Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

What does a first conversation about race look like between strangers?

What does a first conversation about race look like between strangers?
Getty Images

André Thomas is co-host of Healing Race, and founder of Fortnum Solutions where he has a background in project management and using technology to serve corporate strategy.

Todd Levinson is co-host of Healing Race and co-founder of MATR, a tech start-up looking to bring meaningful conversations to social media. He has a background in peacebuilding, policy and psychology.


If you could ask any question to someone of another race, without fear of blowback or being shamed, what would you ask? What burning questions do you have about the role of race in others’ lives and in America? What questions about race have you held back from asking or do you think we need to discuss as a country?

Talking about race isn’t always easy. It can be fraught with landmines born of deep personal feelings and trigger blowback that can threaten relationships, careers, and reputations. But how can we resolve conflicts surrounding race - given the critical role they play in our larger national conflicts - if we can’t openly and constructively discuss our views about racial issues and the experiences that have shaped them?

That was the challenge faced by four guests on the Healing Race show. Their questions were compelling, sometimes even provocative, and reflected the kinds of questions many Americans likely ponder in the solitary confines of their minds… because too often in our culture we dare not ask the difficult questions or share the difficult views we hold about so contentious an issue as race.

So what did they ask?

Marcus, a Black conservative police officer from Texas, wondered why he was outcast from his Black community for deciding to become a cop. Wouldn’t you want “someone who looks like you wearing the uniform and doing the job?” His questions were all the more courageous with the video of Tyre Nichols’ deadly beating by Black officers having just been released the prior evening. Imagine the conversation that ensued.

Susan, a white libertarian who grew up in a Georgia town where the Klan was active, asked why, with so much talk about the need for conversations about race, someone like her gets shut down when they engage and share their different views, as she recently experienced.

Landon, a white moderate conservative with family roots in rural Utah, asked how we can put the racial past behind us and focus more on our future together and wondered what others saw as both valuable and upsetting about our U.S. history.

Marin, a Black moderate who consults on diversity, equity & inclusion strategy, asked what Landon and Susan had learned about Black people growing up, which moved every guest to think about and share the narratives that shaped their early thinking and how those narratives changed over time.

What unfolded was a “real” conversation, a human conversation, one that allowed us to see the people that exist beyond our preconceptions. We saw fears and resentments, empathy and epiphanies, differing views and common ground. We heard powerful stories, unexpected perspectives, and difficult questions. Most importantly, we saw minds and hearts open and a true desire to know each other better, learn from each other’s experiences, and make a human connection beyond our racial differences.

We saw Marcus understand the pain and anger felt by the Black community, their desire to feel like they “matter,” and their worry that they won’t get as much grace in police interactions; while we also saw Marin appreciate how police officers like Marcus put their lives on the line to serve their community and her hope for the day when Black Americans can look to police officers as role models and supports in the community without caution.

We saw Landon realize, after hearing Andre’s anxieties about not coming off as intelligent, how racial stereotypes can burden Black minds as they work extra hard to defy those stereotypes; while we also saw Andre’s skepticism about white motivations shift as Landon shared the genuine desire for diversity that exists in the workplace.

We saw Susan feel for Marin’s experience growing up having only seen white females as the standard of beauty; while Marin empathized with Susan being called out and dressed down for saying that racial progress has been made, asserting that white voices are very much needed and should be welcomed in conversations about race.

Finally, we saw Landon resonate with Marcus and Marin’s unexpected answer that they felt more like “victors” than victims in response to U.S. racial history; while Landon and Susan shared their desire that a deeper, more well-rounded racial history be taught in our country’s schools, as long as that history was not only seen through the lens of race.

The conversation demonstrated that we are not the simplistic, one-dimensional characters society projects onto us through the media and through the way we talk about one another. Our guests showed the deep emotion, shared humanity, and good will that exists in our country as they grappled with how race affects our lives, how it creates divisions in society, and how we can have better conversations about race and find a way forward together.

There has been an illusion of separation among the races perpetuated since the founding of our country. We have all been exploited by it, using it as a tool to wound each other physically and emotionally. The illusion keeps us in our racial groups, in our castes, in our heads, not supporting each other, telling stories of malice about each other, and preventing us from tackling our national challenges. When Marin, Marcus, Landon, and Susan came together, bearing their souls and minds through interactive questioning, their dialogue coalesced around one theme: to understand and be understood. There is value in discussing our feelings about race and racial issues in a way where no one is diminished and everyone is amplified.

Yes, race isn’t and shouldn’t be everything about how we interact with one another in this country. But race also isn’t just anything when it comes to the American experience and it is long past time to heal this wound.

We hope you’ll join the Healing Race show on that journey as a viewer, a guest, a supporter… and most importantly, a fellow traveler who seeks out and leans into difficult conversations that can be part of the healing race in our country. We also welcome you to our National Week of Conversation events - where we will cover how to have transformative conversations about race and discuss some of the most compelling and provocative clips from our show with you. To learn more about how to get involved, email us at info@healingraceshow.com, and you can enjoy our conversations here.

Read More

news app
New platforms help overcome biased news reporting
Tero Vesalainen/Getty Images

The Selective Sanctity of Death: When Empathy Depends on Skin Color

Rampant calls to avoid sharing the video of Charlie Kirk’s death have been swift and emphatic across social media. “We need to keep our souls clean,” journalists plead. “Where are social media’s content moderators?” “How did we get so desensitized?” The moral outrage is palpable; the demands for human dignity urgent and clear.

But as a Black woman who has been forced to witness the constant virality of Black death, I must ask: where was this widespread anger for George Floyd? For Philando Castile? For Daunte Wright? For Tyre Nichols?

Keep ReadingShow less
Following Jefferson: Promoting Inter-Generational Understanding Through Constitution-Making
Mount Rushmore
Photo by John Bakator on Unsplash

Following Jefferson: Promoting Inter-Generational Understanding Through Constitution-Making

No one can denounce the New York Yankee fan for boasting that her favorite ballclub has won more World Series championships than any other. At 27 titles, the Bronx Bombers claim more than twice their closest competitor.

No one can question admirers of the late, great Chick Corea, or the equally astonishing Alison Krauss, for their virtually unrivaled Grammy victories. At 27 gold statues, only Beyoncé and Quincy Jones have more in the popular categories.

Keep ReadingShow less
A close up of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement badge.

Trump’s mass deportations promise security but deliver economic pain, family separation, and chaos. Here’s why this policy is failing America.

Getty Images, Tennessee Witney

The Cruel Arithmetic of Trump’s Immigration Crackdown

As summer 2025 winds down, the Trump administration’s deportation machine is operating at full throttle—removing over one million people in six months and fulfilling a campaign promise to launch the “largest deportation operation in American history.” For supporters, this is a victory lap for law and order. For the rest of the lot, it’s a costly illusion—one that trades complexity for spectacle and security for chaos.

Let’s dispense with the fantasy first. The administration insists that mass deportations will save billions, reduce crime, and protect American jobs. But like most political magic tricks, the numbers vanish under scrutiny. The Economic Policy Institute warns that this policy could destroy millions of jobs—not just for immigrants but for U.S.-born workers in sectors like construction, elder care, and child care. That’s not just a fiscal cliff—it is fewer teachers, fewer caregivers, and fewer homes built. It is inflation with a human face. In fact, child care alone could shrink by over 15%, leaving working parents stranded and employers scrambling.

Meanwhile, the Peterson Institute projects a drop in GDP and employment, while the Penn Wharton School’s Budget Model estimates that deporting unauthorized workers over a decade would slash Social Security revenue and inflate deficits by nearly $900 billion. That’s not a typo. It’s a fiscal cliff dressed up as border security.

And then there’s food. Deporting farmworkers doesn’t just leave fields fallow—it drives up prices. Analysts predict a 10% spike in food costs, compounding inflation and squeezing families already living paycheck to paycheck. In California, where immigrant renters are disproportionately affected, eviction rates are climbing. The Urban Institute warns that deportations are deepening the housing crisis by gutting the construction workforce. So much for protecting American livelihoods.

But the real cost isn’t measured in dollars. It’s measured in broken families, empty classrooms, and quiet despair. The administration has deployed 10,000 armed service members to the border and ramped up “self-deportation” tactics—policies so harsh they force people to leave voluntarily. The result: Children skipping meals because their parents fear applying for food assistance; Cancer patients deported mid-treatment; and LGBTQ+ youth losing access to mental health care. The Human Rights Watch calls it a “crueler world for immigrants.” That’s putting it mildly.

This isn’t targeted enforcement. It’s a dragnet. Green card holders, long-term residents, and asylum seekers are swept up alongside undocumented workers. Viral videos show ICE raids at schools, hospitals, and churches. Lawsuits are piling up. And the chilling effect is real: immigrant communities are retreating from public life, afraid to report crimes or seek help. That’s not safety. That’s silence. Legal scholars warn that the administration’s tactics—raids at schools, churches, and hospitals—may violate Fourth Amendment protections and due process norms.

Even the administration’s security claims are shaky. Yes, border crossings are down—by about 60%, thanks to policies like “Remain in Mexico.” But deportation numbers haven’t met the promised scale. The Migration Policy Institute notes that monthly averages hover around 14,500, far below the millions touted. And the root causes of undocumented immigration—like visa overstays, which account for 60% of cases—remain untouched.

Crime reduction? Also murky. FBI data shows declines in some areas, but experts attribute this more to economic trends than immigration enforcement. In fact, fear in immigrant communities may be making things worse. When people won’t talk to the police, crimes go unreported. That’s not justice. That’s dysfunction.

Public opinion is catching up. In February, 59% of Americans supported mass deportations. By July, that number had cratered. Gallup reports a 25-point drop in favor of immigration cuts. The Pew Research Center finds that 75% of Democrats—and a growing number of independents—think the policy goes too far. Even Trump-friendly voices like Joe Rogan are balking, calling raids on “construction workers and gardeners” a betrayal of common sense.

On social media, the backlash is swift. Users on X (formerly Twitter) call the policy “ineffective,” “manipulative,” and “theater.” And they’re not wrong. This isn’t about solving immigration. It’s about staging a show—one where fear plays the villain and facts are the understudy.

The White House insists this is what voters wanted. But a narrow electoral win isn’t a blank check for policies that harm the economy and fray the social fabric. Alternatives exist: Targeted enforcement focused on violent offenders; visa reform to address overstays; and legal pathways to fill labor gaps. These aren’t radical ideas—they’re pragmatic ones. And they don’t require tearing families apart to work.

Trump’s deportation blitz is a mirage. It promises safety but delivers instability. It claims to protect jobs but undermines the very sectors that keep the country running. It speaks the language of law and order but acts with the recklessness of a demolition crew. Alternatives exist—and they work. Cities that focus on community policing and legal pathways report higher public safety and stronger economies. Reform doesn’t require cruelty. It requires courage.

Keep ReadingShow less
Multi-colored speech bubbles overlapping.

Stanford’s Strengthening Democracy Challenge shows a key way to reduce political violence: reveal that most Americans reject it.

Getty Images, MirageC

In the Aftermath of Assassinations, Let’s Show That Americans Overwhelmingly Disapprove of Political Violence

In the aftermath of Charlie Kirk’s assassination—and the assassination of Minnesota state legislator Melissa Hortman only three months ago—questions inevitably arise about how to reduce the likelihood of similar heinous actions.

Results from arguably the most important study focused on the U.S. context, the Strengthening Democracy Challenge run by Stanford University, point to one straightforward answer: show people that very few in the other party support political violence. This approach has been shown to reduce support for political violence.

Keep ReadingShow less