Skip to content
Project 2025
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories
People walking down the steps of the U.S. capitol.

DNC's Proposed RCV Ban Sparks Debate Over 2028 Presidential Primaries

Protecting the Right to Play in an Age of GenAI

Protecting the Right to Play in an Age of GenAI

A Senior Man Using A Laptop Computer And Paying Bills With Nurse

Not All Change Is Good: Medicaid, Medicare Shifts Are Everyone’s Problem

Close-up hands of unrecognizable man holding and using smartphone standing on city street, browsing internet, checking social media, using mobile application.

ALS Doesn't Wait. Our Health Care System Still Does.

Defense Secretary Hegseth Testifies Before Senate Appropriations Committee

Can We Fire Hegseth Yet?

'Pro' and 'anti' positions are simple – and unproductive

Opinion

thumbs up and thumbs down
PM Images/Getty Images
David L. Nevins
By David L. NevinsFeb 21, 2024
David L. Nevins
David L. Nevins serves as publisher of The Fulcrum. Additionally, Nevins serves as co-founder and Board Chairman of the Bridge Alliance. Nevins brings business acumen, vision and a tireless this-must-and-can-be-done zeal to the burgeoning movement to bridge divides to transform the political process. As a business leader, Nevins excels at building bridges between people and organizations from the right, left and center for civilized conversation and then action. He co-founded the Bridge Alliance because, as he says, “No matter how well managed and how well funded anyone organization is, significant political reform will not happen without an alliance to further collaborative interactions. Together we can and will raise the collective impact of all.” He is a member of the Aspen Institute Society of Fellows, with a focus on the Aspen Rodel Fellowship in Public Leadership, he established and continues to work with The Nevins Democracy Leaders program at Penn State University. Nevins graduated with honors in economics from Penn State in 1969 and received an M.B.A. in finance from the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania in 1971.
See More Writings by author

Nevins is co-publisher of The Fulcrum and co-founder and board chairman of the Bridge Alliance Education Fund.

It’s much easier for politicians to simplify complex issues with words like “pro this” or “anti that” rather than deal with the complexities and nuances that are required to address the serious problems our nation and the world are facing.

Politicians get elected over and over again using sound bites to win over voters, so why change? Speaking in absolutes also engenders a sense of certainty and leadership when in fact there is typically uncertainty at the center of hard issues and great leaders accept and harness uncertainty rather than deny it.

So many voters, without even thinking, fall for this trap and are comfortable with being anti-mask or pro-mask, or pro-life or pro-choice, or pro-guns or anti-guns, or pro-immigration or anti-immigration.

How has the level of polarization in our country evolved to the point where we accept “pro” and “anti” without realizing that these terms push us further and further apart, preventing us from solving our problems?

Dave Anderson addressed this problem with respect to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. He argued that it was time to drop the terms “pro-Palestinian” and “pro-Israel” in The Fulcrum in December. Acknowledging there are short- and long-term issues in the overall conflict, Anderson addressed the problem when he wrote, “What would truly eliminate confusion is if people would first identify their overall position on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.”

He went on to say:

The key is to know if someone thinks there is a way to create a map of Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza that enables Jews and Palestinians to live in peace. This can be called the "Peaceful Coexistence Model." Thus someone can either stand for peaceful coexistence or not. Hamas, for one, is against the idea of peaceful coexistence. Iran is also opposed to the idea. The Palestinian Liberation Organization and the Palestinian Authority, on the other hand, have appeared for years to be for peaceful coexistence.

Anderson explained that sometimes the use of the terms “pro-Palestinian” and “pro-Israeli” does reflect an absolute conflict where someone is totally against the other side. Yet he pointed out that this language may conceal the fact that someone might agree with someone on the other side on the long-term solution even though they disagree about the short-term solution. Thus a pro-Palestinian person and pro-Israeli person may both support a two-state solution, but in the short-term they could take opposite sides over how Israel is prosecuting the war against Hamas.

The truth is that most of our domestic public policy problems are very complicated and could be resolved if the politicians, who are very polarized, were not so narrow-minded and unwilling to compromise. Public policy problems – ranging from immigration to climate control, child care to paid parental leave to entitlement reform – should not be "pro vs. anti" issues. There is a middle position on these issues, but the politicians refuse to find it.

The public, which is not as polarized as politicians in Washington, can take a step forward and stop using pro and anti language. It is our responsibility as citizens to rise above infighting and demagoguery, above the simplicity of the pro and anti rhetoric.

Our national challenges and problems are earnest, urgent and serious. Thomas Jefferson recognized that democracy was born from discourse and discussion, and that such resulting discussion would be replete with differing perspectives and opinions. For our Republic to survive ideological differences, we must lead with inquiry, and move from inquiry to resolving our challenges through compromise.

Each one of us must take it upon ourselves to foster the habits of open-mindedness and critical inquiry within ourselves. If we as individuals make changes in how we communicate with each other, then we can call on politicians to do the same. And if we are not satisfied with how politicians respond to changes we make or our calls to them to resolve our pressing problems, then we should vote them out of office. For they only have power so long as we give it to them.


Latest news

Gynecologist doing ultrasound of pregnant woman in hospital.
Health

No Doctor, No Delivery, No Future

A New Standard for Ethical Immigration Reporting
Media & Technology

A New Standard for Ethical Immigration Reporting

How Utah’s H.B. 222 Set the Stage for State-level Climate Liability Shields
Environment

How Utah’s H.B. 222 Set the Stage for State-level Climate Liability Shields

Read More

Our Conservative and Liberal Union
An american flag flying high in the sky
Photo by chris robert on Unsplash

Our Conservative and Liberal Union

How are Americans supposed to make a more perfect union when we can’t agree on whether we need to turn our cultural clocks forward or backward?

This question is among the more difficult that people can pose to their fellow countrymen. Not just because it has no obvious or easily agreed upon answer, but because it’s more likely to be asked during contentious times, like the one we are in today.

Keep ReadingShow less
The Anthem and the Civic Thread That Still Holds America Together

Baseball players place their caps over their hearts during the playing of the national anthem. Tacoma, Washington, USA.

Getty Images

The Anthem and the Civic Thread That Still Holds America Together

Each year, from the first buds of spring to the turning of autumn leaves, America is captivated by baseball. From Major League parks to Little League fields, from minor league stadiums to collegiate summer diamonds, the game transcends geography, generation, and ideology. Fans gather to watch today's stars and tomorrow's prospects, united by America's pastime.

Change has been abundant in the century since America celebrated its 150th birthday. Yet, as Field of Dreams reminds us, "There has been one constant throughout the years… baseball." Accompanying that constant is a nearly century-old civic ritual, forged in moments of national challenge and renewed before nearly every first pitch: the singing of the National Anthem.

Keep ReadingShow less
Two unrecognizable persons holding each other's hands

Political polarization changes relationships in profound ways. Explore the psychology of contempt, fear, extremism, and how to reconnect with loved ones.

Yana Iskayeva/Getty Images

The Permission Slip

There is a particular grief in hearing someone you love speak with contempt, different from anger or disagreement because it turns people into categories and places them beneath regard.

I felt it recently when a friend blamed immigrants for the country’s supposed decline. The bluntness shocked me, but the familiarity disturbed me more.

Keep ReadingShow less
Two people sitting next to each other as one person works with clay.

Global civic education helps students build trust, navigate ambiguity, and work across differences. Research shows it can strengthen civic leadership and reduce polarization.

Photo Courtesy of Tilting Futures

Why Fixing Polarization Requires Students to Cross Borders

I've been running global civic education programs for twelve years, and I keep seeing the same pattern: college-age students arrive believing they know how the world works and that their perspective is fact. Months later, after sustained global engagement, they return home fundamentally different, with their walls down and having gained a visceral understanding that their perspective is just that: a perspective, not the truth.

There's a reason this transformation matters so much at this age. This is the moment when mental models solidify into frameworks about how the world works, about who deserves trust, and about what's possible across difference. But without exposure to people and cultures that have alternative perspectives, those frameworks harden into us-versus-them certainties rather than nurture curiosity, further entrenching the polarization that is fracturing our country. Too often this polarization is framed as a knowledge problem rather than a moral perception problem.

Keep ReadingShow less
© Copyright 2026