Neighborhood watch programs have long encouraged citizens to take pride in the welfare of their communities and to adopt a proactive approach to crime prevention. While maximizing citizen vigilance and cooperation with lawful authorities has been associated with reductions in crime, some liberals figure such efforts and the corresponding signage to be unnecessarily exclusionary.
After revolting last year against the decades-old program of communal self-defense and surveillance, woke city councilors in Ann Arbor, Michigan, have since blown taxpayer dollars on the removal of all remaining evidence of the city's Neighborhood Crime Watch program.
'Neighborhood watch signs are expressions of exclusion.'
According to the resolution passed by the city council on Dec. 15 directing the removal of over 600 Neighborhood Crime Watch signs in Ann Arbor, "Neighborhood Watch programs emerged in the 1970s during a period of national anxiety about crime and social change" and were "often rooted in assumptions about who did and did not 'belong' in a neighborhood, reinforcing race-based hyper-vigilance and suspicion particularly toward black, brown, and other marginalized residents and visitors."
The resolution claimed that this dynamic in Ann Arbor, a city whose population today is 66.5% non-Hispanic white, "encouraged informal surveillance practices that disproportionately targeted people of color and contributed to patterns of exclusion under the guise of public safety."
The signs that were posted throughout the city not only denoted a supposedly defunct program but anti-crime messages that "do not reflect Ann Arbor's current public safety values or its commitment to nondiscriminatory enforcement, community trust, and safe spaces for all residents and visitors."
Councilwoman Cynthia Harrison said when the resolution passed, "Signs don’t just sit there, they speak. For many people, especially black and brown residents and visitors, those signs have never felt neutral. They signal that unfamiliarity itself is suspicious, that their presence must be justified, that belonging is conditional," reported the Michigan Daily.
Harrison joined Ann Arbor Mayor Christopher Taylor (D) and Councilwoman Jen Eyer on April 21 for the ceremonial tear-down of the final Neighborhood Crime Watch sign.
As their virtue-signaling campaign — which cost the city at least $18,000 from its general fund balance — came to a close, the leftist trio recycled the revisionist gobbledygook from their resolution.
"Neighborhood watch signs are expressions of exclusion," said Taylor, reported MLive.com
Eyer stated, "It really hearkens back to a time when public safety was more about surveillance and exclusion of people from communities and trying to look out for anyone who looked different."
After reiterating that the crime-prevention signs do "not align with our values," Harrison stressed that "this is a great day."
The Michigan Daily reported in March 1981 that "rather than quivering behind bolted doors, some Ann Arbor residents favoring stepped-up police protection are taking matters into their own hands."
The Neighborhood Watch program, formally adopted the previous year in the wake of 30-year-old Rebecca Huff's savage murder, "banded together neighbors in one-block sections of the city who look and listen for signs of criminal activity."
"It's more or less socializing and really getting to know your neighbors," an Ann Arbor police detective said at the time. "People watch each other's property, apartment-sit, and know each other's cars. If a strange car is seen in the area, the residents can obtain the license plate number and call us on a special communication hookup."
While Neighborhood Watch is officially no more in Ann Arbor, vigilant residents don't need signs or permission to look after their communities and can always share insights and tips with one another on apps like Citizen and Nextdoor.
According to Neighborhood Scout, the likelihood of becoming a victim of a property crime and a violent crime in the Democrat-run city is 1 in 47 and 1 in 296, respectively.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here
When a dictator in a distant, war-torn nation announces a plan to shrink an ethnic group inside his borders, the Western world erupts. Anchors denounce it. Newspapers detail the plight of the targeted people. Sanctions follow. Diplomats whisper about regime change. The moral verdict arrives quickly, and it arrives correctly: ethnic cleansing.
Yet Western leaders now make a parallel declaration in a cleaner suit. Their countries, they insist, have grown “too white.” The white population must fall. The electorate must change. No denunciations follow. No sanctions arrive. Corporate press treats the project as enlightened policy. A global consensus that once claimed to oppose ethnic cleansing now tolerates it — provided the target is white people in Western nations.
If the West still claims to oppose ethnic cleansing, it should start by opposing it at home and refusing the polite lies that protect it.
French writer Renaud Camus gave us the "Great Replacement.” For years, polite society treated the phrase as radioactive. Say it on television and you became a pariah. Post it online and platforms erased you. That taboo held only as long as people could be bullied into denying what they could see.
The concept’s explanatory power proved stronger than the gatekeepers. Major conservative outlets now discuss replacement openly. YouTube will still attach warnings to videos that mention it, yet the subject refuses to disappear because the policy keeps showing up in schools, boardrooms, and border statistics.
A taboo cannot survive daily evidence.
“Diversity” served as a euphemism for replacement long before anyone had heard of Camus. When a corporation, movie studio, or university says it wants to “increase diversity,” it never means it plans to hire more white, straight men because it has too many trans black women on staff.
Diversity, equity, and inclusion never aimed at demographic proportionality. Leadership announced a preference: more non-white members, fewer white members. Declare a goal of reducing any other demographic, and the public would recognize the project as naked discrimination.
Private institutions practicing anti-white discrimination is bad enough. Governments adopting the same objective is a nightmare. Progressive voices in the United States celebrate the declining share of white Americans and brag that demographic change will lock Democrats into permanent power. They frame replacement as destiny, then use policy to accelerate it, then denounce anyone who notices as a “conspiracy theorist.”
Project Veritas recorded a State Department official admitting that replacement migration functions as a political strategy meant to secure electoral victory. That admission matters less than the broader point: Public and private rhetoric have normalized the idea that a party may change the electorate to entrench itself.
Even if ethnic hatred played no role — and it does — the effort to subvert democratic accountability through mass migration amounts to a political coup. A ruling class that imports a friendlier electorate to escape judgment for its failures announces contempt for the people it claims to serve.
Spain offers a clear example. Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez and the Socialist Workers’ Party plan amnesty for 500,000 immigrants. Sánchez could not secure parliamentary support for the scheme, so he bypassed Parliament with an amnesty decree. Spain’s population runs about 49 million. Scaled to American size, that’s roughly 3.5 million people granted legal status by executive fiat. Far-left politician Irene Montero went farther, telling a crowd she hoped for “replacement theory” and meant to use new migrant voters to wipe out her political opponents.
The United Kingdom looks worse. Visitors to London joke that the Englishman has become an endangered species in the cities his ancestors built. Officials now want the countryside next. The Department for Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs has decided rural England feels “too white” and “too middle class.” It has launched programs to “diversify” protected landscapes and village life.
Officials then discovered an awkward detail: Many Muslim migrants dislike dogs, a staple of country living, and avoid living around them. Planners treat dogs, solitude, and preserved land as “white culture,” then hunt for ways to remake rural life so it attracts Pakistanis and Bangladeshis.
Listen to the admission hiding inside that language. The government intends to make the countryside less like a place where white people live so that fewer white people will live there. It plans to change the character of the land, the habits of the residents, and the public culture, all to engineer a demographic outcome. That is social transformation by state design.
RELATED:The left is at war in Minnesota. America is watching football.
Diversity, equity, inclusion, decolonization — the euphemisms multiply, but the goal stays constant. Even the Great Replacement argument, while useful, still softens what the policy does. When a party, an institution, or a government targets a group for reduction, removal, or displacement, the correct term is not “diversification.” It’s ethnic cleansing.
This process does not arise from a neutral demographic ebb. Politicians announce it. Activists demand it. Bureaucrats implement it. Corporate managers enforce it. Then they threaten anyone who objects with professional ruin. Fear keeps the system humming, and euphemism keeps the conscience quiet.
Enough. That taboo deserves to die. When politicians, corporate leaders, and professors declare their intention to replace white populations, they deserve the same disgust any advocate of ethnic cleansing would receive in any other context. If the West still claims to oppose ethnic cleansing, it should start by opposing it at home and refusing the polite lies that protect it.
In his damning Dec. 15 article in Compact magazine titled "The Lost Generation," Los Angeles-based writer Jacob Savage detailed the disenfranchisement of white male Millennials and their systematic exclusion from various industries, especially academia, entertainment, medicine, the news media, and tech.
While America has long been reckoning with the fallout of the DEI war on meritocracy, Savage's viral article — which journalist Matt Taibbi indicated was initially accepted by the Atlantic on the condition that it avoid making the bigger societal point — crystallized for many, with the help of statistics and personal accounts, the extent and true impact of that racist campaign.
'This was an injustice, plain and simple.'
After Vice President JD Vance weighed in on the article and the discrimination discussed therein, U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Chairwoman Andrea Lucas released a video on social media imploring white men to seek damages — a video that Vance subsequently shared.
"Are you a white male who has experienced discrimination at work based on your race or sex? You may have a claim to recover money under federal civil rights laws," said Lucas, a Republican critic of DEI and mother of two who was appointed to lead the EEOC by President Donald Trump in January.
The EEOC is the sole federal agency authorized to probe and litigate against private companies for violations of federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination.
Lucas, who previously noted that Savage's article told "a story chock full of unlawful discrimination," said in the video that it was imperative that those keen on taking action contact the EEOC as soon as possible, as "time limits are typically strict for filing a claim."
The EEOC chairwoman also noted in a follow-up message, "You may have waived your right to money, but you still have the right to blow the whistle and participate in the EEOC process — and EEOC can sue on behalf of a class."
— (@)
Lucas has made no secret of her contempt for DEI.
In a May 2024 speech — nearly a year after the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. Harvard/UNC, banning race-based college admission — Lucas stated:
Race or sex cannot be even a plus factor, a tiebreaker, or a tipping point in the employment context. People sometimes think that race or sex can be part of the equation for an employment decision if race or sex is not the sole factor, the exclusive factor, or the deciding factor. That is dead wrong. If race or sex was all or part of an employer's motivation, that violates federal employment law.
She noted during the Q&A following her remarks that "many employers, by doing lazy, high-level virtue signaling, paint-by-numbers DEI, have mass discrimination."
Proponents of the DEI regime were evidently prickled by Lucas' latest remarks.
David Glasgow, executive director of the Meltzer Center for Diversity, Inclusion, and Belonging at the NYU School of Law, told the Associated Press that Lucas' recent posts demonstrate a "fundamental misunderstanding of what DEI is."
"It's really much more about creating a culture in which you get the most out of everyone who you're bringing on board, where everyone experiences fairness and equal opportunity, including white men and members of other groups," Glasgow said. "If DEI has been this engine of discrimination against white men, I have to say it hasn't really been doing a very good job at achieving that."
RELATED: Trump takes a wrecking ball to the woke campus economy
Jenny Yang, a former EEOC chairwoman who was appointed by former President Barack Obama, similarly complained, suggesting it was "problematic" for Lucas to speak out about the disenfranchisement of white men.
"It suggests some sort of priority treatment," said Yang, who served as deputy assistant to former President Joe Biden for so-called racial justice and equity. "That's not something that sounds to me like equal opportunity for all."
Hours ahead of Lucas sharing her video to social media, Vice President JD Vance noted on X that Savage's article was "an incredible piece that describes the evil of DEI and its consequences."
"A lot of people think DEI is lame diversity seminars or racial slogans at NFL games," Vance wrote. "In reality, it was a deliberate program of discrimination primarily against white men."
"This is why the Trump administration has so dedicated itself to eradicating racist discrimination. We've eliminated funding for DEI, required government grantees to certify that they're not engaged in DEI, fired a number of DEI employees, and asked the great [Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Harmeet Dhillon] to aggressively prosecute all forms of racial discrimination," the vice president continued. "For too many Democrat leaders, racial discrimination was bad unless it targeted white men. This was an injustice, plain and simple."
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Major League Baseball (MLB) threatened to punish several Christian ballplayers for the San Francisco Giants on Monday after they inscribed Bible verses on their team’s “pride night” uniforms. “The writing on the cap violates our rules, and consistent with normal practice, we have warned the players about future violations,” MLB Chief Communications Officer Pat Courtney […]
Lipscomb Academy officials vehemently deny claims that the private school's leadership has injected DEI into the Church of Christ school.
On Wednesday, Penske Truck Rental tried to Bud Light itself by releasing a virtue-signaling statement criticizing the Department of Homeland Security for using one of its vehicles during an immigration enforcement operation. “Penske Truck Rental is aware of recent reports and videos regarding a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) operation in Los Angeles,” the statement […]
www.theblaze.com
thefederalist.com
85-year-old hockey scout compliments female reporter — so team gets fined $5,000
A hockey scout with more than 30 years of experience landed his team a fine recently after his comment went viral online.
Terry Bonner, 85, was happy to talk about his team's newest draft picks last week, but seemingly could not help but give a female reporter a compliment before answering her question.
'The remarks are not reflective of the organization's standards of respect and inclusion.'
Bonner is the head scout for the Vancouver Giants, a team in the Western Hockey League, one of three leagues that make up Canada's junior hockey system. The Canadian system produces more NHL players than anywhere else in the world.
Since Bonner has been a scout in the WHL since 1992 and his team had the third pick in the draft, he was brought on for commentary during draft coverage on the Victory+ network.
Host Cami Kepke asked Bonner about the Giants' pick, a promising 14-year-old youngster named Eli Vickers.
"What made him a fit for the Giants organization?" Kepke asked, noting the player's talent level.
"Well, thank you very much. You're a good-looking girl," Bonner responded. The scout had a chuckle, then gave his reasoning for his team's picks.
The lone compliment was enough to set off alarm bells for the WHL, and it likely did not help that just one version of the video on X was seen by more than 2.5 million viewers.
According to Fox News, WHL Commissioner Dan Near said in a statement that the Giants would be fined $5,000 over the remark, because Bonner's conduct was apparently detrimental to the league.
RELATED: 'Go make a sandwich Mary': Cleveland media spirals over 'sexist' NFL reporting scandal
"Accountability is a cornerstone value of our league — that includes both players and staff," Near explained. The commissioner added that Bonner's comment fell short of what the league expects in terms of "inclusion."
"In this instance, regardless of intent, the remarks are not reflective of the organization's standards of respect and inclusion."
The WHL has mandatory training and webinars on "respect in hockey," which include educating players about "consent, healthy relationships, diversity, and the risks of bullying, hazing, harassment, and abuse."
The league has also said it requires annual "mandatory WHL Diversity and Inclusion education" and bars players from participating in any conduct — including speech, gestures, or social media posts — that are considered derogatory.
Blaze News has reached out to the Vancouver Giants for comment.
RELATED: Nike apologizes and removes Boston ad that joked about tolerance
Reporter Kepke has not made any public statements regarding the matter and did not respond to a request for comment from Blaze News.
Kepke recently announced that she would be working for Canadian broadcaster TSN as well as Victory+ for the WHL championship and has worked in sports broadcasting for about 10 years.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!