Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

The power of interdependence in the healthy democracy ecosystem

The capacity for change is rooted in the belief in its possibility

Opinion

Many people standing arm-in-arm

"Acknowledging our challenges doesn't equate to succumbing to pessimism; rather, it propels us to forge expansive coalitions, uniting diverse voices to dismantle entrenched power structures that hinder our progress," writes Becvar.

DisobeyArt/Getty Images

Becvar is the executive director of the Bridge Alliance Education Fund, which houses The Fulcrum.

Each week, I dive deep into the pulse of our collective efforts within the Bridge Alliance, exploring the tapestry of initiatives and activities of the healthy democracy field. At times, our work is galvanized by pivotal events, both within the United States and globally, or inspired by cultural milestones, like Taylor Swift pushback or the Tracy Chapman/Luke Combs duet at the Grammy Awards.

This week’s reflection transcends any specific political or cultural narratives. A different kind of theme stood out: the intrinsic interdependence of our diverse fields of work.


Over the years, the areas of focus brought together by the Bridge Alliance have clarified into organizations dedicated to bridging divides and peacemaking, reforming elections and governance, improving civic education and engagement, and spreading trustworthy information. Our founders and team continually work to define how these areas of practice strengthen one another and actively seek to intertwine the domains and amplify their collective impact. Last week highlighted the importance of how two of those domains – bridging divides and electoral and governance reform – really need each other.

There are updates about the successes and challenges of ranked-choice voting in 2023, the challenge of A.I. regulation, testimony on social media policy reforms, state efforts to minimize voters, rock-bottom primary election turnout, campaign finance reform, the debate over immigration, and the challenge of former President Donald Trump’s false allegations about U.S. elections. The breadth of these challenges is as daunting as it is invigorating, yet they are matched by the community’s efforts toward social cohesion and civic engagement.

One highlight was the National Civic League’s webinar with leaders of the Bridging Movement Alignment Council and the #DisagreeBetter Campaign. They offered tools for having conversations with those we disagree with on many of the issues mentioned above. Podcasts discuss how curiosity can bridge dangerous divides and give insights into retaining our humanity in these divided times. Additionally, upcoming events provide opportunities to join discussions with thought leaders like Katherine Gehl and Jonathan Haidt offering insights into reforming our electoral systems, safeguarding democracy, and the societal impacts of social media.

The journey towards bridging divides and fostering social cohesion is often viewed through a skeptical lens, perceived as overly idealistic or disconnected from the broader socio-political challenges. Yet, my personal evolution from a self-identified pessimist to an unwavering optimist underscores a fundamental truth: advocacy for change is rooted in the belief in its possibility. Acknowledging our challenges doesn't equate to succumbing to pessimism; rather, it propels us to forge expansive coalitions, uniting diverse voices to dismantle entrenched power structures that hinder our progress.

In the face of current uncertainties and discord, I draw my hope from recognizing that within this reality lies an opportunity to galvanize broader engagement, drawing individuals out of complacency and into action. The Bridge Alliance and the wider healthy democracy ecosystem have been building capacity and laying foundational groundwork to welcome those individuals for years, and stand ready to lead with solutions, resilience, and an unwavering commitment to democracy.

As we move forward, I carry with me a profound sense of gratitude for this community, our collective endeavors and the tools at our disposal to navigate these times. It's a reminder that our work is not only necessary but pivotal in shaping the future of our democracy. Let this realization fuel our efforts in the coming week and beyond.

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