Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Democracy 2.0 will focus on compassion, not violence

Flag being held out in front of Trump tower

Donald Trump supporters demonstrate in front of Trump Tower in New York a day after the former president was injured during shooting at campaign rally in Pennsylvania.

Beata Zawrzel/NurPhoto via Getty Images

By Sam Daley Harris

Daley-Harris is the author of “Reclaiming Our Democracy: Every Citizen’s Guide to Transformational Advocacy” and the founder of RESULTS and Civic Courage. This is part of a series focused on better understanding transformational advocacy: citizens awakening to their power.


The day before the attempted assassination of former President Donald Trump, a column in USA Today warned of our nation’s toxic brew of political polarization and gun violence. Titled “Ammo Vending Machines at Grocery Stores: Horrible Idea,” it began:

“News broke this week that American Rounds, which promotes itself with the line ‘Ammo Sales Like You've Never Seen Before,’ is operating vending machines that dispense ammunition at grocery stores in Alabama, Oklahoma and Texas. The company has plans to expand to Colorado, and other states are likely in their sights.
“It's a dangerous, irresponsible business practice in a country struggling to contain an epidemic of gun violence.”

Sadly, the column was a prescient warning to a nation familiar with the curse of political assassination. In 1969 I played drums in a musical revue at the University of Miami written and performed by students and faculty. The assassinations of the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. and Sen. Robert F. Kennedy had just happened the year before. During one scene cast members moved two-foot-high letters around the stage to spell different words. The first phrase was “NATION AT SIN”; the cast did a “ta da” pose and the audience applauded in response. After the cast moved the letters around, added a few others and spelled “ASSASSINATION” and did another “ta da” pose, the audience went awkwardly silent. The song that followed asked, “How can I bring a child into this world, only to live in pain?”

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

Hours before Saturday’s assassination attempt, I joined thousands of others on a call to raise funds for the Democratic parties in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. Organized and led primarily by spiritual and mindfulness teachers, Tara Brach kicked it off by asking this question: “What is love asking of me now?” Jon Kabat-Zinn said we need a Democracy 2.0 and committed himself to “talking to people I don’t usually talk to.” Maurice Mitchell said he saw “government as a tool that can redistribute compassion.”

Whatever a Democracy 2.0 would look like, it probably wouldn’t include ammo vending machines in grocery stores. Clearly we need to be dispensing more love instead, redistributing more compassion, especially when it’s hard.

Jack Kornfield closed the call reading the poem “Everyday Grace" by Stella Nesanovich. I must admit, I cried as he finished it:

It can happen like that:
meeting at the market,
buying tires amid the smell
of rubber, the grating sound
of jack hammers and drills,
anywhere we share stories,
and grace flows between us.
The tire center waiting room
becomes a healing place
as one speaks of her husband's
heart valve replacement, bedsores
from complications. A man
speaks of multiple surgeries,
notes his false appearance
as strong and healthy.
I share my sister's death
from breast cancer, her
youngest only seven.
A woman rises, gives
her name, Mrs. Henry,
then takes my hand.
Suddenly an ordinary day
becomes holy ground.

Clearly, Democracy 2.0 would deliver more holy ground — and dispense more everyday grace.


Read More

Dictionary entry for "democracy"
Paving the path forward to strengthening democracy
Lobro78.Getty Images

A Path Forward for the Pro-Democracy Community

The Fulcrum presents The Path Forward: Defining the Democracy Reform Movement. Scott Warren's weekly interviews engage diverse thought leaders to elevate the conversation about building a thriving and healthy democratic republic that fulfills its potential as a national social and political game-changer. This series is the start of focused collaborations and dialogue led by The Bridge Alliance and The Fulcrum teams to help the movement find a path forward.

In the weeks following President Trump’s inauguration, it is challenging to make sense of the state of our democracy. I am in some conversations where colleagues and friends who assert that Elon Musk is leading a coup. For many, “constitutional crisis” has become the term of the day. I’ve met with conservatives buoyed by a new sense of dynamism and opportunity for re-invention of a stagnant and dysfunctional government and are critical of the left for alarmism. I also know many who have already lost their jobs due to federal cuts, having spent their entire careers fighting for democracy.

Keep ReadingShow less
What Would Patrick Henry Say Today?

An engraving from a painting of Patrick Henry delivering an address before the Virginia Assembly. From the New York Public Library.

Getty Images, Smith Collection/Gado

What Would Patrick Henry Say Today?

In Federalist 10, explaining some of the protections of the new Constitution in 1787, James Madison observed that, “Enlightened statesmen will not always be at the helm….” The Founders defined tyranny as the legislative, executive, and judicial powers all being combined in the hands of a single individual or small group of people. So, they divided these three powers into separate and independent branches of the government that checked and balanced each other, preventing this accumulation of power. If, however, the people elected an authoritarian president and a legislature of toadies, who allowed this president to install a compliant judiciary, this protection could be lost. Hence, when asked shortly after the Constitutional Convention concluded in 1787 what the delegates had created, Benjamin Franklin responded, “A republic, if you can keep it.”

Echoing Madison, the Supreme Court in 1866, in Ex Parte Milligan, 71 U.S. 2 (1866), wrote, “Wicked men, ambitious of power, with hatred of liberty and contempt of law, may fill the place once occupied by Washington and Lincoln” as they overturned Lambden Milligan’s conviction before a military commission under martial law in Indiana during the Civil War. Milligan was charged with aiding a secret society that gave material support to the rebellion, conspiring to free Confederate prisoners, and conspiring to raid northern arsenals to come to the aid of the South. The Court’s five-member majority ruled that martial law could not be imposed in states where the civilian courts were open and functioning. Four members of the Court disagreed because state courts could be open and functioning but be in the hands of rebels. Martial law may again be tested, but more fundamental questions are how to prevent the rise of a tyrant in the first place and what remedies are available should the voters elect one.

Keep ReadingShow less
Meet the Faces of Democracy: Derek Bowens

Derek Bowen.

Issue One

Meet the Faces of Democracy: Derek Bowens

Derek Bowens has been a nonpartisan election administrator in North Carolina for over a decade. Since 2012, he served in various capacities, including as the director of elections in New Hanover County, North Carolina. In 2017, he became the director of elections in Durham County. Durham County is home to Duke University and North Carolina Central University, a jurisdiction of nearly a quarter of a million registered voters, the fifth largest in the state.

Bowens has been nationally recognized for his work by the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC) and the National Association of Counties. In 2020, Durham County won a Clearinghouse Award from the EAC for its innovative app that allowed voters to locate polling places near them, view voting information, and see current polling place wait times.

Keep ReadingShow less
Do Trump’s Goals Justify His Words and Actions?

President Donald Trump.

Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post via Getty Images

Do Trump’s Goals Justify His Words and Actions?

As co-publishers of The Fulcrum, it is time to clarify our mission in the context of what we are witnessing from the current Trump Administration.

The barrage of executive orders in the last few weeks has resulted in outrage by his political opponents. In many cases, the responses are justified. Still, oftentimes, the responses often ignore the fact that there might be some truth in what the Trump administration is saying and legitimate reasons for some actions they are taking.

Keep ReadingShow less