I keep seeing the same argument every year, and every year it somehow becomes louder than the last.
Someone says Pride shouldn’t receive taxpayer funding.
Someone else immediately assumes they’re against gay people.
Another person says government should fly a Pride flag.
Someone else accuses them of trying to destroy America.
And just like clockwork, we’ve managed to spend another June arguing with one another instead of actually asking the question that matters.
What is government supposed to represent?
I don’t think that’s a hateful question.
I don’t think it’s a partisan question.
Honestly, I think it’s one of the most important questions we can ask.
Because somewhere along the way, we’ve become comfortable asking government to represent pieces of America instead of the whole thing.
That bothers me.
Not because I dislike those pieces.
Because I love the whole picture.
Here’s where I’m probably going to lose some people.
I don’t have a problem with Pride existing.
I don’t have a problem with people celebrating who they are.
I don’t have a problem with cultural festivals, religious gatherings, heritage celebrations, or communities coming together over something they share.
That’s freedom.
If your neighbors organize a Pride parade, fantastic.
If another community wants a Polish festival, wonderful.
If veterans organize an event, I’ll probably be there.
If a church wants to hold a picnic, more power to them.
America is supposed to be full of people celebrating the things that matter to them.
That’s not what concerns me.
What concerns me is when government steps in and starts deciding which identities it should publicly celebrate with taxpayer money or official symbols.
Because government isn’t another community organization.
Government belongs to everyone.
Maybe this is just the inspector in me.
I’ve spent years walking properties looking for problems before they became disasters.
You start noticing patterns.
Little cracks become big cracks.
Small leaks become flooded crawlspaces.
The biggest problems rarely begin as big problems.
They begin with tiny decisions that nobody thinks much about.
I think this is one of those decisions.
Every time government places another label in front of “American,” we make being American just a little less important.
We become voting blocs.
Demographics.
Interest groups.
Communities.
Identities.
Everything except neighbors.
And I think that’s backwards.
There’s something psychologists have understood for decades.
It’s called Social Identity Theory.
The basic idea is simple.
Human beings naturally sort themselves into groups. It’s part of being human. We identify with people who look like us, think like us, believe like us, or share similar experiences.
There’s nothing inherently wrong with that.
But every group naturally creates another group.
If there’s an “us,” there’s eventually a “them.”
Researchers have also found that symbols like flags and logos strengthen our perception of group identity. They make those identities feel more cohesive and more central to how we see one another. That isn’t automatically bad, but it does make group boundaries more psychologically meaningful.¹ ²
That’s exactly why I think government should be careful.
Not because groups shouldn’t exist.
But because government shouldn’t be in the business of strengthening the walls between them.
Let’s talk about flags.
Private citizens?
Fly whatever flag you want.
Seriously.
That’s your First Amendment right.
Businesses?
Absolutely.
Churches?
Go for it.
Community organizations?
Please do.
That’s freedom.
But City Hall isn’t your house.
It’s everyone’s house.
The courthouse doesn’t belong to one neighborhood.
It belongs to every citizen.
The city council chambers don’t belong to one movement.
They belong equally to every taxpayer sitting in those chairs.
That’s why I believe government buildings should display the American flag as their defining symbol.
Not because it’s the only flag that matters.
Because it’s the only one that already belongs to every American.
The same goes for taxpayer funding.
I’m not asking communities to stop celebrating.
Celebrate.
Raise money.
Volunteer.
Organize.
Invite the whole town.
I’ll probably stop by.
But why should government be deciding which identity-based celebrations deserve public funding?
Instead, imagine this.
Imagine cities investing more in giant neighborhood block parties.
Street fairs where every nonprofit has a booth.
Local musicians.
Kids running around with snow cones.
Police officers playing basketball with teenagers.
Firefighters cooking burgers.
Small businesses showing off what they do.
Nobody wondering if this event is “for them.”
Because it’s for everyone.
Wouldn’t that do more to strengthen a community?
Wouldn’t that create more conversations between people who would otherwise never meet?
Isn’t that exactly what local government should be encouraging?
Veterans Day is different.
Martin Luther King Jr. Day is different.
Those commemorations preserve chapters of our shared national history. They remind us of sacrifice, injustice, courage, and progress. They exist so we remember where we’ve been and learn from it.
That’s different from government choosing to sponsor or symbolize contemporary identities or movements.
Recognizing history is part of government’s civic role.
Choosing among present-day causes is a different question.
Maybe I’m wrong.
Seriously.
I’m open to being convinced otherwise.
But here’s what I can’t shake.
Every year it feels like we’re inventing another label.
Another category.
Another reason to sort Americans into smaller and smaller boxes.
And every year we seem a little more suspicious of people outside our own box.
What if we’ve been solving the wrong problem?
What if the answer isn’t finding new ways to celebrate every separate identity?
What if the answer is finding more ways to remind people they already belong to the same community?
Maybe the most radical thing government could do in 2026 isn’t choosing another flag.
Maybe it’s refusing to choose any flag except the one that already represents all of us.
Maybe the most inclusive event isn’t one aimed at a particular group.
Maybe it’s the neighborhood barbecue where nobody asks who you voted for, what church you attend, who you love, or where your grandparents came from.
They just ask if you’d like another hamburger.
Call me old-fashioned.
Call me naïve.
But I still think America works best when we spend less time asking each other, “What are you?”
…and a lot more time asking,
“How are you, neighbor?”
References
- Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. Social Identity Theory, explaining how people naturally categorize themselves into social groups and how group identities can shape intergroup perceptions.
- Callahan, S. P., & Ledgerwood, A. (2016). On the Psychological Function of Flags and Logos: Group Identity Symbols Increase Perceived Entitativity. This research found that group symbols can strengthen perceptions of groups as unified social entities, helping explain why public symbols often carry significant social meaning.
- Bliuc, A. M., et al. Research on political polarization and social identity has shown that when political or social identities become more central, intergroup polarization can increase. This literature does not suggest that any one symbol or event causes division, but it highlights why governments may wish to consider how public institutions emphasize shared civic identity alongside other identities.