Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Why are we afraid of conversation?

Why are we afraid of conversation?
Getty Images

Chang serves as Co-founder and CEO of GenUnity.

90% of people feel “emotionally or physically unsafe” to share their thoughts. This shocking statistic underscores an increasingly hostile culture characterized by polarization, judgment, and close-mindedness.


This pervasive fear of conversation is undermining every institution - from our democratic governments to our businesses. Conversation is the foundation of how we understand problems, exchange information, and build the trust required for collaboration. In fact, the etymology of “conversation” is the “manner of conducting oneself in the world.” Instead, fear substitutes integrity with obscurity, humility with insecurity, and curiosity with arrogance. And while fear in today’s environment may be well-founded, it is not a feeling we have to resign ourselves to. Conversation is a muscle and, with the right exercises, we can foster productive dialogue where we are honest about our own thinking, learn from others, and spark new ideas that strengthen our workplaces and communities.

I know this is possible because I see it everyday. Just this month, my organization, GenUnity, launched our second Health Equity program in Boston which brought 44 residents together across differences - from those experiencing health issues to employees working in cross-sector institutions like Alnylam, Blue Cross, Boston Medical Center, or Boston Healthcare for the Homeless Program. In less than an hour, with thoughtful norm setting and facilitated conversation, the energy in the room was palpable. Members described it as “relaxed”, “open”, “educational”, “moving”, “inclusive”, “vulnerable” and “intimate”. These individuals (and the organizations who invested in them to be there) recognize that opportunities to be in conversation with those closest to the problems is an invaluable source of personal and professional growth that inevitably leads to innovation. In fact, one of our members from Blue Cross is already translating their learnings into workplace impact - introducing changes to reimbursement structures to expand access to culturally competent behavioral healthcare.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

Admittedly, creating these types of brave, safe spaces is hard work, and in today’s environment, the cost of failure can feel overwhelming. But, this example should also spark curiosity and courage.

At this moment, we have a choice: between inaction that will only deepen our fears and erode our future, or courage to have authentic, challenging, joyful conversations that strengthen our civic culture, businesses, and communities.

If you’re feeling called to turn conversation from a source of fear into a source of inspiration today, start by asking yourself 3 questions:

  1. Do I believe I have something to learn from someone who has a different perspective from me, especially someone who is often unheard?
  2. Am I open to engaging honestly with them in search of deeper mutual understanding?
  3. Do I want to learn how to build the skills and create the conditions to have an honest, human-to-human conversation with this person(s)?
If your answers are yes, go to GenUnity.org or join the National Week of Conversation and start learning how to realize the vision you have for yourself, workplace, or community!

Read More

Large Bipartisan Majorities Oppose Deep Cuts to Foreign Aid

The Program for Public Consultation at the University of Maryland releases a new survey, fielded February 6-7, 2025, with a representative sample of 1,160 adults nationwide.

Pexels, Tima Miroshnichenko

Large Bipartisan Majorities Oppose Deep Cuts to Foreign Aid

An overwhelming majority of 89% of Americans say the U.S. should spend at least one percent of the federal budget on foreign aid—the current amount the U.S. spends on aid. This includes 84% of Republicans and 94% of Democrats.

Fifty-eight percent oppose abolishing the U.S. Agency for International Development and folding its functions into the State Department, including 77% of Democrats and 62% of independents. But 60% of Republicans favor the move.

Keep ReadingShow less
A Super Bowl of Unity

A crowd in a football stadium.

Getty Images, Adamkaz

A Super Bowl of Unity

Philadelphia is known as the City of Brotherly Love, and perhaps it is fitting that the Philadelphia Eagles won Sunday night's Super Bowl 59, given the number of messages of unity, resilience, and coming together that aired throughout the evening.

The unity messaging started early as the pre-game kicked off with movie star Brad Pitt narrating a moving ad that champions residence and togetherness in honor of those who suffered from the Los Angeles fires and Hurricane Helen:

Keep ReadingShow less
The Paradox for Independents

A handheld American Flag.

Canva Images

The Paradox for Independents

Political independents in the United States are not chiefly moderates. In The Independent Voter, Thomas Reilly, Jacqueline Salit, and Omar Ali make it clear that independents are basically anti-establishment. They have a "mindset" that aims to dismantle the duopoly in our national politics.

I have previously written about different ways that independents can obtain power in Washington. First, they can get elected or converted in Washington and advocate with their own independent voices. Second, they can seek a revolution in which they would be the most dominant voice in Washington. And third, a middle position, they can seek a critical mass in the Senate especially, namely five to six seats, which would give them leverage to help the majority party get to 60 votes on policy bills.

Keep ReadingShow less
The Bureaucrat’s Dilemma When Dealing with a Charismatic Autocrat

A single pawn separated from a group of pawns.

Canva Images

The Bureaucrat’s Dilemma When Dealing with a Charismatic Autocrat

Excerpt from To Stop a Tyrant by Ira Chaleff

In my book To Stop a Tyrant, I identify five types of a political leader’s followers. Given the importance of access in politics, I range these from the more distant to the closest. In the middle are bureaucrats. No political leader can accomplish anything without a cadre of bureaucrats to implement their vision and policies. Custom, culture and law establish boundaries for a bureaucrat’s freedom of action. At times, these constraints must be balanced with moral considerations. The following excerpt discusses ways in which bureaucrats need to thread this needle.

Keep ReadingShow less