Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

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

Communication concept with multi colored abstract people icons.

Research shows that emotional, cognitive, and social mechanisms drive both direct and indirect contact, offering scalable ways to reduce political polarization.

Getty Images, Eoneren

“Direct” and “Indirect” Contact Methods Likely Work in Similar Ways, so They Should Both Be Effective

In a previous article, we argued that efforts to improve the political environment should reach Americans as media consumers, in addition to seeking public participation. Reaching Americans as media consumers uses media like film, TV, and social media to change what Americans see and hear about fellow Americans across the political spectrum. Participant-based efforts include dialogues and community-based activities that require active involvement.

In this article, we show that the mechanisms underlying each type of approach are quite similar. The categories of mechanisms we cover are emotional, cognitive, relational, and repetitive. We use the terms from the academic literature, “direct” and “indirect” contact, which are fairly similar to participant and media consumer approaches, respectively.

Keep ReadingShow less
The American Experiment Requires Robust Debate, Not Government Crackdowns

As political violence threatens democracy, defending free speech, limiting government overreach, and embracing pluralism matters is critical right now.

Getty Images, Javier Zayas Photography

The American Experiment Requires Robust Debate, Not Government Crackdowns

The assassinations of conservative leader Charlie Kirk and Democratic lawmakers in Minnesota have triggered endorsements of violence and even calls for literal war on both the far right and far left. Fortunately, an overwhelming majority of Americans reject political violence, but all of us are in a fight to keep our diverse and boisterous brand of democracy alive. Doing so requires a renewed commitment to pluralism and a clear-headed recognition of the limits of government, especially when proposals entail using the criminal justice system to punish speech.

Pluralism has been called the lifeblood of a democracy like ours, in which being an American is not defined by race or religion. It requires learning about and accepting our differences, and embracing the principle that, regardless of them, every person is entitled to be protected by our Constitution and have a voice in how we’re governed. In contrast, many perpetrators of political violence rationalize their acts by denying the basic humanity of those with whom they disagree. They are willing to face the death penalty or life in prison in an attempt to force everyone to conform to their views.

Keep ReadingShow less
A woman sitting down and speaking with a group of people.

The SVL (Stories, Values, Listen) framework—which aims to bridge political divides with simple, memorable steps for productive cross-partisan conversations—is an easy-to-use tool for making an impact at scale.

Getty Images, Luis Alvarez

Make Talking Politics Easier and More Scalable: Be SVL (Stories, Values, Listen)

How can one have a productive conversation across the political spectrum?

We offer simple, memorable guidance: Be SVL (pronounced like “civil”). SVL stands for sharing Stories, relating to a conversation partner’s Values, and closely Listening.

Keep ReadingShow less
St. Patrick’s Cathedral’s Mural: Art, Immigration, and the American Spirit

People attend a mass and ceremony for a new mural dedicated to New York City’s immigrant communities and honoring the city’s first responders at St. Patrick’s Cathedral on September 21, 2025 in New York City.

(Photo by Spencer Platt/Getty Images)

St. Patrick’s Cathedral’s Mural: Art, Immigration, and the American Spirit

In a bold fusion of sacred tradition and contemporary relevance, artist Adam Cvijanovic has unveiled a sweeping new mural at St. Patrick’s Cathedral in New York City—one that reimagines the historic narthex as a vibrant ode to peace, migration, and spiritual continuity.

In an age of polarization and performative politics, it’s rare to find a work of art that speaks with both spiritual clarity and civic urgency. Yet that’s exactly what “What’s So Funny About Peace, Love and Understanding” accomplishes. The piece is more than a visual upgrade to a “dreary” entranceway—it’s a theological and cultural intervention, one that invites every visitor to confront the moral stakes of our immigration discourse.

Keep ReadingShow less