education-reform/public-education.

(5) Billionaires Unite!... Against Public Education and Teachers. https://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/sociopol_globaleducation04.htm.

Corporate education reform is a term that refers to a set of policy proposals that aim to change the way public education is organized, funded, and delivered. Some of the main features of corporate education reform are:

• - Increased test-based evaluation of students, teachers, and schools of education
• - Elimination or weakening of tenure and seniority rights for teachers
• - An end to pay for experience or advanced degrees for teachers
• - Closing schools deemed low performing and their replacement by publicly funded but privately run charter schools
• - Replacing governance by local school boards with various forms of mayoral and state takeover or private management
• - Vouchers and tax credit subsidies for private school tuition
• - Increases in class size, sometimes tied to the firing of 5-10% of the teaching staff
• - Implementation of Common Core standards and adoption of "college and career readiness" as a standard for high school graduation¹²³⁴

These proposals are supported by various foundations, think tanks, political groups, and corporations that have a stake in the education market. They claim that these reforms will improve student achievement, close the achievement gap, increase accountability, and foster innovation. However, critics argue that these reforms are driven by profit motives, ideological agendas, and standardized testing regimes that undermine public education and harm students, teachers, and communities. They point out that these reforms have not produced the promised results, but have instead increased inequality, segregation, privatization, and corruption in the education system¹²⁴.

Bing, 7/10/2023

(1) Challenging Corporate Ed Reform - Rethinking Schools. https://rethinkingschools.org/articles/challenging-corporate-ed-reform-and-10-hopeful-signs-of-resistance/.

(2) A primer on corporate school reform - The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/a-primer-on-corporate-school-reform/2011/10/26/gIQAyWrUKM_blog.html.

(3) Corporate Reform | NYSAPE. https://nysape.org/corporate-reform/.

(4) Corporate Reform - Long Island Opt Out. https://lioptout.org/corporate-reform.

Some of the advanced marketing techniques that have been used to sell corporate education reform and privatization are:

• - Lobbying: Corporate actors use their economic and political power to influence legislators, policymakers, and regulators to adopt pro-market reforms. They also fund political campaigns, ballot initiatives, and referenda to sway public opinion and votes¹.
• - Networking and brokerage: Corporate actors create or join networks of like-minded organizations, individuals, and media outlets that share their vision and goals. They also act as brokers or intermediaries that connect different actors and facilitate the exchange of information, resources, and support¹.
• - Knowledge mobilization: Corporate actors produce, disseminate, and promote research, data, and narratives that support their agenda. They also fund or partner with think tanks, advocacy groups, and media outlets that generate favorable evidence and stories. They also challenge or discredit alternative sources of knowledge that contradict their claims¹².
• - Support of grassroots advocacy: Corporate actors provide financial or technical assistance to grassroots groups that advocate for their reforms. They also recruit or co-opt parents, students, teachers, and community members to join their cause. They also create or sponsor events, campaigns, and movements that mobilize public support¹².
• - Sponsorship of pilot experiences: Corporate actors fund or implement pilot projects that showcase their reforms in action. They also use these projects as evidence of success and scalability. They also leverage these projects to gain access to decision-makers and media attention¹.

These marketing techniques are often used in combination or coordination to create a powerful and persuasive message that appeals to different audiences and stakeholders. However, these techniques are also often deceptive, manipulative, or unethical. They may hide the true motives, interests, or impacts of corporate actors. They may also silence or marginalize the voices of those who oppose or question their reforms².

If you want to learn more about how corporate actors use marketing techniques to sell education reform and privatization, you can check out these sources:

Bing, 7/10/2023

(1) The Political Turn of Corporate Influence in Education: A Synthesis of .... https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-04236-3_3.

(2) Here Are The Corporations And Right-Wing Funders Backing The Education .... https://www.mediamatters.org/daily-caller/here-are-corporations-and-right-wing-funders-backing-education-reform-movement.

(3) Challenging Corporate Ed Reform - Rethinking Schools. https://rethinkingschools.org/articles/challenging-corporate-ed-reform-and-10-hopeful-signs-of-resistance/.

The exact amount of money spent to promote corporate education reform and privatization is hard to estimate, as different sources may have different definitions, methods, and data sources. However, some studies and reports have tried to quantify the spending of some of the major actors and organizations involved in this movement. Here are some examples:

• - According to a report by Media Matters for America, the top 15 foundations that support corporate education reform spent $844 million on public education in 2010. These foundations include the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Walton Family Foundation, the Eli and Edythe Broad Foundation, and others. These foundations also coordinate their spending and invest in advocacy groups, think tanks, media outlets, and political campaigns that advance their agenda¹.
• - According to a chapter by Andrea Gabor in the book Media Capture, between 2000 and 2005, three foundations—the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Walton Family Foundation and the Eli and Edythe Broad Foundation—quadrupled their spending on K–12 education to $400 million. These foundations also expanded their reach to universities, think tanks, government institutions, and the news media. They also funded or founded publications that supported their market-oriented approach to education².
• - According to an article by Jonathan Pelto in The Progressive, the corporate education reform industry spent tens of millions of dollars on state and local elections in 2014. Some of the major donors included former New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg, Netflix CEO Reed Hastings, hedge fund managers Whitney Tilson and Paul Tudor Jones, and education companies like Amplify and Pearson. These donors supported candidates and ballot initiatives that favored charter schools, vouchers, testing, and teacher evaluations³.

These are just some of the examples of how much money has been spent to promote corporate education reform and privatization. However, there may be more spending that is not disclosed or reported by the donors or recipients. Therefore, it is important to be aware of the sources and interests behind the education policies and narratives that are presented to the public.

Bing, 7/10/2023

(1) Andrea Gabor: The Corporate Education-Reform Philanthropies. https://networkforpubliceducation.org/blog-content/andrea-gabor-the-corporate-education-reform-philanthropies/.

(2) Here Are The Corporations And Right-Wing Funders Backing The Education .... https://www.mediamatters.org/daily-caller/here-are-corporations-and-right-wing-funders-backing-education-reform-movement.

(3) Challenging Corporate Ed Reform - Rethinking Schools. https://rethinkingschools.org/articles/challenging-corporate-ed-reform-and-10-hopeful-signs-of-resistance/.

(4) Public Education: Who Are the Corporate Reformers?. https://billmoyers.com/2014/03/28/public-education-who-are-the-corporate-reformers/.

(5) How The Corporate Education Reform Industry Buys Elections. https://progressive.org/magazine/corporate-education-reform-industry-buys-elections/.

These donations affect policy-making and implementation in several ways. Some of the effects are:

• - They create a powerful lobby that influences legislators, policymakers, and regulators to adopt pro-market reforms that favor corporate interests over public interests. They also shape the political agenda and discourse by framing education issues in terms of choice, accountability, and innovation¹².
• - They undermine the democratic governance and oversight of public education by weakening or bypassing local school boards and empowering private operators and managers. They also erode the public trust and support for public education by portraying it as failing, inefficient, and resistant to change¹².
• - They distort the evidence and knowledge base for education policy by producing, disseminating, and promoting research, data, and narratives that support their agenda. They also challenge or discredit alternative sources of knowledge that contradict their claims. They also manipulate or misuse standardized tests to measure and rank students, teachers, and schools¹²³.
• - They alter the conditions and practices of teaching and learning by imposing narrow curricula and scripted pedagogy that are aligned to standardized tests. They also attack teachers' job protections, compensation, and professionalism. They also create a less experienced, less secure, less stable, and less expensive teaching force²³.
• - They increase the inequality and segregation in the education system by creating a dual system of winners and losers. They also divert public funds and resources from public schools to private schools or contractors. They also exploit students and communities as sources of profit and data²³.

These are some of the effects of the donations made by corporate actors to promote education reform and privatization. However, there may be more effects that are not yet visible or documented. Therefore, it is important to be critical and vigilant of the sources and impacts of these donations on the education system.

Bing, 7/10/2023

(1) Here Are The Corporations And Right-Wing Funders Backing The Education .... https://www.mediamatters.org/daily-caller/here-are-corporations-and-right-wing-funders-backing-education-reform-movement.

(2) A primer on corporate school reform - The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/a-primer-on-corporate-school-reform/2011/10/26/gIQAyWrUKM_blog.html.

(3) How The Corporate Education Reform Industry Buys Elections. https://progressive.org/magazine/corporate-education-reform-industry-buys-elections/.

(4) Challenging Corporate Ed Reform - Rethinking Schools. https://rethinkingschools.org/articles/challenging-corporate-ed-reform-and-10-hopeful-signs-of-resistance/.

There are many billionaires who have supported corporate education reform and privatization, but some of the most prominent and influential ones are:

• - Bill and Melinda Gates: The co-founders of Microsoft and the Gates Foundation, which is the largest private foundation in the world. They have spent billions of dollars on various education initiatives, such as breaking large high schools into small schools, promoting the Common Core standards, funding charter schools, and developing teacher evaluation systems based on test scores. They have also funded or founded media outlets and publications that support their agenda¹.
• - Eli and Edythe Broad: The founders of the Broad Foundation, which is one of the largest education philanthropies in the country. They have spent hundreds of millions of dollars on training school leaders, expanding charter schools, influencing state and federal policies, and sponsoring research and advocacy groups that advance their agenda. They have also funded or founded media outlets and publications that support their agenda².
• - Walton Family: The heirs of Walmart founder Sam Walton and the owners of the Walton Family Foundation, which is one of the largest education philanthropies in the country. They have spent hundreds of millions of dollars on promoting school choice, expanding charter schools, supporting voucher programs, influencing state and federal policies, and sponsoring research and advocacy groups that advance their agenda. They have also funded or founded media outlets and publications that support their agenda².
• - Dick and Betsy DeVos: The former Amway executives and the owners of the DeVos Family Foundation, which is one of the largest education philanthropies in the country. They have spent hundreds of millions of dollars on promoting school choice, expanding charter schools, supporting voucher programs, influencing state and federal policies, and sponsoring research and advocacy groups that advance their agenda. Betsy DeVos is also the current U.S. secretary of education under President Trump²³.
• - Michael Bloomberg: The former mayor of New York City and the founder of Bloomberg LP, a global media and financial company. He has spent hundreds of millions of dollars on various education initiatives, such as closing low-performing schools, expanding charter schools, implementing test-based accountability systems, and supporting candidates and ballot initiatives that advance his agenda. He has also funded or founded media outlets and publications that support his agenda³⁴.

These are some of the billionaires who have supported corporate education reform and privatization. However, there may be more billionaires who are not as visible or public about their donations. Therefore, it is important to be aware of the sources and interests behind the education policies and narratives that are presented to the public.

Bing, 7/10/2023

(1) Bill and Melinda Gates have spent billions to shape education policy .... https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2020/02/10/bill-melinda-gates-have-spent-billions-dollars-shape-education-policy-now-they-say-theyre-skeptical-billionaires-trying-do-just-that/.

(2) Here Are The Corporations And Right-Wing Funders Backing The Education .... https://www.mediamatters.org/daily-caller/here-are-corporations-and-right-wing-funders-backing-education-reform-movement.

(3) A Layman’s Guide to the Destroy Public Education Movement. https://tultican.com/2018/09/09/a-laymans-guide-to-the-destroy-public-education-movement/.

(4) How The Corporate Education Reform Industry Buys Elections. https://progressive.org/magazine/corporate-education-reform-industry-buys-elections/.

In summary, these billionaires influence policy-making and implementation by:

• - Lobbying legislators, policymakers, and regulators to adopt pro-market reforms that favor their interests
• - Funding or founding advocacy groups, think tanks, media outlets, and publications that support their agenda
• - Producing, disseminating, and promoting research, data, and narratives that support their agenda
• - Funding or implementing pilot projects that showcase their reforms in action
• - Supporting candidates and ballot initiatives that advance their agenda

Some of the criticisms against their donations are:

• - They undermine democracy and public accountability by using their wealth and influence to shape social policy without proper scrutiny or participation from the public or the affected communities. They also bypass or weaken democratic institutions and processes that are meant to represent the public interest¹².
• - They perpetuate inequality and injustice by reinforcing the power and privilege of the wealthy elite over the marginalized and oppressed groups. They also divert public funds and resources from public services and social programs that could benefit the majority of the population. They also exploit tax loopholes and subsidies that reduce their fair share of taxes¹²³.
• - They fail to address the root causes of the social problems they claim to solve by focusing on symptoms rather than systemic change. They also impose their own agendas and values on the recipients of their donations rather than listening to their needs and preferences. They also neglect or harm other important areas of social good that are not aligned with their interests¹²⁴.

These are some of the criticisms against their donations. However, there may be more criticisms that are not yet articulated or heard. Therefore, it is important to be critical and vigilant of the motivations and impacts of these donations on the society.

Bing, 7/10/2023

(1) A new reason Americans are getting leery of billionaire donors. https://theconversation.com/a-new-reason-americans-are-getting-leery-of-billionaire-donors-162409.

(2) The problems with philanthropy | Stanford News. https://news.stanford.edu/2018/12/03/the-problems-with-philanthropy/.

(3) $400 million gift to Harvard sets off debate about philanthropy to .... https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2015/06/05/400-million-gift-harvard-sets-debate-about-philanthropy-wealthy-institutions.

(4) 12 Common Criticisms of Philanthropy—and Some Answers. https://ssir.org/articles/entry/12_common_criticisms_of_philanthropyand_some_answers.

ONWARD CHRISTIAN SOLDIERS: HOW CHRISTIAN NATIONALISM IS IMPACTING THE MILITARY AND LAW ENFORCEMENT

 

ONWARD CHRISTIAN SOLDIERS: HOW CHRISTIAN NATIONALISM IS IMPACTING THE MILITARY AND LAW ENFORCEMENT

Well folks, it looks like we've got ourselves a bit of a holy war going on in the military and law enforcement. That's right, Christian nationalism is making its mark and causing quite the controversy. But don't worry, we're here to break it down for you in a way that's both detailed and witty (if we do say so ourselves).

First off, did you know that 73% of active military service members identify as people of faith?¹ That's a lot of praying going on. And with opportunities for worship, counseling, religious education, and more, it's no wonder religion plays such a big role in the military. But there are some challenges and controversies that come with it, such as the balance between religious liberty and constitutional separation of church and state. It's like trying to balance a Bible on your head while doing jumping jacks.

One of the biggest issues with Christian nationalism in the military is that it claims the United States was founded as a Christian nation and should be governed by Christian principles. It's like they're trying to make America into one big church potluck. And while some defend it as a legitimate expression of religious freedom and patriotism, others argue that it poses a threat to diversity, inclusion, and constitutional duty.

But what about law enforcement? Did you know that recruiting from the military may have some benefits for law enforcement, such as providing a pool of candidates with relevant skills, experience, and discipline?¹² That's right, those military veterans may just be the perfect fit for keeping the peace on our streets. But recruiting from the military may also pose some challenges or risks, such as creating a culture of militarization, aggression, or conformity. It's like trying to fit a square peg into a round hole.

Now let's talk about the impact of Christian nationalism on law enforcement recruitment. It may attract some potential recruits who see it as a way of serving God and country, but it may also deter those who value religious diversity and pluralism. It's like trying to decide whether to eat a delicious slice of apple pie or a healthy salad. Tough choice, right?

But what about the impact of religious diversity in law enforcement? Well, it turns out that it can enhance police-community relations and improve police performance and professionalism.¹² But it can also pose some challenges and risks, such as difficulties or conflicts in accommodating religious beliefs and practices. It's like trying to juggle a bunch of different balls at once.

So what's the bottom line here? Well, it seems like there are pros and cons to everything when it comes to religion in the military and law enforcement. But one thing's for sure - we could all use a little more humor and laughter to lighten things up. So let's all take a deep breath, put on our funny hats, and try to find some common ground. After all, isn't that what being a good Christian (or human being) is all about?

THE DEFT DIVE

According to one source, religious life in the military centers on opportunities for voluntary worship, counseling, religious education, moral leadership training, pastoral support, religious retreats, child and youth ministries, and holiday observances¹. Close to **73%** of active military service members identify as people of faith¹.

However, there are also challenges and controversies regarding the role of religion in the military, such as the balance between religious liberty and constitutional separation of church and state, the diversity and inclusion of different faith groups and beliefs, the potential for discrimination or coercion based on religion, and the ethical implications of religion in war and violence²³⁴⁵⁶.

Bing, 7/10/2023

(1) Religion in the Military | Encyclopedia.com. https://www.encyclopedia.com/history/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/religion-military.

(2) WHAT IS THE ROLE OF RELIGION IN THE MODERN MILITARY?. https://warroom.armywarcollege.edu/podcasts/what-is-the-role-of-religion-in-the-modern-military/.

(3) Pentagon unveils new religious liberty policies after pressure from .... https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-military/2020/09/18/pentagon-unveils-new-religious-liberty-policies-after-pressure-from-conservative-lawmakers/.

(4) Military and Religion | SpringerLink. https://link.springer.com/referenceworkentry/10.1007/978-3-030-02866-4_32-1.

(5) Religious Belief in the Military | SOFREP. https://sofrep.com/news/religious-belief-in-the-military/.

(6) How Religious Is Our Military? 3 Ways Faith and Defending Freedom Go .... https://firstliberty.org/news/how-religious-is-our-military/.

Some examples of religious practices in the military are:

• - **Worship services** for different faith groups, led by chaplains or lay leaders, in chapels, tents, ships, or other locations³⁴.
• - **Religious holidays** such as Christmas, Easter, Passover, Ramadan, Diwali, etc., celebrated by service members and their families with special meals, decorations, ceremonies, or time off³.
• - **Religious symbols** such as crosses, stars of David, crescents, pentagrams, etc., worn as jewelry, tattoos, or on uniforms or dog tags⁴.
• - **Religious accommodations** such as dietary restrictions, head coverings, beards, prayer times, etc., granted by the military to service members who request them based on their sincerely held beliefs¹⁴.
• - **Religious education** such as Bible studies, Sunday schools, Quran classes, etc., offered by chaplains or volunteers to service members and their families³.
• - **Religious counseling** such as pastoral care, spiritual guidance, moral advice, etc., provided by chaplains or other religious leaders to service members and their families³.

These are just some of the examples of religious practices in the military. There may be more depending on the specific beliefs and traditions of each service member. The military tries to accommodate individual expressions of sincerely held beliefs as long as they do not adversely affect military readiness and unit cohesion¹⁴.

Bing, 7/10/2023

(1) Religion in the Military | Encyclopedia.com. https://www.encyclopedia.com/history/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/religion-military.

(2) Email: HQS-PolicyandStandards@uscg.mil COMDTINST 1000 - U.S. Department .... https://media.defense.gov/2021/Aug/30/2002843210/-1/-1/0/CI_1000_15.PDF.

(3) Pentagon unveils new religious liberty policies after pressure from .... https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-military/2020/09/18/pentagon-unveils-new-religious-liberty-policies-after-pressure-from-conservative-lawmakers/.

(4) Religious Diversity in the U.S. Military. https://diversity.defense.gov/Portals/51/Documents/Resources/Commission/docs/Issue%20Papers/Paper%2022%20-%20Religious%20Diversity.pdf.

Christian nationalism is a political ideology that claims the United States was founded as a Christian nation and should be governed by Christian principles. It often conflates American patriotism with Christian identity and seeks to preserve or restore the dominance of white Christians in society¹.

The effect of Christian nationalism on the military is a matter of debate and controversy. Some argue that Christian nationalism poses a threat to the military's professionalism, diversity, cohesion, and constitutional duty. They point to examples of Christian nationalist symbols, slogans, and actions among some military personnel, especially during the January 6 insurrection at the Capitol²³⁴. They also criticize the influence of Christian nationalist groups and leaders on military policy, culture, and chaplaincy⁴.

Others defend Christian nationalism as a legitimate expression of religious freedom and patriotism. They argue that Christian nationalism does not imply intolerance or violence, but rather a commitment to moral values and national security. They claim that Christian nationalism reflects the beliefs and preferences of many service members and veterans, who are more likely to identify as Christians than the general population² .

Bing, 7/10/2023

(1) Views of U.S. as a Christian nation, Christian nationalism and its .... https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2022/10/27/views-of-the-u-s-as-a-christian-nation-and-opinions-about-christian-nationalism/.

(2) White Christian Nationalism: The Deep Story Behind the Capitol Insurrection. https://berkleycenter.georgetown.edu/responses/white-christian-nationalism-the-deep-story-behind-the-capitol-insurrection.

(3) The Spiritual Lessons of a Christian Nationalist Military Defeat. https://thedispatch.com/newsletter/frenchpress/the-spiritual-lessons-of-a-christian/.

(4) The Coup & The Military-Christian Nationalist Industrial Complex. https://crooksandliars.com/2021/01/coup-military-christian-nationalist.

Christian nationalism may have both positive and negative effects on military recruitment, depending on the perspective and motivation of the potential recruits.

On the one hand, Christian nationalism may appeal to some people who see the military as a way of serving God and country, defending their faith and values, and fulfilling their patriotic duty. Some Christian nationalists may view the military as a mission field, where they can spread the gospel and influence others with their beliefs¹³. Some may also see the military as a source of strength and security for the nation, especially in times of crisis or conflict².

On the other hand, Christian nationalism may deter or alienate some people who do not share its ideology or agenda, or who value religious diversity and pluralism. Some people may be concerned about the potential for discrimination, coercion, or harassment based on their religious beliefs or lack thereof. Some may also question the compatibility of Christian nationalism with the constitutional principles of separation of church and state, religious freedom, and civil rights¹³⁴. Some may also doubt the legitimacy or morality of using violence in the name of God or Christianity².

Bing, 7/10/2023

(1) Michael Flynn is recruiting an ‘Army of God’ in growing Christian .... https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/michael-flynn-is-recruiting-an-army-of-god-in-growing-christian-nationalist-movement.

(2) The Coup & The Military-Christian Nationalist Industrial Complex. https://crooksandliars.com/2021/01/coup-military-christian-nationalist.

(3) Views of U.S. as a Christian nation, Christian nationalism and its .... https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2022/10/27/views-of-the-u-s-as-a-christian-nation-and-opinions-about-christian-nationalism/.

(4) What Is Christian Nationalism? | Christianity Today. https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2021/february-web-only/what-is-christian-nationalism.html.

The religious diversity of the US military reflects the changing demographics and preferences of the American population, as well as the military's efforts to accommodate different faiths and beliefs among its service members.

According to a 2009 survey by the Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute, the most common religious affiliations reported by military personnel were Protestant (35%), Catholic (22%), no religious preference (21%), and other Christian (11%). The survey also found that 8% of service members identified with non-Christian faiths, such as Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, Wicca, and others¹.

Compared with the US civilian population, the military has a higher proportion of Christians and a lower proportion of religiously unaffiliated people. However, the military also has a higher proportion of non-Christian faiths than the general public. For example, Muslims make up 0.9% of the military, but only 0.6% of the civilian population. Similarly, Buddhists make up 0.7% of the military, but only 0.5% of the civilian population².

The religious diversity of the military is also influenced by other demographic factors, such as race, ethnicity, gender, age, and rank. For instance, Black and Hispanic service members are more likely to be Protestant than White or Asian service members. Women are more likely to be Catholic than men. Younger and lower-ranking service members are more likely to have no religious preference than older and higher-ranking service members¹.

The military has faced various challenges and controversies in dealing with religious diversity, such as balancing religious accommodation and readiness, preventing discrimination and harassment based on religion, ensuring chaplain diversity and quality, and addressing ethical dilemmas related to religion and war³⁴⁵. However, the military has also shown some progress and innovation in embracing religious diversity, such as allowing religious exemptions for uniforms and grooming standards, creating spaces for worship and meditation, providing training and education on religious pluralism, and supporting interfaith dialogue and cooperation²⁴⁵.

Bing, 7/10/2023

(1) Religious Diversity in the U.S. Military. https://diversity.defense.gov/Portals/51/Documents/Resources/Commission/docs/Issue%20Papers/Paper%2022%20-%20Religious%20Diversity.pdf.

(2) How the US military has embraced growing religious diversity. https://theconversation.com/how-the-us-military-has-embraced-growing-religious-diversity-124734.

(3) Accommodating Faith in the Military | Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2008/07/03/accommodating-faith-in-the-military/.

(4) How the US military has embraced growing religious diversity. https://religionnews.com/2019/11/12/how-the-us-military-has-embraced-growing-religious-diversity/.

(5) Religious Diversity and Challenges in the U.S. Military. https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/religious-diversity-and-challenges-us-military-95786.

The impact of law enforcement recruitment from the military and Christian nationalism is not well-studied or understood, but it may have some implications for the diversity, culture, and performance of police departments.

On the one hand, recruiting from the military may have some benefits for law enforcement, such as providing a pool of candidates with relevant skills, experience, and discipline. Military veterans may also bring a sense of service, loyalty, and teamwork to their police work. Some studies have found that military veterans perform better than non-veterans on some measures of police performance, such as use of force, citizen complaints, and awards¹².

On the other hand, recruiting from the military may also pose some challenges or risks for law enforcement, such as creating a culture of militarization, aggression, or conformity. Military veterans may also face difficulties in adjusting to civilian policing, such as dealing with different rules of engagement, legal constraints, and community expectations. Some studies have found that military veterans are more likely than non-veterans to be involved in some types of misconduct, such as domestic violence, sexual harassment, and excessive force¹².

Christian nationalism may also have some influence on law enforcement recruitment and behavior, especially among military veterans who identify with this ideology. Christian nationalism is a political belief that the United States was founded as a Christian nation and should be governed by Christian principles. It often conflates American patriotism with Christian identity and seeks to preserve or restore the dominance of white Christians in society³.

Christian nationalists may be attracted to law enforcement as a way of serving God and country, defending their faith and values, and fulfilling their patriotic duty. They may also see law enforcement as a source of strength and security for the nation, especially in times of crisis or conflict³. However, Christian nationalists may also pose some problems or dangers for law enforcement, such as violating the constitutional separation of church and state, discriminating or harassing people of other faiths or no faith, or using violence in the name of God or Christianity. They may also be susceptible to radicalization by extremist groups or movements that promote conspiracy theories, anti-government sentiments, or white supremacy³⁴⁵.

Bing, 7/10/2023

(1) Recruiting for Diversity in Law Enforcement - Scholars at Harvard. https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/janewiseman/files/police_recruiting_research_summary_august_2021.pdf.

(2) It’s Time to Talk About Violent Christian Extremism - POLITICO. https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2021/02/04/qanon-christian-extremism-nationalism-violence-466034.

(3) Recruitment, Hiring & Retention | COPS OFFICE. https://cops.usdoj.gov/recruitment_hiring_and_retention.

(4) A Crisis Facing Law Enforcement: Recruiting in the 21st Century. https://www.policechiefmagazine.org/a-crisis-facing-law-enforcement-recruiting-in-the-21st-century/.

(5) Trends and Threats of Hate & Antigovernment Extremism. https://www.splcenter.org/year-hate-extremism-2022/trends-and-threats.

Christian nationalism may affect police culture in various ways, such as shaping the attitudes, values, and behaviors of some police officers and influencing their interactions with the public and their peers.

Some possible effects of Christian nationalism on police culture are:

• - **A sense of mission and identity.** Some police officers who adhere to Christian nationalism may view their work as a way of serving God and country, defending their faith and values, and fulfilling their patriotic duty. They may also see themselves as part of a chosen or favored group that has a special role and responsibility in society¹².
• - **A tendency to favor or discriminate.** Some police officers who adhere to Christian nationalism may be more likely to favor or discriminate people based on their religious affiliation, ethnicity, race, or political orientation. They may be more supportive of or hostile to certain groups or individuals depending on whether they perceive them as allies or enemies of their cause¹²³.
• - **A susceptibility to radicalization or extremism.** Some police officers who adhere to Christian nationalism may be vulnerable to radicalization or extremism by groups or movements that promote conspiracy theories, anti-government sentiments, or white supremacy. They may be influenced by false or distorted information, propaganda, or rhetoric that appeals to their fears, grievances, or prejudices. They may also be willing to use violence in the name of God or Christianity²³⁴.
• - **A challenge to accountability and professionalism.** Some police officers who adhere to Christian nationalism may pose a challenge to the accountability and professionalism of the police force. They may resist or undermine policies or practices that aim to promote diversity, inclusion, or equity within the police force or among the public. They may also violate the constitutional principles of separation of church and state, religious freedom, and civil rights¹²³.

Bing, 7/10/2023

(1) God’s Country in Black and Blue: How Christian Nationalism Shapes .... https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/2332649218790983.

(2) New report details the influence of Christian nationalism on the .... https://religionnews.com/2022/02/09/new-report-details-the-influence-of-christian-nationalism-on-the-insurrection/.

(3) Christian nationalism - Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_nationalism.

(4) Christian Nationalism Is Worse Than You Think | Christianity Today. https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/podcasts/quick-to-listen/christian-nationalism-capitol-riots-trump-podcast.html.

Christian nationalism may affect military recruitment in various ways, such as attracting or deterring potential recruits based on their religious beliefs, values, and motivations.

Some possible effects of Christian nationalism on military recruitment are:

• - **An appeal to service and patriotism.** Some potential recruits who adhere to Christian nationalism may be drawn to the military as a way of serving God and country, defending their faith and values, and fulfilling their patriotic duty. They may also see the military as a mission field, where they can spread the gospel and influence others with their beliefs¹².
• - **A deterrent to diversity and pluralism.** Some potential recruits who do not share the ideology or agenda of Christian nationalism may be discouraged or alienated from joining the military. They may be concerned about the potential for discrimination, coercion, or harassment based on their religious beliefs or lack thereof. They may also question the compatibility of Christian nationalism with the constitutional principles of separation of church and state, religious freedom, and civil rights²³.
• - **A susceptibility to radicalization or extremism.** Some potential recruits who adhere to Christian nationalism may be vulnerable to radicalization or extremism by groups or movements that promote conspiracy theories, anti-government sentiments, or white supremacy. They may be influenced by false or distorted information, propaganda, or rhetoric that appeals to their fears, grievances, or prejudices. They may also be willing to use violence in the name of God or Christianity²⁴.

Bing, 7/10/2023

(1) Michael Flynn is recruiting an ‘Army of God’ in growing Christian .... https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/michael-flynn-is-recruiting-an-army-of-god-in-growing-christian-nationalist-movement.

(2) Views of U.S. as a Christian nation, Christian nationalism and its .... https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2022/10/27/views-of-the-u-s-as-a-christian-nation-and-opinions-about-christian-nationalism/.

(3) The Coup & The Military-Christian Nationalist Industrial Complex. https://crooksandliars.com/2021/01/coup-military-christian-nationalist.

(4) What Is Christian Nationalism? | Christianity Today. https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2021/february-web-only/what-is-christian-nationalism.html.

Yes, there are some studies on the impact of religious diversity in law enforcement, although they are not very extensive or conclusive. Some of the main findings and challenges are:

• - **Religious diversity can enhance police-community relations.** By having a more diverse and representative police force, law enforcement agencies can build trust and rapport with different religious groups and communities, especially those that may feel marginalized or discriminated by the police. Religious diversity can also help police officers to understand and respect the cultural and religious sensitivities, needs, and rights of the people they serve¹².
• - **Religious diversity can improve police performance and professionalism.** By having a more diverse and inclusive police force, law enforcement agencies can benefit from the different skills, perspectives, and experiences of their officers, especially in dealing with complex and sensitive situations that involve religion. Religious diversity can also help police officers to avoid stereotypes, biases, or prejudices that may impair their judgment or behavior¹².
• - **Religious diversity can pose some challenges and risks for law enforcement.** By having a more diverse and pluralistic police force, law enforcement agencies may face some difficulties or conflicts in accommodating the religious beliefs and practices of their officers, especially when they clash with the policies, procedures, or expectations of the police work. Religious diversity can also create some tensions or divisions within the police force or between the police and the public, especially when religion is used to justify or promote violence, extremism, or discrimination¹³.

Bing, 7/10/2023

(1) The Positive Impact of Religious Diversity on a Police Force. https://www.policechiefmagazine.org/the-positive-impact-of-religious-diversity/.

(2) Few police officers are religion experts. That can create big problems. https://www.deseret.com/indepth/2019/8/1/20755777/few-police-officers-are-religion-experts-that-can-create-big-problems.

(3) Freedom of Religion and Law Enforcement Employment: Recent Court .... https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/freedom-religion-and-law-enforcement-employment-recent-court.

(4) A Practical Reference to Religious Diversity for Operational Police and .... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Practical_Reference_to_Religious_Diversity_for_Operational_Police_and_Emergency_Services.