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

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.

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.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

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

President Donald Trump speaks during a rally at Macomb Community College on April 29, 2025 at Warren, Michigan.

President Donald Trump speaks during a rally at Macomb Community College on April 29, 2025 at Warren, Michigan.

Getty Images, Scott Olson

​​The American Schism in 2025: Understanding the Other Side

In distilling lessons from my research onAmerican Schism, I often refer to a secret sauce or magic formula that U.S. citizens deployed at times during our history to productively bridge major societal divisions. To be clear, in these periods, the rifts endured but relying on the formula’s specific ingredients led us to better outcomes as compared to other eras when this formula was abandoned. In the former moments, we often forged new policy solutions — in the latter, we often experienced violent episodes.

One of the three key elements of this magic formula is what I label deep empathetic listening (stay tuned to this series for future discussion of the other two elements). Sounding simple but too often forsaken today, this form of listening is not easy work. It is analogous to a routine practice from high school debate club: first, through research and critical thinking, one constructs a rational argument for a particular point of view supported by data and carefully vetted sources. Then, perhaps a week later, one is assigned the same but from the opposing point of view. It is perhaps not surprising that our civic discourse has collapsed today — with current communication methods and platforms such as social media, critically researched data is sparse while sanctimonious outrage is omnipresent.

Keep ReadingShow less
Crowd Surfing Through Revolution
silhouette photo of man jumped off on top of people inside party hall
Photo by Zach Lucero on Unsplash

Crowd Surfing Through Revolution

Picture this: A person launches themselves into a crowd at a concert, and for a moment, everything hangs in the balance. Will they fall? Will they float? It all depends on countless hands moving in coordination, strangers united in a common purpose. Some push up while others stabilize, creating a dynamic, living system that defies gravity.

At this moment, we are all suspended between falling and flying, carried by a wave of global resistance that nobody controls but all can help shape. Think about what makes crowd surfing work. It's not just about the individual being carried – it's about the collective choreography happening beneath. With too much force in one direction, you fall. Not enough support in another, you crash. The magic happens in the balance.

Keep ReadingShow less
Threat Minimizes Compassion
Polarization and the politics of love
Polarization and the politics of love

Threat Minimizes Compassion

Threat minimizes compassion. This connection helps to explain two seemingly unrelated questions: Why do those who voted for President Trump seem not to publicly express much concern for the thousands of government workers fired since Inauguration Day? And why do liberals often seem not to talk as much about drug deaths as other issues like gun deaths?

The answers are multi-faceted, of course. This article will focus on one of many reasons: the potential victims of these actions and situations (government workers and drug users) are often directly or indirectly seen as threats by the other side, and it is hard to feel the pain of those who seem to threaten us. Institutions can also be threatening, based on the actions taken by people within those institutions.

Keep ReadingShow less