“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
Some MAGA loyalists have turned on Trump. Why the rest haven’t