Mediaboss Marketing

Jesse Powell, a founder and the chief executive of Kraken, one of the worlds largest cryptocurrency exchanges, recently asked his employees, If you can identify as a sex, can you identify as a race or ethnicity?

He also questioned their use of preferred pronouns and led a discussion about who can refer to another person as the N word.

And he told workers that questions about womens intelligence and risk appetite compared with mens were not as settled as one might have initially thought.

In the process, Mr. Powell, a 41-year-old Bitcoin pioneer, ignited a culture war among his more than 3,000 workers, according to interviews with five Kraken employees, as well as internal documents, videos and chat logs reviewed by The New York Times. Some workers have openly challenged the chief executive for what they see as his hurtful comments. Others have accused him of fostering a hateful workplace and damaging their mental health. Dozens are considering quitting, said the employees, who did not want to speak publicly for fear of retaliation.

Corporate culture wars have abounded during the coronavirus pandemic as remote work, inequity and diversity have become central issues at workplaces. At Meta, which owns Facebook, restive employees have agitated over racial justice. At Netflix, employees protested the companys support for the comedian Dave Chappelle after he aired a special that was criticized as transphobic.

But rarely has such angst been actively stoked by the top boss. And even in the male-dominated cryptocurrency industry, which is known for a libertarian philosophy that promotes freewheeling speech, Mr. Powell has taken that ethos to an extreme.

His boundary pushing comes amid a deepening crypto downturn. On Tuesday, Coinbase, one of Krakens main competitors, said it was laying off 18 percent of its employees, following job cuts at Gemini and Crypto.com, two other crypto exchanges. Kraken which is valued at $11 billion, according to PitchBook is also grappling with the turbulence in the crypto market, as the price of Bitcoin has plunged to its lowest point since 2020.

Mr. Powells culture crusade, which has largely played out on Krakens Slack channels, may be part of a wider effort to push out workers who dont believe in the same values as the crypto industry is retrenching, the employees said.

This month, Mr. Powell unveiled a 31-page culture document outlining Krakens libertarian philosophical values and commitment to diversity of thought, and told employees in a meeting that he did not believe they should choose their own pronouns. The document and a recording of the meeting were obtained by The Times.

Those who disagreed could quit, Mr. Powell said, and opt into a program that would provide four months of pay if they affirmed that they would never work at Kraken again. Employees have until Monday to decide if they want to take part.

On Monday, Christina Yee, a Kraken executive, gave those on the fence a nudge, writing in a Slack post that the C.E.O., company, and culture are not going to change in a meaningful way.

If someone strongly dislikes or hates working here or thinks those here are hateful or have poor character, she said, work somewhere that doesnt disgust you.

After The Times contacted Kraken about its internal conversations, the company publicly posted an edited version of its culture document on Tuesday. In a statement, Alex Rapoport, a spokeswoman, said Kraken does not tolerate inappropriate discussions. She added that as the company more than doubled its work force in recent years, we felt the time was right to reinforce our mission and our values.

Mr. Powell and Ms. Yee did not respond to requests for comment. In a Twitter thread on Wednesday in anticipation of this article, Mr. Powell said that about 20 people were not on board with Krakens culture and that even though teams should have more input, he was way more studied on policy topics.

People get triggered by everything and cant conform to basic rules of honest debate, he wrote. Back to dictatorship.

The conflict at Kraken shows the difficulty of translating cryptos political ideologies to a modern workplace, said Finn Brunton, a technology studies professor at the University of California, Davis, who wrote a book in 2019 about the history of digital currencies. Many early Bitcoin proponents championed freedom of ideas and disdained government intrusion; more recently, some have rejected identity politics and calls for political correctness.

A lot of the big whales and big representatives now theyre trying to bury that history, Mr. Brunton said. The people who are left who really hold to that are feeling more embattled.

Mr. Powell, who attended California State University, Sacramento, started an online store in 2001 called Lewt, which sold virtual amulets and potions to gamers. A decade later, he embraced Bitcoin as an alternative to government-backed money.

In 2011, Mr. Powell worked on Mt. Gox, one of the first crypto exchanges, helping the company navigate a security issue. (Mt. Gox collapsed in 2014.)

Mr. Powell founded Kraken later in 2011 with Thanh Luu, who sits on the companys board. The start-up operates a crypto exchange where investors can trade digital assets. Kraken had its headquarters in San Francisco but is now a largely remote operation. It has raised funds from investors like Hummingbird Ventures and Tribe Capital.

As cryptocurrency prices skyrocketed in recent years, Kraken became the second-largest crypto exchange in the United States behind Coinbase, according to CoinMarketCap, an industry data tracker. Mr. Powell said last year that he was planning to take the company public.

He also insisted that some workers subscribe to Bitcoins philosophical underpinnings. We have this ideological purity test, Mr. Powell said about the companys hiring process on a 2018 crypto podcast. A test of whether youre kind of aligned with the vision of Bitcoin and crypto.

In 2019, former Kraken employees posted scathing comments about the company on Glassdoor, a website where workers write anonymous reviews of their employers.

Kraken is the perfect allegory for any utopian government ideal, one reviewer wrote. Great ideas in theory but in practice they end up very controlling, negative and mistrustful.

In response, Krakens parent company sued the anonymous reviewers and tried to force Glassdoor to reveal their identities. A court ordered Glassdoor to turn over some names.

On Glassdoor, Mr. Powell has a 96 percent approval rating. The site adds, This employer has taken legal action against reviewers.

At Kraken, Mr. Powell is part of a Slack group called trolling-999plus, according to messages viewed by The Times. The group is labeled and you thought 4chan was full of trolls, referring to the anonymous online message board known for hate speech and radicalizing some of the gunmen behind mass shootings.

In April, a Kraken employee posted a video internally on a different Slack group that set off the latest fracas. The video featured two women who said they preferred $100 in cash over a Bitcoin, which at the time cost more than $40,000. But this is how female brain works, the employee commented.

Mr. Powell chimed in. He said the debate over womens mental abilities was unsettled. Most American ladies have been brainwashed in modern times, he added on Slack, in an exchange viewed by The Times.

His comments fueled a furor.

For the person we look to for leadership and advocacy to joke about us being brainwashed in this context or make light of this situation is hurtful, wrote one female employee.

It isnt heartening to see your genders minds, capabilities, and preferences discussed like this, another wrote. Its incredibly othering and harmful to women.

Being offended is not being harmed, Mr. Powell responded. A discussion about science, biology, attempting to determine facts of the world cannot be harmful.

At a companywide meeting on June 1, Mr. Powell was discussing Krakens global footprint, with workers in 70 countries, when he veered to the topic of preferred pronouns. It was time for Kraken to control the language, he said on the video call.

Its just not practical to allow 3,000 people to customize their pronouns, he said.

That same day, he invited employees to join him in a Slack channel called debate-pronouns where he suggested that people use pronouns based not on their gender identity but their sex at birth, according to conversations seen by The Times. He shut down replies to the thread after it became contentious.

Mr. Powell reopened discussion on Slack the next day to ask why people couldnt choose their race or ethnicity. He later said the conversation was about who could use the N-word, which he noted wasnt a slur when used affectionately.

Mr. Powell also circulated the culture document, titled Kraken Culture Explained.

We Dont Forbid Offensiveness, read one section. Another said employees should show tolerance for diverse thinking; refrain from labeling comments as toxic, hateful, racist, x-phobic, unhelpful, etc.; and avoid censoring others.

It also explained that the company had eschewed vaccine requirements in the name of Krakenite bodily autonomy. In a section titled self-defense, it said that law-abiding citizens should be able to arm themselves.

You may need to regularly consider these crypto and libertarian values when making work decisions, it said.

In the edited version of the document that Kraken publicly posted, mentions of Covid-19 vaccinations and the companys belief in letting people arm themselves were omitted.

Those who disagreed with the document were encouraged to depart. At the June 1 meeting, Mr. Powell unveiled the Jet Ski Program, which the company has labeled a recommitment to its core values. Anyone who felt uncomfortable had two weeks to leave, with four months pay.

If you want to leave Kraken, read a memo about the program, we want it to feel like you are hopping on a jet ski and heading happily to your next adventure!

Kitty Bennett and Aimee Ortiz contributed research.

Read more:
Inside Krakens Culture War Stoked by Its C.E.O. - The New York Times

Im referring to India, a constitutionally secular nation wracked by inter-religious conflict between majority Hindus and minority Muslims (Christians have been caught in this imbroglio, too, but put that aside for the duration of this post).

Heres a recent overview of Indias situation from The Washington Post. And heres the top of that report::

NEW DELHI After a spokeswoman for Indias ruling party made disparaging remarks about the prophet Muhammad during a recent televised debate, rioters took to the streets in the northern city of Kanpur, throwing rocks and clashing with police.

It was only the beginning of a controversy that would have global repercussions.

Indian products were soon taken off shelves in the Persian Gulf after a high-ranking Muslim cleric called for boycotts. Hashtags expressing anger at Prime Minister Narendra Modi began trending on Arabic-language Twitter. Three Muslim-majority countries Qatar, Kuwait and Iran summoned their Indian ambassadors to convey their displeasure. The governments of Saudi Arabia, Indonesia and Afghanistan on Monday condemned the spokeswoman, Nupur Sharma, as did the Organization of Islamic Cooperation.

Inflammatory comments by right-wing activists and political leaders in India often make headlines and spark outrage on social media. But rarely do they elicit the kind of attention that Sharma drew in [early June], which sent her political party and Indias diplomats scrambling to contain an international public relations crisis.

Lets step back from the news coverage for a moment to consider some underlying dynamics and their impact on journalism.

Culture wars, to my mind, are, in essence, political struggles in which one group seeks to impose its values, structures, and narrative its world view, in short on another. At least, this is the way the term is used in most mainstream coverage, as opposed to the actual work of the sociologist James Davison Hunter who wrote the most influential book on this topic.

Individual and societal values drawn from religious sources provide the ammunition for clashes over gender and sexuality issues, religious tolerance and intolerance, acceptable speech, immigration and other hot-button topics spurred by todays unprecedented rate of social change.

Americans have seen how ugly culture wars can become when electoral politics are caught in its talons. Witness the vitriol that dominates the news out of Washington and various state capitals these days.

Witness the level of culture wars manipulation that occurred under ex-President Donald Trump (of course pro-MAGA conservatives will argue that progressive Democrats the problem). And witness what happened in Idaho, where 31 anti-gay demonstrators were arrested for allegedly planning to riot at a gay pride parade last Saturday. The Coeur dAlene incident underscored how dangerous Americas culture war has become and what we might expect more of.

The situation in India the worlds largest Hindu-majority nation with the third largest Muslim population after Indonesia and Pakistan is arguably even worse. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) have long been accused of rallying their Hindu nationalist base by sowing, for example, Hindu fears about Muslim men seducing Hindu women.

(In truth, many Muslims seem no more accepting of Hindu-Muslim unions than are Hindus. This Hindustan Times story from May underscores this reality.)

Heres a bit more explanation from the Post piece to which I linked above.

The [insult] controversy highlights one of the challenges to Indian foreign policy at a time when Modi is seeking a greater role on the world stage: Although his government has cultivated strong diplomatic ties with many Muslim nations, including both Saudi Arabia and Iran, his party has come under growing criticism for its treatment of Indias Muslim minority. It is accused by rights groups of stoking Hindu nationalist sentiment and turning a blind eye to religious violence.

India under Modi has been quite deft in dealing with the Muslim world, but this was almost inevitable, said Sumit Ganguly, a professor of political science at Indiana University. At home, a lynching takes place and Modi remains deafeningly silent. Now, he feels compelled to act because he realizes the damage abroad could be extensive. When it comes to foreign policy, the stakes are high.

The Indian government has sought to downplay a string of local religious controversies in recent months, including a ban on headscarves for female students, the razing of Muslim neighborhoods after communal clashes, and efforts by Hindu nationalists to reclaim high-profile mosques [that were once Hindu temple sites].

To better understand Indias complicated religious landscape read these two partisan pieces. The first is from an Indian Hindu perspective. The second is from a Muslim viewpoint, featured at Religion News Service.

Whats my bottom line? Governments and groups that stir conflict by focusing on religion and culture, for their own preservationist desires, are playing with fire.

Examples abound: From the American Civil War to Nazi Germany, from Israel and Palestine to Northern Irelands Protestant-Catholic troubles, to Myanmars treatment of its Rohingya Muslims and Chinas claim that its minority Muslim groups all represent a terrorist threat.

The reality is political leaders have long perhaps always used so-called culture war tactics to harden their support. Is it worse today? I cant really say.

What I can say, however, is that the deadliness of modern weaponry a category that includes the internet as well as tactical nuclear weapons raises the specter of culture wars becoming bloodier than ever. That includes the United States of America. Because were no smarter about these incessant problems than are Indians or any other of the other nationalities mentioned here.

That, dear readers, should worry you. It should also make you wonder about the responsibility journalists have in this issue.

My take is that its not enough to just regurgitate manipulative comments from leaders on both sides and then call it fair and objective journalism. I think we need context and the courage to challenge those who care more about careers than country.

Walking that path is, of course, far from easy. It has its own set of problems that are far too complex for me to detail here. But if you simply give additional serious thought to this issue, Ill consider my work here done.

FIRST IMAGE: Social-media image of protests against remarks by Bharatiya Janata Party spokesperson Nupur Sharma, featured at the OpIndia commentary website.

Excerpt from:
What responsibility do journalists have when covering incendiary wars about religion and culture? - GetReligion

Being called boring by his own shadow cabinet appears to have really got under Keir Starmers skin.

The Labour leader was throwing culture references around like confetti in PMQs, one minute name-checking Obi-Wan Kenobi, the next going on about Love Island.

In truth, the jokes fell rather flat, but you could hardly fault him for effort.

But while Starmer wanted to talk about Star Wars, it was the UKs culture wars that Boris Johnson wanted to stoke.

Rail strikes, Rwanda deportation flights and Brexit were all given an airing by the prime minister, for the simple reason that he - rightly - believes they make things electorally tricky for Labour.

So next weeks planned walkout by members of the RMT are Labours strikes because the opposition cant bring themselves to criticise a trade union.

On Rwanda, the PM said Labour were on the side of the people traffickers who would risk peoples lives at sea because they criticise the governments policy of sending asylum seekers on a one-way journey to east Africa.

And on Brexit, Johnson said that given half a chance, Labour would take the UK back into the European Union. Nonsense, of course, but it plays very well in the Red Wall.

After narrowly escaping an attempt by his own MPs to turf him out office, the prime minister clearly believes that the best way to save his job is to turn politics into an Us versus Them battle.

It worked for him in 2019 and, he clearly believes, it will prove fruitful again at the next election, should he still be Conservative leader then.

Until Starmer comes up with plausible positions on the most divisive issues in British politics, Johnson is right to feel optimistic.

More here:
Analysis: While Starmer Jokes About Star Wars, Johnson Is Stoking Up The Culture Wars - HuffPost UK

Charles W. Milliken| The Daily Telegram

As the Russian invasion of Ukraine settles into a slugfest in the east of the country, headlines appear suggesting many difficulties. There is a split within NATO as to how much support is appropriate to give to Ukraine. Weapons of sufficient range and lethality to allow the Ukrainian army to defeat the Russians will only prolong the war.

In the U.S., there is a political segment wondering why we have ever helped the Ukrainians at all. How does saving Ukraine from being dominated by the Russians serve American interests? Why are we sending billions to Ukraine while we have shortages of baby formula? Besides all this, if we give the Ukrainians what they need, might not that force Putin into a humiliating corner, and then who knows what he might do with, for instance, nukes?

This all sounds familiar. When Chamberlin went to Munich, he wondered why endanger the peace in Europe by denying Hitler what he wanted in Czechoslovakia? That would mean war, and Chamberlin wanted peace in our time. After all, Hitler only wanted the Sudetenland, where many Germans lived, supposedly oppressed by the Czech majority.

Putin, perhaps, only really wants a couple Eastern provinces, and the south coast, where many ethnically Russians live, oppressed by the neo-Nazi Ukrainians, leaving the rest of the country to its own devices. It can be swallowed up later, the principle of rewarding aggression having beenestablished. Did Hitler stop with the Sudentland? Of course not. After shortly swallowing up the rest of Czechoslovakia, he also took a chunk of Lithuania in March 1939. Who cares about Lithuania?

England and France were riven by fear, and the U.S. stood aloof in our continental isolation. Why should we get involved in another European intertribal spat? I think we all know how that worked out.

Once we were in, however, we were in it to win it.There was no talk of giving Hitler, Tojoand Mussolini an exit ramp.There was no talk of prolonging the war by pouring massive amounts of American blood and treasure into the fight. There was only one exit ramp for the dictators, and that was unconditional surrender.That was the end of them. Well, not quite.Stalin was left standing in a deal with the devil.

After World War II, winning ceased to be an option.Korea was a stalemate, mostly because of fear of Russian nukes if we went too far.Vietnam was a defeat after years of wasted blood and treasure because we did not have the fortitude to win it.Russian nukes, again.The first Gulf War was fought to a tactical victory, and strategic defeat as Saddam Hussein was left in power.It took another set of wars which we were not willing to see to complete victory, thus the humiliation in Afghanistan.

If the history of the world teaches us anything, I think it is that those who have the will to win and the means will win. Hitler had the will, but not the means. To switch to domestic politics, how many of the culture wars have been won by the side with the will to win? The losers in these wars are those who were willing to compromise, to be bi-partisan,to be reasonable, to understand the other side. If wars arent worth winning, why fight at all? Surrender immediately and save the cost.

If, in the current situation, we do not wish to reward Russian aggression, the path forward is very simple. Arm the Ukrainians to the teeth. Break the Russian blockade of Odessa in the Black Sea. Millions are facing hunger, or worse, if Ukrainian grain is not exported.The Russian Black Sea fleet couldnt stand up to our Navy for five minutes, and they know it. If, after that, the Ukrainians cannot expel the Russians, then we have a different and far more serious problem.

Concluding thoughts: If evil is given an off ramp,it will win; compromise is just another word for surrender on the installment plan.

Charles Milliken is a professor emeritus after 22 years of teaching economics and related subjects at Siena Heights University. He can be reached at milliken.charles@gmail.com.

See the rest here:
History shows those who have the will to win will win - Monroe Evening News

Ive been meaning to write a column on the growing threat and reality of violence to Americas LGBTQ community posed by right-wing rhetoric and politics, but its proved a difficult piece to write. Not because the culture wars around sexuality and gender are complicated they can be, although the notion of loving all people for who they are is pretty simple but because new, outrageous incidents keep topping the ones I planned to write about.

Literally as I hit the send button on a note to my editors about this column, it was reported that police in Baltimore are investigating multiple fires on a city street as a possible hate crime which sent three people to the hospital in which a Pride flag celebrating LGBTQ rights was reportedly set ablaze.

Officials there had good reason to be alarmed, after this weekends widely reported incident in which 31 members of the white nationalist Patriot Front the weird khaki-wearing extremists who marched through Philadelphia last July 4 were arrested in Coeur dAlene, Idaho, after piling into a rented U-Haul truck armed with riot gear, apparently with the goal of violently disrupting the annual Pride event underway there.

This occurred right after several members of another well-known, violent extremist group, the Proud Boys some of them wearing T-shirts with images of AK-47s showed up at the San Lorenzo, Calif., public library to disrupt and shut down a drag queen story time childrens book event, shouting homophobic slurs. As the author and transgender advocate Parker Molloy wrote in a recent newsletter, both the Idaho and California events had been targeted by a social media feed called Libs of TikTok that has developed a huge following on the right with some 1.2 million Twitter followers and attracted much controversy.

Wrote Molloy: Things are getting really bad for LGBTQ people out there, and I just dont see how itll get any better, especially in the short term. Republicans and their allies in right-wing media are going on the attack. Their goal is to create reasonable-sounding arguments (No, you see, I just really care about fairness in womens sports!), and then use that to wipe out LGBTQ people.

I dont think Molloy is unduly alarmist. To the contrary, its only getting worse by the day. We are now seeing a dangerous loop in which the most extreme voices on the far right led, ironically, by so-called pastors are making genocidal comments about our brothers and sisters in the LBGTQ community. In Americas statehouses, Republican lawmakers who claim to be worried about real-life problems like inflation are instead spending all of their time translating hate speech into proposed laws that would make societal pariahs out of transgender kids. In chat rooms and militia training sessions, the soldiers of extremism are on the brink of taking all of this to the next blood-drenched level.

The increasingly dangerous, violent rhetoric has been amplified to 11 by the likes of Mark Burns, a prominent South Carolina televangelist and Donald Trump enthusiast who just ran for Congress (and lost, thankfully) and who said this month that LGBTQ-friendly schoolteachers are a national security threat guilty of treason, which should be punishable by execution. In Idaho, where that Pride parade violence was narrowly averted, Pastor Joe Jones of Shield of Faith Baptist Church in Boise kicked things up a notch by declaring in a video that subsequently went viral: God told the nation that he ruled: Put them to death. Put all queers to death.

In a healthy democracy truly committed to liberty and human rights, our elected leaders would be condemning these shocking calls for violence. Instead, Republican lawmakers are working overtime to figure out how to channel this alarming new far-right zeitgeist into the fake respectability of law and not just in the blood-red states of the old Confederacy. It was jarring to see Pennsylvanias GOP-led legislature immediately after the mass shooting in Uvalde, the all-too-real national security threat to our kids squelch any meaningful debate on gun control while the state Senate was instead passing a blanket ban on transgender youth in school sports.

We are in a day when good is called evil and evil is called good, claimed one of the bills cosponsors, State Sen. Doug Mastriano, who happens to be the current Republican nominee for governor. If he wins and a major new poll has Mastriano within the margin of error (such a fitting phrase) of defeating Democrat Josh Shapiro he would surely sign this legislation into law in 2023. As Ive written previously in this space, homophobia especially against Pennsylvanias transgender community is a driving force of Mastrianos movement and, increasingly, the Republican Party writ large. And its a matter of time before this gets someone killed.

READ MORE: Homophobia is Mastrianos driving force | Will Bunch Newsletter

This story is understandably shocking to many Americans. When the Supreme Court made same-sex marriage the law of the land with its 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges ruling, it felt to many like the final chapter in an American feel-good story of increasing tolerance that would only get better with the ascension of open-minded new generations. Instead, the epilogue has been a violent wrenching backward of the arc of a moral universe.

In focusing on laws like transgender sports bans which affect a handful of kids, in a matter that can and should be handled by sports regulatory bodies, and not the stuff of state legislation or Floridas notoriously and now-copied Dont Say Gay law, the Republican Party is sending a message that is both heartbreakingly cruel to the humans directly affected but also meant to intimidate all people it wants to keep on societys margin. We have a word for when this type of inhumane bullying becomes the governing philosophy, and its time to start using it.

That word is fascism.

This American version of an authoritarian dystopia wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross, as long predicted is numbingly similar to the worlds past versions of autocracy, with brutal anti-LGBTQ discrimination so often on the cutting edge for movements also cloaked in white supremacy, patriarchy, and other forms of repression.

The parallels between what happened in Germany in the 1920s when the short-lived Weimar Republic saw a period of liberalizing and openness around human sexuality and the 1930s, when the brutal repression of Adolf Hitlers Nazi Party took root, should be alarming to Americans in the 2020s. In May 1933, right after Hitler took power, students in clean white shirts (shades of todays Patriot Front) marched on Berlins Institute for Sexual Research a bastion of Weimar liberalism which was a prelude to its library being burned down and the arrest of its leader.

By the mid-1930s, Hitlers Gestapo had formed a unit to arrest gay men under a previously not-enforced law, netting some 8,500 prisoners. As Europe devolved into the horrors of World War II, its known that thousands of men accused of homosexuality perhaps as many as 15,000 did not survive the Nazi death camps. The pink triangle that the imprisoned were forced to wear would later be adopted as a symbol of resistance by the movement for gay rights, which should not minimize the horrors that occurred under this image. They were mechanically raped, castrated, favored for medical experiments and murdered for guards sadistic pleasure even when they were not sentenced for liquidation, Case Western Reserve University historian John Broich wrote for Newsweek.

It cant happen here? Its already starting to happen right now, and its happening in conjunction with so many other warning signs of creeping fascism: daily, stunning revelations of a failed putsch that occurred not inside a beer hall but at the U.S. Capitol, the rise of a political class wedded to a Big Lie that could end democratic elections, and the rise of a Christian nationalism that is converting The Handmaids Tale into a work of nonfiction. Every days headlines scream out for the truth, that this is Nazi-type stuff.

And its spiraling out of control in June, a month for remembering the courageous 1969 pioneers of Stonewall, but also the horrors of the backlash that erupted in a hail of gunfire at the Pulse nightclub in 2016. Some 53 years after Greenwich Village and just six years after Orlando, America is on the precipice. There is still barely time to grab the arc of the moral universe back from the men in crisp white shirts trying to break it.

READ MORE: SIGN UP: The Will Bunch Newsletter

Read the original here:
GOPs violent, expanding war on LBGTQ kids should make you think about 1930s Germany | Will Bunch - The Philadelphia Inquirer