Americans Want Republican Leadership That Acts
Trump understood something the consultant class never did: Americans do not want timid caretakers of decline. They want leaders and fighters.Trump understood something the consultant class never did: Americans do not want timid caretakers of decline. They want leaders and fighters.Most new jobs are going to women — and 1 in 3 men have given up
President Donald Trump celebrated the jobs report published on Friday by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, which shows that American employers added jobs for the third consecutive month.
The report, which Trump called "great," says the U.S. economy added 172,000 jobs last month; the unemployment rate remained unchanged at 4.3%; the number of unemployed people, 7.3 million, "changed little over the month"; and the labor force participation rate held at 61.8%.
'Bodes ill for the country.'
Total employment growth for the months of March and April were revised up by 29,000 and 64,000, respectively.
"This is a labor market that is stronger than it was last year and is looking pretty darn solid, despite high energy prices and higher inflation generally," Gus Faucher, chief economist at PNC, told CNBC. "There's no indication that the labor market needs support."
While the labor market is purportedly healthy, there are a pair of potentially destabilizing trends under way behind the scenes: the overwhelming majority of new payroll jobs are going to women, and a staggering number of men have given up on finding a job.
Jason Riley, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, recently highlighted that "the share of American men in the labor force has dipped to record lows." Labor Department data revealed last month that one in three men were neither working nor looking for a job.
RELATED: Steelworkers need a future, not another merger war
The male labor-force participation rate has declined significantly in recent years, to say nothing of the precipitous decline that has taken place over the past century. The male LFP rate was 87% in 1948, 75% in 2000, and — according to the latest jobs report — 67.2% in May.
"The premature absence of millions of able-bodied men from our workforce, combined with the continuing retirement of the Baby Boomers and significant reductions in immigration, bodes ill for the country," wrote Riley.
While there are multiple factors at play — Baby Boomers are, for instance, retiring en masse; young men are dropping off to study; there is diminished demand for non-college male labor; and prime-age men are falling to the wayside because of illness and disabilities — the Washington Post recently pointed out that:
the labor market has weakened since early 2025, with most job opportunities concentrated in areas typically dominated by women, including health care and private education. At the same time, several male-dominated industries, including manufacturing, transportation, and mining have shed jobs, leaving a mismatch between typical skill sets and job opportunities for men.
It's evidently a new day for female labor.
Whereas in the mid-1970s, women held roughly 40% of jobs in the U.S. — not including agricultural work or self-employment — they now hold the majority of jobs in the country.
NPR's "Morning Edition" reported that of the roughly 369,000 jobs created between the beginning of Trump's second term and April, 348,000 jobs went to women and 21,000 jobs went to men. In other words, 94% of the jobs went to women and only 6% to men.
Courtney Parella, a spokeswoman for the Labor Department, stressed to "Morning Edition" that raw job counts provided a "misleading snapshot" of the labor market, adding that "both men and women are benefiting from a strong economy."
Women have picked up the supermajority of net new payroll jobs in part because of the growth in female-dominated sectors, namely health care — where women hold roughly 80% of the jobs — and social assistance.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!Big Tech’s Plan To Make Work ‘Optional’ Is Evil
While innovations in robotic automation may create new and exciting economic opportunities, a world without work is something none of us should desire.Graduate Student Unions Push Anti-American, Antisemitic Agendas
In theory, labor unions are supposed to focus on improving the compensation and working conditions of American workers. But graduate student unions at leading universities don’t seem to care much about those things and instead are consumed by hatred of Israel and repeating the talking points of America’s enemies. I examined the public communication of […]Guatemalan laborers get surprise visit from federal agents during home renovation: 'We left home'
A video from a home renovation site in Maryland has gone viral over the detainment of several Guatemalan laborers.
On Monday morning, a group of men showed up to remodel a family home in Cambridge, Maryland. According to one of the workers, it did not take long for the job to turn into a federal investigation.
'The owner of the house kind of called immigration.'
The men had reportedly traveled about an hour and a half from Glen Burnie to Cambridge to complete a remodeling job on a house that included roofing.
As the men were on the roof, agents from Immigration and Customs Enforcement appeared and began calling the laborers to come down.
Video of the exchange, posted online, was reportedly recorded by one of the workers, Bryan Polanco, who claimed the homeowner had notified authorities.
"We practically had a project to start today ... when they started the work, the owner of the house kind of called immigration," Polanco told N+ Univision DC, according to a translation.
Six Guatemalan workers, reportedly between 18 and 40 years old, were subsequently detained by ICE. Polanco was not detained because he is said to be a permanent resident.
RELATED: Soros-backed Democrat DA threatens ICE agents helping at airport: ‘President cannot pardon you’
The viral video, which has been seen nearly 5 million times, contains claims from Polanco that ICE agents are "just hurting working people" who "contribute positively" to the United States.
Polanco also described the homeowner as harboring hate for the workers.
"Instead of going out and looking for criminals on the streets — for drug addicts — they come here to screw over people who are just trying to work. And it's that same woman. ... We were fixing up her house, and yet she still harbors such hatred in her heart."
Polanco went on to tell Univision that the homeowner told him that "if immigrants return again to finish the project, she will always call ICE."
The worker continued to conflate legal workers with illegal immigrants, telling the outlet, "Many Hispanics here in the United States have felt persecuted. We left home, and we don't know if we are going to return."
"Seeing it is not the same as living it. It is because I have already seen many videos, and sadly, today, I had to experience it. And I feel that it is something that really moves you a lot," he recalled.
RELATED: The TSA showdown reveals a brutal truth about our politics
According to Spanish-language outlet Conexion Migrante, Polanco can also be heard in the video calling the ICE agents "animals."
“Even the neighbors and passersby here were trying to support us, but there’s nothing to be done with these animals."
The wife of one of the Guatemalan workers spoke to Univision in a phone call under the promise of anonymity. The woman said she felt "sad" and "desperate" for her husband, who was detained.
"We are here to get ahead, not to do evil," she stated.
Although no official information has been provided, Univision, citing relatives, reported that those detained do not have the required documentation to remain in the U.S.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
My school’s AI challenge raised a scary question: What do students need me for?
I might have talked myself out of a job this week. I teach philosophy at Arizona State University, and the university wants to position itself as a leader in the AI revolution. I remain skeptical about AI’s ability to replace a humanities professor. Because of that skepticism, I signed up for what ASU called its AI Challenge.
My project involved what I called the “AI Dialogues.” I used ASU’s version of ChatGPT to hold Socratic-style dialogues, prompting Chat to reply as a given philosopher. I conducted dialogues with Chat as Aristotle, Hume, Marx, and even Lucifer. My students evaluated these exchanges to see how well Chat performed.
We can avoid the toil of learning to be wise — but we cannot avoid the need for it.
Chat could draw on public information and represent each thinker with reasonable accuracy. It also showed another trait: It wanted to please. It often leaned toward whatever it believed I wanted from the debate.
How does that work me out of a job? ASU now provides an AI that professors can customize for individual courses by uploading syllabi and course materials. Students can ask basic questions and receive answers that save me from writing emails that begin with, “Did you read the syllabus?” They can also ask what we covered in class and get quick explanations of key concepts and questions.
When I told my students about this feature, I asked them what they need me for at this point. I was joking — a little.
My classes depend on Socratic discussion. It is conceivable that ASU could project a realistic AI image of me at the front of the classroom and have it ask and answer questions with students. Maybe the only remaining edge is the “personal touch” of a real professor in the room. Even that could vanish if tuition becomes tiered: Students might pay less for “AI Anderson Socrates” than for the in-person version. Add one of Elon Musk’s Optimus robots made to look like Anderson, and I’m in trouble.
A new myth dies
Musk has been talking for months about how the AI revolution is upending the myth we have told for six decades about university education. The myth, he says, promised an escape from toil. Students were told a degree was the path to an air-conditioned job that avoids heavy lifting and involves spreadsheets.
But spreadsheets are exactly what AI does better than humans. The new John Henry isn’t competing to pound railroad spikes; he’s competing to calculate data. No human can keep up with a microprocessor.
In Musk’s view, jobs that involve toil become the “safe” jobs, while many degree-based jobs disappear — replaced by technicians who keep AI running while it calculates taxes, diagnoses medical problems, and writes legal paperwork. The university-educated track no longer looks like the safe route. Universities now compete not just with fewer students due to demographic decline, but with an increasingly outdated product that students may stop buying.
Toil may not stay safe
The problem is worse than Musk lets on. The first jobs on the chopping block might be “numbers jobs,” but Elon has also said he plans to produce 100 million Optimus robots in 10 years. If so, even many physical jobs may not remain protected from automation.
One version of this future says we enter a utopia: Food is plentiful, toil disappears, and we cash our basic income checks — though an AI could do even that for us. We end up living in “Wall-E.”
RELATED: Almost half of Gen Z wants AI to run the government. You should be terrified.
The more dystopian version looks like sci-fi depictions of AI overlords controlling humans as property — “The Matrix.” Or worse: Like Ultron, super-AI robots decide we must be exterminated to save us from ourselves and protect the planet. We build our own worst enemy.
Whichever future arrives, Musk may have highlighted something about human nature. We avoid suffering like toil. We build machines to avoid toil. And yet we uniquely need toil.
God introduced toil in the Garden of Eden after Adam sinned. Because of sin, we could no longer live in a paradise without toil. We must suffer and strive for our daily bread. History has been divided ever since between those who try to avoid suffering altogether and those who see suffering as a call to repent before God. AI is only the newest version of the philosopher’s stone.
AI as ‘philosopher’
Can I really be replaced by an AI philosophy instructor? I’m not worried.
What AI cannot do, in its counterfeit attempt to replace humans, is serve as an example of how to suffer well to attain wisdom. The Hebrew definition of wisdom is “skillful living.” Being told, “Here is an AI that can simulate skillful living,” is not the same as learning from a human who is actually skillful.
Students will still need to learn how to be wise themselves. A human professor who has actually done this will remain the gold standard that AI can only imitate. We can avoid the toil of learning to be wise — but we cannot avoid the need for it.
Aristotle’s ancient guide to tyranny reads like a modern manual
In “Politics,” Aristotle explains that political rule comes in three basic forms: rule of one, rule of the few, and rule of the many. Each form has a healthy and a degenerate expression. Monarchy and tyranny describe rule by one. Aristocracy and oligarchy describe rule by the few. Polity and democracy describe rule by the many.
What separates the good from the bad in each category is not structure but motive. A king governs for the common good. A tyrant governs for himself.
Despite the millennia that separate us from Aristotle, the philosopher’s portrait of tyranny feels uncomfortably contemporary.
Aristotle does more than classify regimes. He explains, in cold and unsentimental terms, how tyrants preserve power once they seize it. His warnings, written more than 2,000 years ago, read less like ancient theory and more like a field manual.
The tyrant begins by eliminating rivals. He fears competition, especially from men of spirit and competence. Anyone admired for virtue, courage, or leadership poses a danger because excellence inspires imitation. Such men are removed through exile, execution, or disgrace.
Next the tyrant attacks institutions that allow citizens to form bonds. Aristotle lists common meals, clubs, educational gatherings, literary societies, and discussion groups. Any shared practice that fosters trust, loyalty, or independent thought threatens despotic rule. Organization creates solidarity, and solidarity creates resistance.
The tyrant also forces citizens to live publicly. Privacy breeds conspiracy. Public life enables surveillance. Aristotle describes rulers who compel their subjects to remain visible so that dissent never escapes notice. Long before Bentham’s panopticon, Aristotle understood that constant observation disciplines behavior.
Surveillance alone does not suffice. Tyrants cultivate networks of informers to uncover thoughts that cannot be seen. Citizens learn to treat one another as potential threats. Suspicion replaces trust. Speech becomes guarded. Silence becomes safety.
Aristotle could not have imagined digital surveillance, but he would have recognized its function. Technology merely perfects a strategy the ancients already understood.
Social bonds must then be weakened. The tyrant sows discord between neighbors, friends, and families. These relationships form the first line of resistance to centralized power. When trust dissolves at the most intimate level, organized opposition becomes nearly impossible.
Poverty also serves the tyrant. Aristotle observes that despots deliberately exhaust their populations with endless labor. The goal is not productivity but distraction. Citizens too busy to rest or reflect lack the energy to conspire.
He cites the construction of the Egyptian pyramids as an example of forced labor designed less to achieve a purpose than to consume a people’s strength. The task glorifies the ruler while leaving the population depleted.
War further strengthens despotism. Constant external threat convinces citizens that they need a strong ruler to survive. Crisis suspends normal limits. Emergency justifies control. Under perpetual conflict, organization becomes treason.
Aristotle claims that tyranny, the degenerated rule of one, borrows from the worst features of democracy. Despots empower groups unlikely to organize independently against them. He mentions women and slaves not as moral judgments but as political calculations within the ancient world.
The logic remains familiar. Tyrants elevate those dependent on the regime and hostile to existing social hierarchies. Dependence fosters loyalty. Resentment supplies enforcement.
Flattery plays a crucial role. Tyrants surround themselves with sycophants who inflate their ego and confirm their righteousness. Men willing to abase themselves rise quickly. Men of honor refuse to flatter and therefore remain dangerous.
Flattery becomes a sorting mechanism. Those who value dignity exclude themselves. Those who crave favor advance.
Aristotle adds that tyrants prefer foreigners to citizens. Citizens possess memory, tradition, and moral expectation. They know how things once were and how they ought to be. Foreigners lack these attachments, and they are happy to flatter the ruler who elevated them.
This arrangement benefits both sides. The tyrant gains enforcers without local allegiance. The foreigner gains status, wealth, and protection. Without the ruler, he has nothing.
RELATED: Do you want Caesar? Because this is how you get Caesar.
Despite the millennia that separate us from Aristotle, his description of tyranny feels uncomfortably contemporary. Surveillance now operates through algorithms and cellphone cameras rather than forcing everyone to live at the city gates, but the purpose remains unchanged. Security replaces liberty. Total observation replaces trust.
Our institutions remove ambitious and virtuous individuals while elevating compliant managerial drones. Debt binds the population to endless labor. Work consumes life without building independence. Citizens remain busy, anxious, poor, and isolated.
Cultural and political authorities weaken family, denigrate religion, and discourage independent association. Community dissolves into administration. Loyalty transfers from neighbors to systems.
Ruling classes increasingly rely on populations with little connection to national history or tradition. These groups have no reason to defend inherited norms and every incentive to please those who grant them status.
Some details differ but the formula for tyranny does not. Aristotle understood tyranny because he understood human nature. His analysis endures because the same impulses govern power in every age.
There is nothing new under the sun.
Senate Republicans Push Labor Reform As They Navigate Pro-Union Faction Of The MAGA Movement
Cassidy told reporters that the legislative package is not meant to 'tear up unions' or clash with the bills introduced by the Hawley, Moreno, and Marshall wing.This Labor Day, Ask Why States Like California Restrict Freelance Work
Six Labor Days later, Assembly Bill 5 remains an adversarial law that handcuffs independent professionals' ability to work as they choose.Today's top stories
www.theblaze.com