Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Unity doesn’t mean thinking alike in a free society

Red and blue hands coming together
JakeOlimb/Getty Images

“In the political life of a free society, unity doesn’t mean thinking alike,” according to noted political theorist Yuval Levin. “Unity means acting together.”

A couple weeks ago, Levin sat down with Brian Boyle of American Promise to unpack this idea and others from Levin’s latest book, “ American Covenant: How the Constitution Unified Our Nation — And Could Again.”


Levin is the director of social, cultural and constitutional studies at the American Enterprise Institute. The founder and editor of National Affairs, he is also a senior editor at The New Atlantis, a contributing editor at National Review and a contributing opinion writer at The New York Times. Levin served as a member of the White House domestic policy staff under President George W. Bush.

In a wide-ranging conversation, they discussed the importance of constructive conflict in our constitutional system, practical ways to bridge the ideological divide and ongoing efforts to amend our country’s founding document.

The conversation was hosted by American Promise, a cross-partisan organization working to advance the For Our Freedom Amendment, a constitutional measure that would legally empower lawmakers to pass reasonable restrictions around campaign finance.

In the wake of a record-breaking $20 billion election, Levin also offered his take on how big money nationalizes local elections and collapses discourse, why well-intentioned campaign finance regulations have failed in the past and how judicial overreach disempowers Congress from tackling difficult problems.

Levin identified several structural factors that drive polarization, including the modern primary system. “We begin every election cycle by basically asking the people who least want the system to work, ‘Who do you want in the political system?’” Levin explains. “The answer is: People who don’t want to compromise, people who don’t want to bargain, people who want to be ideological purists — and who view the other party as the country’s biggest problem.”

- YouTubewww.youtube.com

Read More

Two speech bubbles overlapping.

Recent data shows that Americans view members of the opposing political party overly negatively, leading people to avoid political discourse with those who hold different views.

Getty Images, Richard Drury

How To Motivate Americans’ Conversations Across Politics

Introduction

A large body of research shows that Americans hold overly negative distortions of those across the political spectrum. These misperceptions—often referred to as "Perception Gaps"—make civil discourse harder, since few Americans are eager to engage with people they believe are ideologically extreme, interpersonally hostile, or even threatening or inferior. When potential disagreement feels deeply uncomfortable or dangerous, conversations are unlikely to begin.

Correcting these distortions can help reduce barriers to productive dialogue, making Americans more open to political conversations.

Keep ReadingShow less
Divided American flag

Rev. Dr. F. Willis Johnson writes on the serious impacts of "othering" marginalized populations and how, together, we must push back to create a more inclusive and humane society.

Jorge Villalba/Getty Images

New Rules of the Game: Weaponization of Othering

By now, you have probably seen the viral video. Taylor Townsend—Black, bold, unbothered—walks off the court after a bruising match against her white European opponent, Jelena Ostapenko. The post-match glances were sharper than a backhand slice. Next came the unsportsmanlike commentary—about her body, her "attitude," and a not-so-veiled speculation about whether she belonged at this level. To understand America in the Trump Redux era, one only needs to study this exchange.

Ostapenko vs. Townsend is a microcosm of something much bigger: the way anti-democratic, vengeful politics—modeled from the White House on down—have bled into every corner of public life, including sports. Turning “othering” into the new national pastime. Divisive politics has a profound impact on marginalized groups. Neither Ostapenko nor Donald Trump invented this playbook, yet Trump and his sycophants are working to master it. Fueled by a sense of grievance, revenge, and an insatiable appetite for division, he—like Ostapenko—has normalized once somewhat closeted attitudes.

Keep ReadingShow less
Hand blocking someone speaking

The Third Way has recently released a memo stating that the “stampede away from the Democratic Party” is partly a result of the language and rhetoric it uses.

Westend61/Getty Images

To Protect Democracy, Democrats Should Pay Attention to the Third Way’s List of ‘Offensive’ Words

More than fifty years ago, comedian George Carlin delivered a monologue entitled Seven Words You Can Never Say on Television.” It was a tribute to the legendary Lenny Bruce, whose “nine dirty words” performance led to his arrest and his banning from many places.

His seven words were “p—, f—, c—, c———, m———–, and t—.”

Keep ReadingShow less