I would be wary of anyone campaigning on the slogan “Fountain Hills first.”

Those who profess “first” hide behind terms like “patriotism” and sometimes falsely cite enragement, like the threat of war, economic instability, drug usage and uncontrolled immigration. It sounds like the national campaign slogans gone local to me.

These are clear messages to me that this “first” movement is alive in Fountain Hills, and we should all be concerned about what it means to local government. It also implies isolation, which when applied  to local government, could be a disaster for Fountain Hills. We can ill-afford to go without municipal neighbors, regional, or state partnerships when it comes to just about everything within and next to our borders and, for example, some on the dais have claimed for years that we are heading for a recession, yet that surely hasn't happened, either.

But it's more than that; using the term “first” is frequently a mix of nationalism, unilateralism and xenophobia. More specifically, it’s embraced in white Christian principles, “first” is an attempt to dominate everything from government to family, business, education, arts and entertainment, and the media through religion. If you don't believe me, read “Understanding White Christian Nationalism/ Institution for Social Policy Studies” at yale.edu. Patriotism and nationalism aren't the same thing.

So, don't overlook the implication when someone uses “first” when tied to Fountain Hills.

Reader reactions, pro or con, are welcomed at AzOpinions@iniusa.org.