The John Locke Foundation is thrilled to announce a new podcast - Revolutionary Roads!
Good evening,
The John Locke Foundation is thrilled to announce a new podcast (and vodcast) on North Carolina’s part in America’s struggle for independence — Revolutionary Roads!
As the United States prepares to celebrate its 250th anniversary in 2026, I’ll explore North Carolina’s pivotal role in the nation’s founding, from the War of Regulation to the Battle of Guilford Courthouse and beyond, in this podcast.
This 10-episode series features guests with a deep knowledge, passion, and understanding of the American Revolution in North Carolina. In my conversations, we’ll explore questions like:
Is the Mecklenburg Declaration of Independence real or just a myth?
Who were the women of the Edenton Tea Party?
And why did North Carolina take YEARS to sign the Constitution?
In our first three episodes, we pull back the curtain on this vital history:
The Spark Before the Flame – The War of Regulation (1760s–1771), with Nathan Schultz from the Alamance Battleground State Historic Site - North Carolina spent years before the revolution engulfed in a bitter struggle against colonial tyranny. Learn how this crucial, localized battle foreshadowed the larger fight for liberty.
Protest in Petticoats – The Edenton Tea Party (1774), with Carolina Journal Editor Donna King - A daring act of political defiance by North Carolina’s brave women shocked Britain and marked one of the earliest organized female protests in American history. Discover how Penelope Barker and her allies staged this powerful demonstration.
The Myth and Meaning of May – The Mecklenburg Declaration (1775) with attorney Dan Gibson - Fact or folklore? We explore the fascinating debate over the Mecklenburg Declaration and the very real Mecklenburg Resolves that followed. Was it a bold stand, or the birth of a legend?
If you want to understand the true roots of American liberty, you need to hear these stories. Don't miss the first three episodes!
You can listen to the first three episodes on our website here, or you can WATCH the first three episodes on YouTube here.
Following the assassination of Charlie Kirk, members of the Trump administration made statements suggesting a willingness to suppress or punish certain forms of speech, mirroring past actions by the Biden administration.
Attorney General Pam Bondi declared "hate speech" illegal and promised to "target" those who engage in it.
Bondi later walked back her comments, clarifying she would only prosecute "hate speech that crosses the line into threats of violence"
Which is already illegal and has never been protected by the First Amendment (e.g., Texas v. Johnson).
FCC Chair Brendan Carr also publicly pressured ABC and its affiliates after host Jimmy Kimmel made allegedly false statements about Kirk's murderer.
Carr's actions would likely survive judicial scrutiny under the standard set in Murthy v. Missouri (2024).
Where the court found it hard to differentiate between government pressure and a company's own moderation policies.
However, President Trump's subsequent suggestion to strip networks critical of him of their licenses would be a direct form of coercion, likely violating the prohibition established in NRA v. Vullo.
Even if these attacks on speech are not unconstitutional, they are politically unwise.
Carr's pressure campaign elevated Kimmel's status and temporarily boosted his show's ratings, essentially saving his career.
These actions would also provide the next Democratic administration with a precedent and justification to further engage in and escalate censorship and "cancel culture."
The Administration’s attacks on free speech have received pushback from the right, and they would be wise to heed the warnings of their allies and reverse course.
It’s hard to ignore the financial mess brewing at Winston-Salem/Forsyth County Schools (WS/FCS).
WS/FCS, North Carolina's sixth-largest district, is facing a $46 million budget deficit.
North Carolina State Auditor Dave Boliek reported that poor financial decisions and poor accounting procedures contributed to the deficit.
The district spent over $75 million in bonuses and overspent its annual revenue in fiscal years 2022 and 2023.
WS/FCS used temporary federal COVID-relief funds to pay the salaries of permanent employees, delayed account reconciliations, and inappropriately used suspense accounts.
Of the $274.8 million in federal COVID-relief funds the district received, over half ($152.5 million) was spent on salaries and benefits.
The district has implemented mass layoffs, employee furloughs, and school closings to address the deficit.
And enrollment plunged nearly 4% (about 2,000 students) in 2024–25, leading to a further reduction in funds.
The financial crisis at WS/FCS may not be an isolated incident.
The complexity of North Carolina's school finance system, the lack of accountability for federal COVID-relief dollars, and the difficulty school business officers face in understanding the funding system suggest similar problems could exist in other districts too.
This is why we should investigate spending in our public schools further and work toward a more transparent and less complex system for funding North Carolina’s public schools.
North Carolina soybean farmers, whose crop is one of the state's top five cash crops, are facing mounting pressure due to the ongoing trade war with China as harvest season approaches.
China, which typically buys 30% of the U.S. soybean crop, has placed no new orders for U.S. soybeans since September 1.
Tariffs have priced U.S. soybeans out of the Chinese market, diverting trade to lower-cost suppliers and making U.S. producers uncompetitive.
Despite the strong domestic demand and a diversified export market, North Carolina farmers are being squeezed by two factors:
The cost of essential inputs (fertilizer, pesticides, equipment) remains high following the COVID-19 pandemic.
Prices paid for soybeans and other row crops have steadily declined over the past three years.
The combination of high costs and low prices is causing agricultural lenders to view many farmers as "unbankable," potentially jeopardizing their ability to secure lines of credit.
If this trend continues, many farmers may not make it to next spring’s planting season.
