Recently on June 19th, Juneteenth was celebrated for the 6th year as a federal holiday. In 2021, the holiday was established, celebrating the first day of enforcement of the Emancipation Proclamation, in Galveston, Texas in 1865. Despite its relevance as the end of slavery, a multitude of conservatives such as the President himself have spoken against the holiday, pointing to it as a useless — and even woke — celebration that divides people and takes away from working hours. Arguably, however, these claims are counterintuitive as Juneteenth affects the masses ideologically more than we think. A primary group affected by this holiday is women. By denying Juneteenth, women are denying the very same freedom they themselves are fighting for — against systems of domineering oppression. Moreover, the holiday is presented as activism in a similar way women use to fight for their own rights. The celebration takes place over social media, fashions, and events. In treating Juneteenth as a dramatic display of “wokeness” and virtue signaling, women deny commercialism as a valid display of protest and recognition, consequently denying their primary mode of expression. Secondly, and perhaps shockingly, by slandering Juneteenth the lower-class communities of America slander themselves. Even more than in women’s rights, there is an overwhelming unity among lower-class people against power-based regimes that take away their free will, those that have financial and governmental dominance over their livelihoods. Juneteenth celebrates the same essence, a fight against greed-based executives who treated others as subhuman and denied them rights. As a low-income person, speaking of Juneteenth negatively grants power back to the same executives. Ultimately, a spotlight should be shined on the real reason why people are spreading hate about Juneteenth. Maybe it is not as much the function of the holiday, and more so that conservative media figures feel personally offended by others’ tendency to call out oppression in a way that forces them to be socially accountable and educated on minority rights.
By Megan Fincher
When Olivia Rodrigo announced her new music festival, Daisy Chain Fields, many fans focused on the lineup. The one-day festival, taking place on August 29 in Irvine, California, will feature performances from some of the biggest names in music, including Chappell Roan, Doechii, Mitski, Bikini Kill, Garbage, KATSEYE, Rachel Chinouriri, and special guests Stevie Nicks, Karen O, and Sarah McLachlan. What makes the festival stand out, however, is not just who is performing, but why the event is being created in the first place. Unlike many traditional music festivals, Daisy Chain Fields was designed as a nonprofit event centered on supporting women and girls. The festival features an all-women and female-fronted lineup, drawing inspiration from events such as Lilith Fair, the groundbreaking all-female music festival founded in the 1990s that celebrated women artists, while creating a modern space focused on community, creativity, and social impact. Rodrigo has described the festival as a long-time dream and an opportunity to bring women in music together while supporting causes that matter to her. According to the festival’s mission statement, Daisy Chain Fields was founded on the belief that “joy, community, and creativity can inspire meaningful change.” Organizers describe the event as more than a music festival, emphasizing opportunities for education, dialogue, and engagement around issues affecting women and girls. The mission also highlights a goal of helping young people connect with resources, support systems, and role models they may not otherwise encounter. More Than a Music Festival Beyond live performances, the event will also feature nonprofit activations, educational resources, community art experiences, local vendors, fan pop-ups, and interactive installations to encourage engagement and learning. Festival organizers say attendees will have opportunities to connect with organizations working across issues such as reproductive rights, maternal health, economic empowerment, domestic violence prevention, and gender equity. The festival is being produced by C3 Presents and Live Nation and is intended to serve as both an entertainment event and a platform for advocacy. Rodrigo has stated that she hopes the festival can bring people together through music while encouraging positive action beyond the event itself. Supporting Women and Girls One of the most notable aspects of Daisy Chain Fields is its fundraising mission. According to organizers, net proceeds from the festival will be donated to nonprofit organizations dedicated to advancing and advocating for women and girls. Several organizations involved with the festival include Planned Parenthood, the Center for Reproductive Rights, the National Women’s Law Center, Baby2Baby, Black Mamas Matter Alliance, the Johns Hopkins Center for Indigenous Health, and other groups focused on health, education, economic opportunity, and gender equity. Rodrigo has also revealed that participating artists are not performing for profit, allowing more of the festival’s proceeds to support these organizations. The decision reflects the event’s emphasis on philanthropy and community impact rather than simply serving as another stop on the concert calendar. According to the festival’s mission statement, net proceeds will be directed toward organizations dedicated to advancing and advocating for women and girls, while also helping create opportunities for connection and support across generations and communities. The Role of Artists and Advocacy Daisy Chain Fields also highlights a growing trend of artists using their platforms for causes beyond music. In recent years, musicians have increasingly partnered with nonprofits, launched charitable initiatives, and used large-scale events to bring attention to social issues. Supporters argue that artists can introduce audiences to organizations and causes they otherwise may not have encountered. Others question how much influence celebrities should have in shaping conversations around social and political issues. Regardless of where people stand, events like Daisy Chain Fields demonstrate how entertainment and advocacy are becoming increasingly connected. Why This Matters Now The festival arrives at a time when many public figures are seeking ways to leverage their influence beyond traditional entertainment. Rather than focusing solely on performances, Daisy Chain Fields combines music, fundraising, education, and community engagement into a single event. These developments raise important questions moving forward: As Daisy Chain Fields prepares for its inaugural year, the festival represents more than a gathering of popular artists. It reflects a broader effort to connect music with philanthropy, education, and community engagement. Whether viewed as a concert, a fundraising initiative, or an advocacy platform, the event highlights how artists are increasingly using their influence to support causes that extend beyond the stage. As Rodrigo writes in the festival’s mission statement, “Daisies are wild and beautiful. As a chain, they are strong and unbreakable.” Sources Daisy Chain Fields
By Taylor Lopez
On Tuesday, June 23, the U.S. Senate passed a War Powers Resolution that could limit President Trump in Iran. The resolution passed with the help of 4 Republicans voting with Democrats. Among these 4 were 2 Senators who also voted against Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act in 2025: Susan Collins (R-ME) and Dr. Rand Paul (R-KY). Thus, Collins and Paul are the only 2 Republicans to vote against the defining features of Trump’s foreign and domestic agendas. In an era where loyalty is key in the Republican Party, this is significant. Collins’ political motivations are easy to infer. She is a Republican Senator running for re-election in Maine, a state which Trump lost by about 7% in 2024. Thus, she has been distancing herself from Trump throughout his second term in order to be free from his agenda in her 2026 race. Further, however short political memories may be among American voters, politics is a game of identity. Collins voted to convict Trump on articles of impeachment in 2021 and proceeded to work with President Biden on his infrastructure effort. She has made a name for herself as an independent Republican. Giving that reputation up would not only put her at an electoral disadvantage in a light blue state, but such a concession would also erase her claim to fame. Rand Paul is much harder to pin down because he represents Kentucky, a state that Trump won by 30%. He, unlike Collins, is not up for re-election this year, making Trump’s support in this moment unnecessary. However, Paul only has 2 years left in his Senate term, and he knows via the political downfall of colleagues like Senator Bill Cassidy that Trump holds grudges. Thus, getting off Trump’s naughty list will be harder for Paul in the leadup to 2028 than it was in the leadup to 2022, when he helped lead the charge against Trump’s impeachment and ultimately garnered the President’s endorsement. If Paul is hoping to veer towards Trump after the 2026 midterms, it may not work because of his vote against the OBBBA and his vote for the War Powers Resolution. And yet, he may need Trump’s support in 2028 if he wants to win a Senate primary in Kentucky. So what is his political motivation in distancing himself from Trump? The President’s ill will would be a hurdle in a 2028 Senate primary, but it might be useful in a 2028 Presidential primary, something Rand Paul is candidly considering. There are two sorts of primary campaigns Paul could run: In both, distance from Trump will be a requirement. If Paul is serious about winning a Presidential nomination, then he will have to set himself apart from a Republican field filled with Trump’s cabinet officials like Marco Rubio and Trump-loyal Senators like Ted Cruz. Running on fidelity to Trump would not get Paul anywhere, especially when his claim to that fidelity is comparatively weak to other Presidential contenders. If Paul is simply aiming to make a statement, then there would be no statement to make from someone who is just echoing the President and his supporters, making political uniqueness important. However, unless Paul is planning to retire after a statement campaign, he would not be able to take any hostility towards Trump too far. In 2016, Paul made a statement, realized he could not win a Presidential primary, and dropped out to run for re-election in the Senate. If he wants to do the same thing in 2028, then he still has to have enough political capital to run for Senate after a Presidential campaign, capital that will not exist if he makes a pure enemy out of Donald Trump. Thus, a statement campaign would be a very difficult line to walk, but it would nevertheless require some degree of distance from Trump that he is currently trying to establish. Rand Paul may not be trying to play politics. Lawmakers are human, and he may just be voting against Trump when Trump doesn’t align with his principles. However, if he is playing politics with these votes, then he is playing Presidential politics, where he stands to benefit from being independent of Trump. Paul said that his chance of running was “50/50,” but if his political posturing tells us anything, the question is not whether or not he will run, but whether or not he will be serious about winning when he does run. Take it to the bank: Rand Paul is soft-launching a bid for President of the United States. Acknowledgement: The opinions expressed in this article are those of the individual author, not necessarily Our National Conversation as a whole
By Jack Jurjans
Follow Us