Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Here are the political terms Americans like

McIsaac is managing director of learning and experimentation at Philanthropy for Active Civic Engagement.

Maybe you’re like me. When you hear a person or organization say they’re trying to “save democracy,” you can’t help but wonder, “What does that mean to you?” Or, when you hear someone’s intention to promote “unity” or “civility,” those words pull at your heartstrings but then you wonder, “Wait, are we saying the same thing?”

At PACE (Philanthropy for Active Civic Engagement), we have spent years investigating how Americans perceive common civic terms like these, with the goal of uncovering which terms resonate most and least, and how these perceptions differ based on one’s identity and experiences. Another major purpose of the Civic Language Perception Project is to understand the degree to which civic terms are coded or loaded in ways that make them politicized – or, in other words, perceived as being favored or “owned” by political actors.


In partnership with Citizen Data, we are now releasing a new wave of data from 5,000 surveys, collected in November 2023. Our terms of interest included: democracy, freedom, patriotism, bipartisan, racial equity and diversity.

For the most part, Americans’ perceptions got more positive in two years.

Could Americans be growing tired of the language of polarizing politics, and in turn, more appreciative of civic terms? That’s one possibility behind a stunning increase in appreciation for nearly all of the terms of interest in our study – in just two years.

All terms tested in the 2023 Civic Language Perceptions Survey went up in positivity except "unity" and "diversity," though they are within or near the margin of error for the survey.

Another possibility might be a reconsideration of the 2021 levels. Our 2021 research surveyed people in November 2021 – not even a year after Jan. 6 and the Covid vaccine roll-out. Could Americans have been especially critical of anything having to do with democracy and civic life in 2021, therefore positioning the 2023 positivity levels as a return to normalcy? These are hypotheses at this point, and we intend to go further into our data to understand the storylines that might reveal themselves to us.

Words signaling broader values are perceived to bring people together, while jargon is perceived to drive us apart.

Political jargon has been found to be a turn off for everyday Americans, as it can send a signal that they don’t belong. This may be why terms like “bridging,” “republic,” and “civic engagement” were not perceived as bringing people together, according to our survey, earning less than 4 on a 5-point “bringing together” score.

Notably, the term “bipartisan” earned a particularly low score (just above 3 out of 5) from our survey respondents, which may reflect the opinion of some that bipartisanship is too forgiving of intolerable perspectives. Some may also be tired of the term overpromising and underdelivering.


Of course, it is also possible that survey respondents were operating with dissent bias (answering negatively, sometimes due to not understanding the question) because they simply weren’t sure what the more jargony words meant. Nevertheless, communications laypeople and professionals in civic spaces should consider when their vernacular has become “ inside baseball ” to a fault, triggering perceptions of exclusion and elitism.

The terms Americans perceive as bringing people together also motivate them to act.

A 2018 study found that Americans donate their time more than any other nation, with over 60 million Americans – about 23 percent of the nation – volunteering 4.1 billion hours in 2021. PRRI found that about 56 percent of Americans in 2018 were “modestly” or “highly” civically or politically engaged. What motivates people to be civically engaged?

Common wisdom has taught us that people are motivated by negativity and fear. In fact, entire political and marketing strategies are built on this premise. But our data tells a different story.

Could it be that the words Americans perceive to bring people together are also the words that motivate them to action? We ran that analysis, and yes, our data confirms the trend. The more a term was perceived to bring people together, the more it was motivating Americans to action. We can't say it's a cause-and-effect relationship, of course, but we can say that there is a correlation. In fact, the correlation coefficient is 0.62, which is considered strong.

What we’re saying vs. what they’re hearing.

As a philanthropy-serving organization, we maintain a membership of funders who are each invested in strengthening democracy and civic engagement from different vantage points. One of the most common challenges we’re hearing from members (as well as others in the civic engagement space) is where people used to think they were just saying words, they now realize their audiences are hearing signals – about their political ideology, their news sources, their views of the world and more. These signals are sometimes constructive, sometimes destructive, sometimes intentional, sometimes unintentional. We often hear it this way: “The coded and loaded nature of civic terms has become unsustainable. Are there even words I can say anymore?”

On the one hand, it’s fair to say that civic terms have always been loaded, or at least fluid, in their definitions and usages. We can’t be assured that the language that is “working” for us today will have the same effect in a decade or two.

On the other hand, it’s unfair to suggest that we should therefore throw in the towel on our communications efforts and default to using whichever terms we like. As PACE’s study suggests, civic terms don’t just have the power of positive or negative perception, but can inspire positive or negative action. In our efforts to inspire voting, volunteerism, belonging, and other prosocial and procivic activities, words matter – and this includes whether they are familiar, unfamiliar, stigmatize, or embraced.

Read More

Two speech bubbles overlapping each other.

Political outrage is rising—but dismissing the other side’s anger deepens division. Learn why taking outrage seriously can bridge America’s partisan divide.

Getty Images, Richard Drury

Taking Outrage Seriously: Understanding the Moral Signals Behind Political Anger

Over the last several weeks, the Trump administration has deployed the National Guard to the nation’s capital to crack down on crime. While those on the right have long been aghast by rioting and disorder in our cities, pressing for greater military intervention to curtail it, progressive residents of D.C. have tirelessly protested the recent militarization of the city.

This recent flashpoint is a microcosm of the reciprocal outrage at the heart of contemporary American public life. From social media posts to street protests to everyday conversations about "the other side," we're witnessing unprecedented levels of political outrage. And as polarization has increased, we’ve stopped even considering the other political party’s concerns, responding instead with amusement and delight. Schadenfreude, or pleasure at someone else’s pain, is now more common than solidarity or empathy across party lines.

Keep ReadingShow less
Two speech bubbles overlapping.

Recent data shows that Americans view members of the opposing political party overly negatively, leading people to avoid political discourse with those who hold different views.

Getty Images, Richard Drury

How To Motivate Americans’ Conversations Across Politics

Introduction

A large body of research shows that Americans hold overly negative distortions of those across the political spectrum. These misperceptions—often referred to as "Perception Gaps"—make civil discourse harder, since few Americans are eager to engage with people they believe are ideologically extreme, interpersonally hostile, or even threatening or inferior. When potential disagreement feels deeply uncomfortable or dangerous, conversations are unlikely to begin.

Correcting these distortions can help reduce barriers to productive dialogue, making Americans more open to political conversations.

Keep ReadingShow less
Divided American flag

Rev. Dr. F. Willis Johnson writes on the serious impacts of "othering" marginalized populations and how, together, we must push back to create a more inclusive and humane society.

Jorge Villalba/Getty Images

New Rules of the Game: Weaponization of Othering

By now, you have probably seen the viral video. Taylor Townsend—Black, bold, unbothered—walks off the court after a bruising match against her white European opponent, Jelena Ostapenko. The post-match glances were sharper than a backhand slice. Next came the unsportsmanlike commentary—about her body, her "attitude," and a not-so-veiled speculation about whether she belonged at this level. To understand America in the Trump Redux era, one only needs to study this exchange.

Ostapenko vs. Townsend is a microcosm of something much bigger: the way anti-democratic, vengeful politics—modeled from the White House on down—have bled into every corner of public life, including sports. Turning “othering” into the new national pastime. Divisive politics has a profound impact on marginalized groups. Neither Ostapenko nor Donald Trump invented this playbook, yet Trump and his sycophants are working to master it. Fueled by a sense of grievance, revenge, and an insatiable appetite for division, he—like Ostapenko—has normalized once somewhat closeted attitudes.

Keep ReadingShow less
Hand blocking someone speaking

The Third Way has recently released a memo stating that the “stampede away from the Democratic Party” is partly a result of the language and rhetoric it uses.

Westend61/Getty Images

To Protect Democracy, Democrats Should Pay Attention to the Third Way’s List of ‘Offensive’ Words

More than fifty years ago, comedian George Carlin delivered a monologue entitled Seven Words You Can Never Say on Television.” It was a tribute to the legendary Lenny Bruce, whose “nine dirty words” performance led to his arrest and his banning from many places.

His seven words were “p—, f—, c—, c———, m———–, and t—.”

Keep ReadingShow less