Carney is a contributing writer.
Student activism is on the rise, and young voters are both expanding as a bloc and mobilizing to demand action from the politicians of 2020.
But will all voices be heard, including those of marginalized and lower-income students? And will all the buzz translate into any lasting policy or political outcomes?
Such questions preoccupy not just political organizers but civic educators, who are increasingly looking for ways to make civic learning relevant to this diverse and fired-up younger generation. Research shows gaps in both civic knowledge and civic engagement between black and Hispanic students and their white peers, as well as between students from lower- and higher-income families. And as a whole, civic learning is often perceived as dominated by white perspectives and educators.
To many leaders in the field, the antidote is "action civics," which typically invites students to identify a problem in their community, come up with a solution and take direct action to fix it. Leading groups that practice and promote action civics, including Generation Citizen and Mikva Challenge, have been expanding their reach, and grant-makers and other civic educators are taking notice.
The national civic education group iCivics has launched two student-centered initiatives, the Equity in Civics Youth Fellowship and the Youth as Civic Experts network, to give diverse students a platform and a voice in what their civic education looks like. The projects involve a collaboration between iCivics and Generation Citizen, and their work has been underwritten by a six-figure grant from the Hewlett Foundation.
"This is our first foray into this whole sphere of youth activism, elevating youth voice directly," says Amber Coleman-Mortley, director of social engagement at iCivics. "Students have a lot of great ideas. They have a lot of awareness, especially underrepresented youth that are in civic deserts."
Educators at a CivXNow coalition convening last year realized that "we're missing people of color, we're missing rural communities, we're missing student voices," Coleman-Mortley says. Both the in-person youth fellowship and the online youth network set out to remedy that by inviting students to weigh in.
Another Hewlett-funded grant in Oklahoma City will test the action civics model on an entire school district, again with diversity in mind. The $1 million initiative brings together Generation Citizen, the Oklahoma City Public Schools and Tufts University's Center for Information & Research on Civic Learning and Engagement. The idea is to train teachers throughout the district to incorporate action civics into a range of courses, including social studies and history.
"If we can be successful in integrating these practices and these ideas in a school system within a state that is really struggling with public education, then that is something that we can apply in other places," says Rey Junco, director of research at CIRCLE. "And by doing it this way, we learn things about young people who are not typically represented in the civic space that we can then fold back into educational initiatives."
The push toward action civics coincides with an upsurge in youth activism, not just in the United States but also worldwide. Young people have always been on the vanguard of public protests, of course, but climate change, gun violence, and threats to immigrant and LGBTQ rights have all helped drive students to the streets.
The number of people ages 18-24 who had attended a march or demonstration tripled between 2016 and 2018, according to CIRCLE, and that was even before Swedish teenager Greta Thunberg launched a worldwide "Fridays for Future" movement that drew millions of students to school climate strikes last year.
This year, a U.S. Climate Strike Coalition is mobilizing students to turn out voters, target primaries, and press for a Green New Deal — a comprehensive legislative package of public works projects and economic reforms to combat climate change. Young voters may also play an outsized role in the Democratic presidential primaries. A recent analysis by CIRCLE credited voters 29 and younger with propelling Sen. Bernie Sanders to victory in the New Hampshire primary.
Like their adult counterparts, the young people agitating for change are not immune from accusations that voices of color are being left out or silenced. When students at Marjorie Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Fla., sparked a nationwide movement of school walkouts over gun violence, some credited the state's comprehensive civics education mandates. But others bemoaned the news media's failure to report on the black youth resistance movements that had preceded Parkland.
Not everyone agrees that action civics is the best way to help students understand politics and government. Action civics has the potential to stir political controversy, to further entrench students "in their preexisting perspectives," and to leave them "cynical and disillusioned" if their activism fails to incite change, a rgued education writer Natalie Wexler recently in Forbes.
Generation Citizen CEO Scott Warren, who will leave his post in June and recently issued a parting memo that calls on the field to diversify, counters that education should be relevant to students' lives, whatever the topic.
"One thing that we can all agree upon is that our democracy needs to be in a better place," says Warren. "We want to ensure that more people are participating, and we want to ensure that there's more dialogue and discussion and constructive debate going on. Those are things that we really value in action civics."
Disclosure: The Hewlett Foundation is also a funder of The Fulcrum.




















A golden tray sits on the Resolute Desk as President Donald Trump speaks during an announcement on American nuclear innovation in the Oval Office at the White House on July 24, 2026, in Washington, D.C. Trump is signing multiple executive orders targeting the nuclear energy sector and easing rules for new reactors and nuclear fuel supply chains.
Trump’s hubris rivals the fallen heroes of ancient Greek mythology
In January, the New York Times asked President Donald Trump if there were any limits on his global powers.
“Yeah,” the president responded, “there is one thing. My own morality. My own mind. It’s the only thing that can stop me.”
That was eight months ago, but fortunately Christopher Nolan’s blockbuster adaptation of “The Odyssey” has made ancient Greek literature newly relevant. Before that window closes, I’d like to talk about hubris.
Today, the term mostly means excessive pride or arrogance. That’s part of what the Greeks meant by it too, but the meaning was a bit richer and more specific. Hubris was an insolent or outrageous act that offended the gods, often because the transgressor was claiming abilities or authorities that solely belonged to supreme beings.
Nolan renamed and slightly modified the concept of xenia for the film, calling it “Zeus’ law.” In the director’s telling, mortals should follow the rules laid out by the gods, specifically the requirement to treat strangers with respect lest they be gods in disguise.
In a sense, hubris is the opposite, or at least the rejection, of xenia. The hubris of the suitors, and at times Odysseus himself, invites punishment by the gods and their mortal instruments.
Which brings me back to Donald Trump. His claim that there are no constraints on his personal power to dictate events on the global stage was one of the greatest expressions of hubris ever uttered by a political leader.
Trump’s claim was obviously false when he made it.
He vowed that he could end the Russia-Ukraine war in 24 hours. He’s proved powerless to make that happen. If he had divine powers to work his will, why would he have balked at implementing his tariffs so often that Wall Street adopted the “TACO trade” term for his deals? “TACO” stands for “Trump always chickens out.”
And why would Trump have made so many embarrassing concessions to China — from rescinding tariffs on Chinese goods to allowing them to buy crucial and incredibly valuable computer chips?
But Trump saw his success at capturing Venezuelan strongman Nicolas Maduro as proof of his ability to launch missiles to the same effect as Zeus’ lightning bolts. Trump believed he was the most powerful man who ever lived.
This is no exaggeration. In March, when the Iran invasion seemed successful, Trump gave a document penned by“Presidential Historian David King” to New York Times reporters Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan purporting to prove that Trump was “the most powerful person to have EVER walked this planet.” King was, in fact, a businessman and occasional caddy for legendary golfer Gary Player.
King compared Trump favorably to many of history’s most powerful, and often heinous, figures: Alexander the Great, Attila the Hun, William the Conqueror, Napoleon Bonaparte, Joseph Stalin, Genghis Khan, Mao Tse Tung, Adolf Hitler and Vladimir Lenin. Many of these men thought they were the most powerful person in the world, too. And many were defeated precisely because they believed it.
At least Napoleon and Hitler had a string of truly impressive victories before they learned the folly of hubris. The limits on Trump’s power have been exposed by far less august forces than the combined might of the allies in World War II or the fearsome Russian winter.
Iran is a comparatively middling power. But the regime’s ability to absorb punishment while imposing its will on the Strait of Hormuz has proved to be a greater constraint on Trump’s power than his morality or mind. We should note that, at least rhetorically, his morality has not proved much of a constraint. He has repeatedly promised to destroy Iranian “civilization” if the regime refuses to capitulate.
But they haven’t — and won’t anytime soon — because the regime’s tolerance for pain far outstrips Trump’s. The combined fear of skyrocketing oil prices, outrage of Gulf state potentates, diminishing weapon supplies and domestic unpopularity is doing the work that international law, congressional oversight and the collective opinion of foreign policy experts can’t or won’t do.
If I considered Trump more heroic than reason and facts could allow, I would say his Sisyphean predicament has the whiff of Greek tragedy to it. Trump is vexed by the fact that the Iranians won’t honor deals or ratify his countless premature claims of victory — giving new meaning to his vow that his presidency would make people tired of winning. It’s almost like they’re out-Trumping Trump.
Things might have gone better if he’d heeded that great Greek tragedian Sophocles: “For Zeus utterly abhors the boasts of a proud tongue.”
____
Jonah Goldberg is editor-in-chief of The Dispatch and the host of The Remnant podcast. His Twitter handle is @JonahDispatch.