Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

A call for conscious rhetoric

Donald Trump

Former President Donald Trump attends the Republican National Convention on July 18.

Jacek Boczarski/Anadolu via Getty Images

J ohnson 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.

In the wake of the attempted assassination of former President Donald Trump and the shadow of the Republican National Convention, a stark reality confronts us: Our national discourse is a ticking time bomb, urgently in need of defusing. The incendiary rhetoric, the vitriol, the escalating violence — these are not just political issues but profound moral crises.

As a nation, we stand at a precipice, and the choice before us is consequential: We can continue down the path of hatred and division, or we can chart a new course guided by respect, empathy and the fundamental dignity of every human being.


Let us be clear: This is not a partisan issue. The poison of "whataboutism," projection and false equivalencies, dishonest debate, and gaslighting infects us all, regardless of our political stripes. It is a cancer that eats away at the heart of our democracy, turning our public square into a battleground and our fellow citizens into enemies.

We see it in how we debate, with minds already made up and ears closed to opposing views. We see it in the way we treat those who disagree with us, not as fellow Americans with differing opinions but as threats to be defeated. We see it in how we excuse the worst excesses of our side while magnifying the flaws of the other. These practices are not merely a political problem but a profound moral failure. It is a corruption of the soul, a hardening of the heart, a closing of the mind. And it demands not just a political response but an ethical one.

We must ask ourselves how we engage with those who see the world differently. Do I seek to understand or merely to triumph? Do I speak to illuminate or to obscure? Do I see a brother, sister, a human or an enemy to defeat in my fellow citizen? These questions will determine not just the future of our politics but the health of our souls.

As a Christian cleric, I am compelled by the teachings of my faith to speak out against injustice, to stand with the marginalized and to call my fellow believers to account. The prophets of old did not mince words when confronted with wrongdoing, nor can I. But this is not merely a religious imperative. It is a call to our shared humanity that transcends religious boundaries. Whether we identify as people of faith or not, we all intuitively understand the power of words. We remember the schoolyard taunts that cut to the bone, the words of encouragement that lifted our spirits, the voices of hatred that sparked violence and the speeches that inspired us to greatness.

Words are not neutral; they carry the power to heal, to harm, to build or to tear down. And in a society as diverse and fractured as ours, the words we choose, the rhetoric we embrace, carry the weight of life and death. Words can inflame our differences, turning our fellow citizens into enemies. They can either dehumanize and degrade or uplift and inspire. They can be tools of division or instruments of peace. And so we must choose our words carefully, aware of their power. We must speak with honesty, integrity, compassion and respect.

For instance, when we call out injustice, we should do so in a way that humanizes rather than demonizes. We should express our convictions with passion and remain open to persuasion in debates. And we must always remember that the words we speak and the rhetoric we embrace reflect not just our politics but our character. Thus, it is essential that we employ speech and messaging that reflects the best of our humanity rather than the worst. Only by communicating in such a manner can we hope to build a nation worthy of its highest ideals.

We often boast of the need for national unity. Still, unity is a hollow shell without the virtues that make it possible: empathy, respect and a commitment to the inherent worth and dignity of every human being. We must strive not merely to be a unified nation but to be a better people committed to the ideals of liberty and justice. And when we say "all," we mean all — without qualification, without exception.

The road ahead will be challenging, but it also holds the promise of transformation. It will demand courage, humility and a willingness to confront our failings. It will require us to listen when we would rather shout and to seek understanding when we would rather condemn. But it is the only path forward, the only way to break the cycle of hatred and build a society worthy of our highest ideals. The potential for positive change is within our grasp, and we must realize it.

We all share the collective responsibility of healing, bridge-building and forging a democracy. Honoring such a commitment is not just political necessity, but a moral and spiritual imperative. So start with the person in front of us, the colleague beside us, the stranger on the street. Engage with those who see the world differently, not with suspicion and hostility, but with curiosity and respect. In the future, we may listen as much as we speak and seek to understand more than persuade. Remember that every face we meet mirrors our humanity and deserves dignity and respect. Only by such small but steady acts can we hope to build a nation worthy of our highest ideals. The choice is ours. America chooses wisely.

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