Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Toxic political talk undermines the foundations of our country

Red and blue heads colliding
wildpixel/Getty Images

Johnson is a United Methodist pastor, the author of "Holding Up Your Corner: Talking About Race in Your Community" and program director for the Bridge Alliance, which houses The Fulcrum.

The 2024 presidential race is heating up and, with it, an alarming trend has emerged in how we as a nation are talking to each other. It's not just a matter of political strategy; it's a crisis that demands our immediate attention.


Divisive rhetoric — such as labeling immigrants as "invaders" or "criminals," using inflammatory language like "enemy of the people" to describe the media, dehumanizing speech that refers to people of certain ethnicities as "animals," and outright racism — is becoming all too familiar. This way of politicking isn't just a betrayal of democratic principles and American ideals. The toxic talk we're experiencing is a clear and present danger to our social contract.

The consequences of this kind of rhetoric are severe. Look at the recent rise in hate crimes and discrimination against ethnic groups. It creates a toxic environment in which fear and anger run the show, clouding our judgment and leading us to destruction. It tears at the seams that bind us together, threatening to rip us apart. Most damaging, it poisons our political discourse, preventing us from discussing critical issues honestly, finding common ground and working towards solutions that benefit all Americans. But the danger goes even further.

When leaders use rhetoric that demonizes, scapegoats and dehumanizes, they're not just dividing the people; they're actively undermining the foundations of our country. They're saying some lives and rights matter less than others. They're violating the sacred principle of equality that is the bedrock of our democracy.

Disrespectful discourse isn't just anti-democratic; it's the opposite of healthy citizenship and basic human decency. It's a poison that infects our society, corrupting the ideals of liberty, equality and justice we hold so dear. This “toxic rhetoric” refers to language that incites hatred, fear and discrimination, and it's a system in which some are elevated at the expense of others, leading to injustice and inequality. Marginalized groups are inevitably the target of hatred, violence and oppression. We bear the brunt of this toxic rhetoric, suffering the consequences of a society that has lost its way.

The goal should be a nation where every voice is heard, every life is valued and everyone is treated with the dignity and respect they deserve. The United States is where diversity ought to be celebrated, not denigrated, and where inclusion is the common practice, not the exception. Democracy demands greater and expects much from its leaders and citizens. Democratic republics strive to curate political discourse grounded in truth, guided by empathy and dedicated to the well-being of all citizens. As a key player in shaping public opinion, the media has a crucial role in promoting respectful and inclusive political discourse. It's not just a role, it's a responsibility that cannot be understated.

Respectful discourse isn't about creating a fake atmosphere of consensus. Healthy debate seeks to find common ground, even in disagreement. It's about creating a political discourse that tackles the real problems we face, even if that means we disagree. More importantly, it's about recognizing that we can have differing views without demonizing those who see the world differently.

Respectful rhetoric expresses civility, empathy, and respect for humanity. It is an earnest exercise that requires open minds and hearts, and most importantly, empathy. For instance, respectful and inclusive political discourse involves acknowledging the experiences and perspectives of all citizens, regardless of their background. It's about prioritizing real issues over empty rhetoric and holding our leaders accountable for what they say and do. It's about demanding substance over style, action over words. The fate of American democracy literally hangs on our respective tongues and choices we make.

Read More

Two speech bubbles overlapping each other.

Democrats can reclaim America’s founding principles, rebuild the rural economy, and restore democracy by redefining the political battle Trump began.

Getty Images, Richard Drury

Defining the Democrat v. Republican Battle

Winning elections is, in large part, a question of which Party is able to define the battle and define the actors. Trump has so far defined the battle and effectively defined Democrats for his supporters as the enemy of making America great again.

For Democrats to win the 2026 midterm and 2028 presidential elections, they must take the offensive and show just the opposite–that it is they who are true to core American principles and they who will make America great again, while Trump is the Founders' nightmare come alive.

Keep ReadingShow less
Mirror, Mirror On the Wall, Who's the Most Patriotic of All?

Trump and the MAGA movement have twisted the meaning of patriotism. It’s time we collectively reclaim America’s founding ideals and the Pledge’s promise.

Getty Images, LeoPatrizi

Mirror, Mirror On the Wall, Who's the Most Patriotic of All?

Republicans have always claimed to be the patriotic party, the party of "America, right or wrong," the party willing to use force to protect American national interests abroad, the party of a strong military. In response, Democrats have not really contested this perspective since Vietnam, basically ceding the patriotic badge to the Republicans.

But with the advent of Donald Trump, the Republican claim to patriotism has gotten broader and more troubling. Republicans now claim to be the party that is true to our founding principles. And it is not just the politicians; they have support from far-right scholars at the Heritage Foundation, such as Matthew Spalding. The Democratic Party has done nothing to counter these claims.

Keep ReadingShow less
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