Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

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

Opinion

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.


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

A New Path to Depolarization: Media That Brings Us Together
Political polarization
Polarization and the politics of love

A New Path to Depolarization: Media That Brings Us Together

As we face ever-growing partisan polarization in American society, the need for large-scale action becomes increasingly urgent. As James Coan and I have written about in the Fulcrum during my time at More Like US, there are approaches grounded in a significant body of social psychological research that can help address this rapidly growing problem, namely different variations of social contact theory, especially vicarious contact. Until recently, much of the research and thus much of the basis for our articles has been focused on applying social contact theory to other problems facing society: prejudice against members of the LGBTQ community, individuals with autism, and immigrant schoolchildren, among other examples.

It was therefore exciting when last fall I saw the publication of an article in Political Science Research and Methods titled "Content That's as Good as Contact?: Vicarious Intergroup Contact and the Promise of Depolarization at Scale." The study, conducted in 2022 in conjunction with YouGov, finally attempted to measure the effectiveness of indirect contact as a path to depolarization, primarily through the vicarious experience of productive political conversation. Encompassing over 2,000 participants gathered from a nationally representative sample recruited by YouGov’s online panel, the study looked to test affective polarization, measured attitudinally, and interest and investment in depolarization, measured behaviorally. To this end, the study tested multiple media interventions, namely a 50-minute Braver Angels documentary featuring a “Red-Blue” depolarization workshop; a 50-minute placebo nature documentary about wildebeest migration; a 5-minute version of the Braver Angels documentary; a second 5-minute version that emphasized partisan misperception correction; and a pure control group, with no treatment.

Keep ReadingShow less
How Red and Blue America Can Stay Together by Pulling Apart

United States Marine Corps Lockheed Martin F-35B Lightning II STOVL stealth multirole fighters belonging to the VMFA-121 "Green Knights" taxiing at the MCAS Iwakuni in Yamaguchi, Japan, on March 23, 2017.

(viper-zero / Getty Images)

How Red and Blue America Can Stay Together by Pulling Apart

In earlier essays, I argued that America’s political division has grown so deep that a peaceful “American Union” of two sovereign nations — one broadly red, one broadly blue — is worth considering. I also argued that relocation fears are overstated, that cooperation could increase economic prosperity, and that separation could help heal the lingering wounds of the Civil War.

But how would this all actually work? What happens to the national debt? Who gets the military bases, federal lands, and nuclear weapons? Will Social Security be protected? Could two nations share the dollar, defend themselves together, and resolve their disagreements?

Keep ReadingShow less
Rear view of teenage boy walking with arm around friends

Why many young men feel politically and socially adrift, how changing gender roles affect masculinity, self-esteem, relationships, and the future of society.

Maskot / Getty Images

Lost Boys - What Is the Role of a Man in Today's Society?

A recent New York Times article stated that young males who provided an important swing vote for Trump in 2024 are discouraged by what Trump has done and not done while in office. But they are nevertheless not particularly inclined to vote Democratic because they don't see the Party as welcoming their view of masculinity and they don't know where they fit in this society.

These young men assume that because the Party supports equality for women in the workplace and because many young women no longer have marriage and having children at the top of their agenda, the Party would not be a welcoming home for them. They see themselves as striving for the masculinity of their fathers' or grandfathers' day, where the man was the breadwinner in the family and had respect and authority. Not the weaker half in relationships with women.

Keep ReadingShow less
Showing Up and Staying: Disaster Relief in an Age of Distrust

NECHAMA volunteers in Western North Carolina after Hurricane Helene.

Showing Up and Staying: Disaster Relief in an Age of Distrust

As the Atlantic hurricane season officially began on June 1, disaster response organizations across the country are preparing for the next storm. That preparation includes coordinating logistics, purchasing supplies, training volunteers, and strengthening partnerships. It now also requires planning for an environment shaped by misinformation, distrust, and competing narratives.

A recent 60 Minutes segment examining extremist groups in disaster zones highlighted how quickly public perceptions can form after a disaster. Recovery efforts are now followed by outside groups and online networks attempting to influence how events are understood while communities are still in crisis.

Keep ReadingShow less