Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

To save America, add trust and subtract polarizing words and actions

Building the word "trust"
Banking, democracy & trust
C.J. Burton/Getty Images

Coan is the co-founder and executive director of More Like US. He previously served as DC Alliance co-chair and mid-Atlantic regional lead for Braver Angels.

When I tell people that I work on improving our nation’s politics, they typically have one of two responses, a skeptical “good luck,” or a confused “how?”

I think these people are justified in their skepticism or confusion. I have worked on efforts to reduce polarization since shortly after the 2016 election, but from my standpoint, the overlapping bridging/civic health/civic renewal fields so far have not articulated a particularly plausible and understandable “how” for achieving goals at scale.


The main problem from my perspective is an overblown and distorted sense that those in the other main political party are more threatening and inferior (morally and/or cognitively) than they really are. Unsurprisingly, this pairs with low levels of trust. To use a widely known phrase, Americans are increasingly on a path toward “fear and loathing” across the political spectrum.

Under these conditions, some will feel a need to “win at all costs” to prevent the other party from basically ever having power. Actions to achieve this can involve voting for candidates determined to fight rather than work with those in the other party, testing boundaries of legal or typical means of trying to gain advantage over the other party, and sometimes going beyond legal means even into political violence, all of which weaken or destroy democratic republics.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

Meanwhile, I frame solutions using a simple structure of arithmetic of addition and subtraction, not to suggest that the necessary steps are easy. Add more trust that can bring us together. Meanwhile, subtract polarizing rhetoric and behavior, especially the underlying factors worsening them.

I create this add-subtract structure to provide an easy-to-remember mental model for the vast multitude of potential depolarization solutions. Adding is not necessarily better than subtracting, or vice versa, and certain individual solutions may have both elements.

Starting with addition, it is possible to take steps to directly add to levels of trust. The subcategories of addition, just like an addition sign, have “horizontal” and “vertical” components.

  • Horizontal trust is interpersonal and intercommunal between Americans across the political spectrum. This can include highlighting cross-partisan similarities such as in Similarity Hub from AllSides and More Like US, the organization I lead and co-founded. It can also include portraying those across the political spectrum in a better light, such as efforts from Bridge Entertainment Labs, as well as facilitating civil discourse like many groups in the #ListenFirst Coalition.
  • Vertical trust concerns institutions, especially when they are commonly associated with one political party.

Yet it is also vital to deal with factors that got us to this point. The current information environment deserves some of the blame for these distortions that put us on a path toward fear and loathing. When people hear similar divisive, distorted content again and again, many start to find it plausible or accept it. Of course, certain actions can also worsen polarization.

I frame the categories of solutions to subtract polarizing words and actions as negatives – dissuade, disincentivize and (in extreme cases) disallow.

  • Dissuade people and institutions from rhetoric and behaviors that exacerbate negative perceptions across the political spectrum, essentially following the maxim “First, do no harm.” This also involves dissuading donors from funding polarizing institutions, as well as dissuading people from believing inaccurate and divisive statements, which means increasing media literacy and its variants.
  • Disincentivize the worst aspects of news media, social media, artificial intelligence and electoral systems. News media and social media currently face perverseincentives to encourage politically charged content to engage users and maximize advertising revenue, and electoral systems often perverselyencourage politicians and candidates to play to a more extreme and partisan base to win primaries in otherwise safe districts. These are all macro-level incentives that cut across entire fields, involving approaches including incentives for advertising and mechanisms of election systems. Disincentivizing preserves free speech, but tilts the scales away from amplifying polarizing statements.
  • Disallow the most extreme speech and actions, such as incitement to “imminent lawless action” or actions that become violent. At times, individuals or groups will suffer consequences from these actions, including fines or imprisonment.

Separately, a last set of actions involve broader issues such as loneliness and lack of wage growth. These matter, as they can exacerbate a path toward interparty fear and loathing. However, these are massive topics that cut across many domains, so I believe it is best to usually play a supporting role to other kinds of organizations that focus on them more directly.

The add-subtract structure includes space for a vast array of individual initiatives but itself is straightforward. Add trust both horizontally and vertically. Subtract polarizing words and actions, especially the factors that cause them. Remember broader issues affecting Americans.

Many groups have roles to fill, working in parallel to add trust and subtract the words and actions tearing us apart. Let’s get to work.

Read More

People standing near 4 American flags

American flags fly near Washington Monument.

Jakub Porzycki/NurPhoto via Getty Images

A personal note to America in troubled times

Harwood is president and founder of The Harwood Institute. This is the latest entry in his series based on the "Enough. Time to Build.” campaign, which calls on community leaders and active citizens to step forward and build together.

I wanted to address Americans after the attempted assassination of former President Donald Trump. Consider this a personal note directly to you (yes, you, the reader!). And know that I have intentionally held off in expressing my thoughts to allow things to settle a bit. There’s already too much noise enveloping our politics and lives.

Like most Americans, I am praying for the former president, his family and all those affected by last weekend’s events. There is no room for political violence in our nation.

Keep ReadingShow less
David French

New York Times columnist David French was removed from the agenda of a faith-basd gathering because we was too "divisive."

Macmillan Publishers

Is canceling David French good for civic life?

Harwood is president and founder of The Harwood Institute. This is the latest entry in his series based on the "Enough. Time to Build.” campaign, which calls on community leaders and active citizens to step forward and build together.

On June 10-14, the Presbyterian Church in America held its annual denominational assembly in Richmond, Va. The PCA created considerable national buzz in the lead-up when it abruptly canceled a panel discussion featuring David French, the highly regarded author and New York Times columnist.

The panel carried the innocuous-sounding title, “How to Be Supportive of Your Pastor and Church Leaders in a Polarized Political Year.” The reason for canceling it? French, himself a long-time PCA member, was deemed too “divisive.” This despite being a well-known, self-identified “conservative” and PCA adherent. Ironically, the loudest and most divisive voices won the day.

Keep ReadingShow less
Young girl holding a sparkler and wearing an American flag shirt
Rebecca Nelson/Getty Images

Three approaches to Independence Day

Anderson edited "Leveraging: A Political, Economic and Societal Framework," has taught at five universities and ran for the Democratic nomination for a Maryland congressional seat in 2016.

July Fourth is not like Christmas or Rosh Hashanah, holidays that create a unified sense of celebration among celebrants. On Christmas, Christians throughout the world celebrate the birth of Jesus Christ. On Rosh Hashanah, Jews throughout the world celebrate the Jewish New Year.

Yet on the Fourth of July, apart from the family gatherings, barbecues and drinking, we take different approaches. Some Americans celebrate the declaration of America's independence from Great Britain and especially the value of freedom. And some Americans reject the holiday, because they believe it highlights the self-contradiction of the United States, which created a nation in which some would be free and some would be enslaved. And other Americans are conflicted between these two points of view.

Keep ReadingShow less
Fireworks on July 4
Roy Rochlin/Getty Images

One country, one constitution, one destiny

Lockard is an Iowa resident who regularly contributes to regional newspapers and periodicals. She is working on the second of a four-book fictional series based on Jane Austen’s “Pride and Prejudice."

“One country, one constitution, one destiny,” Daniel Webster said in a historic 1837 speech defending the American Union.

This of Fourth of July, 187 years after Webster’s speech and the 248th anniversary of the signing of our Declaration of Independence, Webster would no doubt be dismayed to find his quote reconstrued by popular opinion to read something like this:

“Divided country, debated constitution, and as for destiny, we’re going to hell in a hand-basket.”

Keep ReadingShow less
Rich Harwood
Harwood Institute

Meet the change leaders: Rich Harwood

Nevins is co-publisher of The Fulcrum and co-founder and board chairman of the Bridge Alliance Education Fund.

After working on more than 20 political campaigns and two highly respected nonprofits, Rich Harwood set out to create something entirely different. He founded what is now known as The Harwood Institute for Public Innovation in 1988, when he was just 27 years old (and is now its president). Soon after, he wrote the ground-breaking report “Citizen and Politics: A View from Main Street,” the first national study to uncover that Americans did not feel apathetic about politics, but instead held a deep sense of anger and disconnection.

Over the past 30 years, Rich has innovated and developed a new philosophy and practice for how communities can solve shared problems, create a culture of shared responsibility and deepen people’s civic faith. The Harwood practice of Turning Outward has spread to all 50 states and is being used in 40 countries.

Keep ReadingShow less