Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Where is the Holiday Spirit When It Comes to Solving Our Nation’s Problems?

Opinion

Where is the Holiday Spirit When It Comes to Solving Our Nation’s Problems?

Amid division and distrust, collaborative problem-solving shows how Americans can work across differences to rebuild trust and solve shared problems.

Getty Images, andreswd

Along with schmaltzy movies and unbounded commercialism, the holiday season brings something deeply meaningful: the holiday spirit. Central to this spirit is being charitable and kinder toward others. It is putting the Golden Rule—treating others as we ourselves wish to be treated—into practice.

Unfortunately, mounting evidence shows that while people believe the Golden Rule may apply in our private lives, they are pessimistic that it can have a positive impact in the “real” world filled with serious and divisive issues, political or otherwise. The vast majority of Americans believe that our political system cannot overcome current divisions to solve national problems. They seem to believe that we are doomed to fight rather than find ways to work together. Among young people, the pessimism is even more dire.


The good news is, we don’t need a Christmas miracle to make things better. We know from experience that Americans can overcome deep division: it is indeed possible to work across differences in a way that fosters respect and positive relationships and achieves remarkable results in the process.

For over two decades, we have successfully addressed critical issues at the national, state, and local levels through what we and others call “collaborative problem-solving.” We’ve found that so long as people agree there is a problem to solve, they can work together productively. Even people who assume they are inalterably opposed can find ways to build durable solutions and, in many instances, surprising friendships.

For example, in 2012, the Convergence Center for Policy Resolution convened a few dozen deeply divided leaders on K-12 education and engaged them in a collaborative problem-solving project. One participant, Gisele Huff, then head of the conservative Jaquelin Hume Foundation, was a strong critic of teachers’ unions and an advocate for school choice. She said she joined the project mainly to counteract union views and “had no illusions about the work product being anything worthwhile.

When they engaged in the collaborative problem-solving process, Gisele and the union representatives were surprised to see that they agreed on a lot. Gaps remained, and still remain, on issues like school choice. But they also found that when they focused on a common problem rather than defeating each other’s agendas, and broadened their perspectives, they were able to find enough common ground to form a more creative and compelling vision for the future of K-12 education than any party had before they met.

In this process, Gisele formed a positive relationship with her former adversary, Becky Pringle, now president of the National Education Association, the nation’s largest teachers’ union. They have supported each other through family challenges and even did something previously regarded as unthinkable: they went on a joint speaking engagement to spread the gospel of “learner-centered education.”

The collaboration was so successful that in 2015, a wide array of participating groups formed a new organization called Education Reimagined. Since then, the organization has been successfully moving its vision into action through grassroots efforts across the country.

The example of Gisele and Becky is one of many similar stories. If philosophical adversaries like them can generate and work to implement shared solutions, there is no reason why others—in government at all levels, businesses, nonprofits, academia, religious institutions, community groups, and more—cannot do the same.

The starting point for success lies in cultivating a “collaborative mindset.” Aspects of this include: seeing that conflict can be constructive and can push thinking to a higher level; giving others the benefit of the doubt rather than making premature assumptions; cultivating a practice of genuine curiosity to really understand each other; believing that win-win solutions are possible; and entertaining the idea that no one person, perspective or ideology has all the answers and that better solutions are likely to emerge by integrating collective wisdom. People who practice this mindset, or at least stay open to it, are more likely to have success employing the key steps entailed in any collaborative problem-solving effort.

There is no reason why most people cannot try these methods in a surprisingly wide array of circumstances. With good faith and honesty, this approach can help solve tough problems far more effectively and amicably than most would ever imagine.

We know we can do better as a nation. This mindset and simple steps hold exciting potential to help foster a cultural shift toward a deeply held aspiration of the season: to bring the “holiday spirit” into our private and public lives.


Robert Fersh is the founder and first CEO of Convergence Center for Policy Resolution and previously served on the staff of three Congressional Committees.

Mariah Levison is the organization’s current CEO. They are co-authors of From Conflict to Convergence: Coming Together to Solve Tough Problems

Read More

Governors Cox and Shapiro Urge Nation to “Lower the Temperature” Amid Rising Political Violence

Utah Republican Spencer Cox and Pennsylvania Democrat Josh Shapiro appear on CNN

Governors Cox and Shapiro Urge Nation to “Lower the Temperature” Amid Rising Political Violence

In the days following the murder of conservative activist Charlie Kirk, I wrote Governor Cox’s Prayer Wasn’t Just Misguided—It Was Dangerous, an article sharply criticizing Utah Gov. Spencer Cox for his initial public response. Rather than centering his remarks on the victim, the community’s grief, or the broader national crisis of political violence, Cox told reporters that he had prayed the shooter would be from “another state” or “another country.” That comment, I argued at the time, was more than a moment of emotional imprecision—it reflected a deeper and more troubling instinct in American politics to externalize blame. By suggesting that the perpetrator might ideally be an outsider, Cox reinforced long‑standing xenophobic narratives that cast immigrants and non‑locals as the primary sources of danger, despite extensive evidence that political violence in the United States is overwhelmingly homegrown.

Recently, Cox joined Pennsylvania Governor, Democrat Josh Shapiro, issuing a rare bipartisan warning about the escalating threat of political violence in the United States, calling on national leaders and citizens alike to “tone it down” during a joint interview at the Washington National Cathedral.

Keep Reading Show less
The Great Political Finger Trap

Protesters gather near the White House on November 24, 2025 in Washington, DC. The group Refuse Fascism held a rally and afterwards held hands in a long line holding yellow "Crime Scene Do Not Cross" tape along Lafayette Square near the White House.

(Photo by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)

The Great Political Finger Trap

In the wake of Charlie Kirk’s assassination earlier this year, a YouGov poll was released exploring sentiments around political violence. The responses raised some alarm, with 25% of those who self-identified as “very liberal,” and nearly 20% of those polled between the ages of 18 and 29, saying that violence was sometimes justified “in order to achieve political goals.” Numerous commentators, including many within the bridging space, lamented the loss of civility and the straying from democratic ideals. Others pointed to ends justifying means, to cases of injustice and incivility so egregious, as they saw it, that it simply demanded an extreme response.

But amidst this heated debate over what is justified in seeking political ends, another question is often overlooked: do the extreme measures work? Or, do acts of escalation lead to a cycle of greater escalation, deepening divisions, and making our crises harder to resolve, and ultimately undermining the political ends they seek?

Keep Reading Show less
High School Civic Innovators Bridging America’s Divide

Sophie Kim

High School Civic Innovators Bridging America’s Divide

At just 17 years of age, Sophie Kim was motivated to start her organization, Bipartisan Bridges, to bring together people from both ends of the political spectrum. What started as just an idea during her freshman year of high school took off after Sophie placed in the Civics Unplugged pitch contest, hosted for alumni in Spring 2024. Since then, Sophie has continued to expand Bipartisan Bridges' impact, creating spaces that foster civil dialogue and facilitate meaningful connections across party lines.

Sophie, a graduate of the Spring 2024 Civic Innovators Fellowship and the Summer 2025 Civic Innovation Academy at UCLA, serves as the founder and executive director of Bipartisan Bridges. In this role, Sophie has forged a partnership with the organization Braver Angels to host depolarization workshops and has led the coordination and capture of conversations on climate change, abortion, gun control, foreign aid, and the 100 Men vs. a Gorilla debate. In addition, this year, Sophie planned and oversaw Bipartisan Bridges’ flagship Politics and Polarization Fellowship, an eight-week, in-person program involving youth from Tustin, Irvine, Costa Mesa, and Huntington Beach, California. A recent Bipartisan Bridges session featuring youth from both Los Angeles and Orange County will be featured in Bridging the Gap, an upcoming documentary.

Keep Reading Show less
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 Reading Show less