A look at Vice President Kamala Harris’ record reveals she will be the one holding the metaphorical matches in this dangerous game.

Democrats claim to extinguish the flames of racism, but they are, in fact, stoking the fires of division by perpetuating the very stereotypes they claim to fight against. This is evident in their handling of race and meritocracy.

Michelle Obama’s DNC speech echoed familiar progressive themes about systemic oppression and racial inequality. While these issues — when it comes to our public educational system — are real and need attention, the solutions proposed often exacerbate the problems.

Take, for instance, the fire service, a field where lives are on the line, and the progressive left’s focus on diversity over competence would have dangerous repercussions. When hiring and promotions are based more on skin color than ability, merit is sidelined, and mediocrity is tolerated.

This reflects a troubling notion that minorities require special treatment because they cannot compete on a level playing field. This mindset is not only condescending but also hazardous.

It suggests that minority individuals cannot achieve excellence on their own merits and need lowered standards. This undermines capable individuals and endangers the public, compromising critical services like firefighting, police and the medical profession.

Elon Musk has described the “woke mind virus” as one of the biggest threats to modern civilization, characterizing it as a toxic ideology that undermines merit, divides people by identity and stifles free thought.

The evolution of diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) training exemplifies this shift. In the 1990s, diversity training was about following the law, treating each other with respect and building consensus around a shared purpose.

It was about coming together despite differences, understanding proper behavior at work, and advancing together. Today, however, DEI training often emphasizes identity over individuality and grievance over gratitude. It has shifted from fostering inclusion to imposing a Marxist-inspired ideology that divides people into oppressors and oppressed, deepening the very divisions it claims to heal.

Eric Holder, when serving as U.S. attorney general, once criticized America for being a “nation of cowards” in discussing race. Yet, true cowardice lies in refusing to challenge the progressive orthodoxy that equates race with victimhood and merit with privilege. This narrative brands dissenters as racists or worse and perpetuates a harmful cycle.

The left’s broader agenda also mirrors this flawed approach. They claim to save the “cat” — the vulnerable and marginalized — but their policies often trap these individuals in failed schools controlled by progressive unions. This approach keeps low-income children in failing educational environments, reinforcing dependency and victimhood instead of offering genuine opportunities for success.

Moreover, the civil rights issue of our time is this very failure of our education system, perpetuated by entrenched union control. Breaking the teachers’ union monopoly and providing parents with real choices is essential to offering children the best educational opportunities.

Empowering individuals to rise through merit and personal responsibility, rather than coddling them with the “soft bigotry of low expectations,” is the real path to progress.

The progressive left’s focus on identity over ability is not the solution it claims to be. Instead of extinguishing the flames of racism, it has exacerbated them, creating a society where race often overshadows merit.

To move forward, we must reject this flawed ideology and embrace a future where merit and character define a person’s worth. The real firefighters are those who champion equality, merit and individual responsibility, not those who perpetuate a cycle of dependency and division.

Frank Ricci was the lead plaintiff in the landmark Supreme Court case Ricci v Destefano.  He retired as a Battalion Chief in New Haven CT. He has testified before Congress and is the author of the book, Command Presence.

The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of the Daily Caller News Foundation.

Featured Image: Screen Capture/CSPAN

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

This new, covert strategy, hidden in plain sight, allows state and municipal officials to create sweeping policy changes that evade the scrutiny typically associated with customary legislative procedures, which include publicly available draft legislation, committee hearings, amendments and comprehensive floor debates.

In Boston, teachers’ union president Jessica Tang announced they secured “an unprecedented $50 million to commence bolstering the affordable housing that Boston students and families require.” Similarly, Los Angeles teachers incorporated “housing justice provisions” into their contracts.

Whatever the merits of affordable housing, it’s quite a stretch to argue that the issue is relevant to the matters properly encompassed within a teachers’ contract.

Yet the Boston contract is being utilized as a template by the AFL-CIO to advance housing and environmental “justice.” During the recent Connecticut AFL-CIO biennial convention, during a panel on Labor-Community Partnerships, the President of the New Haven Federation of Teachers stated on film, “Engage in negotiations and address the issues our community cares about, as it’s a win-win situation, and this is how we sustain those relationships and continue to advance our collective agenda.”

Collective bargaining agreements, which can range from dozens to hundreds of pages in length, encompass virtually all aspects of compensation such as wages, working hours, and conditions, in addition to medical and retirement benefits. These agreements are often intentionally drafted in vague terms laden with industry jargon, and require knowledge of local bargaining history for proper interpretation.

Although these agreements are negotiated in the name of taxpayers, in practice, the taxpayers are frequently overlooked in the process. Contracts do receive a vote from a legislative body, but it is typically a binary, up-or-down choice for the elected officials. There’s no open, deliberative process to review individual contract provisions or offer amendments.

Public sector unions have long used their significant political influence to draw attention to social issues that far extend beyond the scope of their work in the public sector, but this strategy takes that advocacy to an entirely new level. A growing trend sees them transitioning from vocal proponents of socialist reforms to using labor agreements negotiated in dimly light backrooms to impose their agenda on an often unwilling public.

This pernicious tactic will be used by unions and unscrupulous state and municipal negotiators to enact a laundry list of far-left social programs that could never win support through the democratic process. It conveniently provides cover for government officials eager to evade political accountability.

By creating an omnibus policy package within a collective bargaining agreement, the political class is able to silence any dissenting views and distract from the merits of reasonable objections. It’s far easier to claim that anyone who votes against the collective bargaining agreement is anti-teacher or anti-worker than to defend expensive (and potentially unpopular) new social programs.

Unions are telling us what they plan to do. We can no longer afford to ignore this reality.

Municipal negotiations, teacher unions and their progressive allies are leveraging the fine print of labor agreements to advance a collective agenda rooted in Marxist ideology, pushing for social programs they could never pass through the typical legislative process. Even if their intentions seem noble, bundling unrelated policy issues into teacher contracts raises concerns about transparency and accountability, and blurs the lines between union advocacy and the public’s interests.

In an era where we have witnessed a decline in student outcomes — the achievement gap has been widening, with students reading, math, science and civics scores falling — teachers’ contracts need to be focused on education. Yet more and more attention is focused on non-education related distractions.

The union agenda of enacting radical policy change through collective bargaining must be exposed, with negotiators trained to block these proposals. What’s more, reforms are desperately needed to limit the scope of collective bargaining and bring the negotiations into the light, so that the public paying for the contracts can view the entire process. That’s our best hope for bringing the interest of the taxpayers and the well-being of the workforce into a sensible balance.

Frank Ricci is a Labor Fellow at Yankee Institute, Retired Union President for New Haven (CT) Fire Fighters, and Battalion Chief. He was the lead plaintiff in the landmark Supreme Court case Ricci v. DeStefano and has testified before Congress. Frank is the Author of book Command Presence.

The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of the Daily Caller News Foundation.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.