Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Defining the Democracy Reform Movement: Rev. F. Willis Johnson

Americans wrapped in a flag
Citizens are united and legislators don’t represent us
SeventyFour

The Fulcrum presents The Path Forward: Defining the Democracy Reform Movement. Scott Warren's weekly interviews engage diverse thought leaders to elevate the conversation about building a thriving and healthy democratic republic that fulfills its potential as a national social and political game-changer. This series is the start of focused collaborations and dialogue led by The Bridge Alliance and The Fulcrum teams to help the movement find a path forward.

The second interview of this series took place with Reverend F. Willis Johnson, an entrepreneur and an elder in the West Ohio Conference of the United Methodist Church in Columbus, Ohio. Reverend Johnson provided a religious and spiritual perspective on the needs of this moment, which is different from many organizations that often receive outsized attention.



- YouTubewww.youtube.com

Reverend Johnson emphasized the importance of local, relational action while casting doubt on the national pro-democracy space. Some of his main ideas included:

  • The “Pro-democracy” language might not resonate: Much of Reverend Johnson’s work is on the ground in Columbus, Ohio. He sees the work he’s leading as part of the bridging sphere and bringing people into a deep community, but he does not use “pro-democracy” rhetoric, nor do people on the ground.

    It can be difficult to build a field when the “pro-democracy” language is seen as elitist or partisan. As Reverend Johnson noted, “I mean, everything in the field is convoluted. The language is convoluted principally because everybody is either sensitive or offended by whatever the language choice is of the other.”
  • There is a risk that the field and ecosystem are becoming too top-heavy: Reverend Johnson warned that too many resources are flowing to national organizations that aren’t necessarily on the front lines. As the “pro-democracy” industry gets professionalized, Reverend Johnson cautioned that the professionals are becoming better compensated and less in touch with the reality on the ground.

    As he noted, now “you got a organization with a million dollar budget with three people, and it's heavy at the top and nobody at the bottom….That that is fueled and focused on survival, not on the strengthening and of the forwarding of a real agenda.”

    The balance between organizational survival, raising dollars, and doing the necessary work is important for all involved in the field. As he noted, “Money does not dictate whether or not we do ministry.” There can be a concern that money is dictating too much of the work in the field right now.
  • The field also may not be reaching everyday Americans: Reverend Johnson also warned that the pro-democracy field is becoming a “boutique” cottage industry, appealing to elites rather than the concerns of everyday Americans. Reverend Johnson noted, “Everybody wants to be Versace and Louis Vuitton. It’s not gonna work that day. Somebody’s got to be Old Navy.”

Reverend Johnson provided critical feedback for the field, but feedback that needs to be heard. Coming from an elite academic institute, I find his warning that the “pro-democracy” space is becoming too professionalized and too niche important to reflect upon.

A decade ago, much of the work that would be constituted as “pro-democracy” was happening in communities across the country without that nomenclature. Now, as the field matures, so do large national organizations bringing in tremendous amounts of resources. However, whether that professionalization leads to actual impact is an entirely different question that needs to be examined more closely.

Yes, people need to be compensated, and some of the professionalization that Reverend Johnson warns about is inevitable as ecosystems emerge. But there is a risk that funders are dictating too much of the work, and we’re not seeing enough progress.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter


Please watch Reverend Johnson’s interview and share your thoughts. We must ensure we’re listening to and working with everyday Americans rather than in our echo chambers.

Executive Editor's Notes: We invite you to subscribe to the Fulcrum's YouTube channel, where you will find thought-provoking and engaging conversations about what matters most in protecting and nurturing democracy.

Look for Scott's next interview on Thursday, March 20.

Scott Warren is a fellow at the SNF Agora Institute at Johns Hopkins University. He is co-leading a trans-partisan effort to protect the basic parameters, rules, and institutions of the American republic. He is the co-founder of Generation Citizen, a national civics education organization.

SUGGESTIONS:

Defining the Democracy Reform Movement: Julia Roig

A Path Forward for the Pro-Democracy Community

A Democracy Reform Movement- If we can define it

Read More

Crowd Surfing Through Revolution
silhouette photo of man jumped off on top of people inside party hall
Photo by Zach Lucero on Unsplash

Crowd Surfing Through Revolution

Picture this: A person launches themselves into a crowd at a concert, and for a moment, everything hangs in the balance. Will they fall? Will they float? It all depends on countless hands moving in coordination, strangers united in a common purpose. Some push up while others stabilize, creating a dynamic, living system that defies gravity.

At this moment, we are all suspended between falling and flying, carried by a wave of global resistance that nobody controls but all can help shape. Think about what makes crowd surfing work. It's not just about the individual being carried – it's about the collective choreography happening beneath. With too much force in one direction, you fall. Not enough support in another, you crash. The magic happens in the balance.

Keep ReadingShow less
Threat Minimizes Compassion
Polarization and the politics of love
Polarization and the politics of love

Threat Minimizes Compassion

Threat minimizes compassion. This connection helps to explain two seemingly unrelated questions: Why do those who voted for President Trump seem not to publicly express much concern for the thousands of government workers fired since Inauguration Day? And why do liberals often seem not to talk as much about drug deaths as other issues like gun deaths?

The answers are multi-faceted, of course. This article will focus on one of many reasons: the potential victims of these actions and situations (government workers and drug users) are often directly or indirectly seen as threats by the other side, and it is hard to feel the pain of those who seem to threaten us. Institutions can also be threatening, based on the actions taken by people within those institutions.

Keep ReadingShow less
a group of people arranged in the shape of the United states of America map

A group of people arranged in the shape of the United states of America map.

Getty Images, attjeacock

Where Is the “Real America”?

Is there such a thing as a “real America”? A battle now rages over this simple question. Some Democratic party operatives claim the real America are so-called “Trump voters,” who they say they need to better “study” in order to win future elections. Many Republican voices argue the real America are just those who support the new administration 100% of the time. Still, others assert that different demographics or geography comprise the real America. It’s as if the real America is one particular slice or another of our nation.

These caricatures lead us sorely astray. But there is a real America. I work in it every day.

Keep ReadingShow less
‘When People Spend Time Together, They Are Less Inclined To See Each Other As the Enemy’: ​A Conversation With Matt Grossmann

Picture of Matt Grossmann

‘When People Spend Time Together, They Are Less Inclined To See Each Other As the Enemy’: ​A Conversation With Matt Grossmann

In The Sun Also Rises, Ernest Hemingway famously observed that a character went broke in two ways: gradually, then suddenly. The same dynamic has been at work in American politics. For decades, the composition of our principal political parties has been slowly shifting, without a great deal of public attention. And then the 2024 presidential election happened, and it was suddenly obvious: the Democrats, traditionally the party of the working class, had become the party of educated elites.

Matt Grossmann has been a keen observer of this transition. A professor of political science at Michigan State University, Grossmann also directs the Institute for Public Policy and Social Research and hosts the “Science of Politics” podcast for the Niskanen Center. With his co-author David A. Hopkins, Grossmann recently published Polarized by Degrees: How the Diploma Divide and the Culture War Transformed American Politics, a book that documents a remarkable shift in American society. Since 1960, we have seen a massive expansion in the number of adult Americans earning college degrees—from roughly 7 percent of the population to nearly 40 percent.

Keep ReadingShow less