Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

How business can help address the American schism without touching political “third rails”

A conversation with author Seth Radwell

How business can help address the American schism without touching political “third rails”
Getty Images

Elizabeth Doty has served as the Director of the Erb Institute’s Corporate Political Responsibility Task Force since its launch in 2021. For 30 years, she has helped leading companies implement their business strategies, improve employee engagement and retain customers by aligning across functions and delivering on their commitments. Her book, “The Compromise Trap,” was published in the aftermath of the 2008 Financial Crisis. Based on that work, she was recognized as a Top Thought Leader in Trust, and has designed and led executive-level programs for Fortune 500 companies, Stanford Graduate School of Business, Presidio Graduate School and the U.S. Department of Defense.

In a recent Expert Dialogue presented by the Corporate Political Responsibility Taskforce at the Erb Institute, award-winning author and former CEO Seth Radwell explored the dilemmas and opportunities that business leaders face amid increasing political polarization and incivility in public discourse. Radwell is author of “American Schism: How the Two Enlightenments Hold the Secret to Healing Our Nation,” winner of the 2022 International Book Award.


Building on his experience as a business executive — as CEO of The Proactiv Company and president of e-Scholastic — Radwell now devotes his time to exploring business’ role in democracy reform and depolarization.

During the dialogue, I asked Seth why he left business to research the causes of American polarization. He said the need for business leaders to step up came into sharp focus over the last decade as he watched the country’s democratic infrastructure weaken and civic debate collapse. “We’re actually moving more and more into an amygdala-driven dialogue about fear and emotions as opposed to facts and problem-solving,” Radwell said.

Yet in the face of this crisis, he watched as most of his peers opted to keep their heads down and avoid getting involved. “They’re afraid of backlash, and concerned that they cannot make a difference,” he said. “I understand this, but I believe business leaders have a unique opportunity to help heal the schism dividing our nation by working to support strong democratic institutions and civic discourse — all in ways that go beyond the polemical issues fueling the current rancor.”

Through the rest of the dialogue, Radwell expounded on why business leaders should be concerned about the health of U.S. democracy and how they can play a pragmatic, constructive role in promoting democratic principles and civic discourse. He gave examples of pro-democratic, nonpartisan issues business leaders can engage with and shared advice for those looking for other ways to take action on issues.

Why should business leaders be concerned about the health of the U.S. democracy?

Radwell said he’s seen civic debate collapsing over the last decade as rational problem-solving, data, and reason have been crowded out by emotionally driven content. The issue will not fix itself due to what he calls the double-incentive problem: both the political system and most media encourage emotionally driven content. Specifically, he argued that politicians know that provoking fear and anger motivates voters to turn out, while the media is also incentivized to stir emotion to promote viewership and engagement.

The result is that though the extreme voices are in the minority, they continue to get more play. He said to fix the problem, the “exhausted, frustrated” majority — or the 70% of people who dislike the country’s political polarization and the state of public discourse — must step up.

Could history provide a model for solutions to today’s polarized environment?

In his book, Radwell looked to five historical periods marked by great division, going back to the Enlightenment and the founding of constitutional democracy in the U.S. He was excited to discover that the U.S. has a successful formula.

Historically, the U.S. has navigated these divisions by letting facts and data lead the conversation and working together constructively to engage multiple perspectives and work toward consensus and compromise.

“History can act as a salve for our wounds if only we’d apply it,” he said. “Over the course of our history, we found what I call a secret sauce, a formula that we’ve used to forge solutions despite being in the face of great division. That’s the reason why I said before the stakes are so high, because where we are today, the trajectory we’re on is moving not with that solution space, that secret sauce, we’re moving away from it.”

He went on to explain that though long-debated questions such as political representation and influence continue to manifest in new forms today, the country increasingly has leaned toward rancor and acrimony while crowding out objective truth and reason.

“It’s about changing a lot of how we talk to each other, how we relate as Americans. And here’s where I think the digital environment has been somewhat destructive in allowing a level of anonymity to fester in the public discourse. We are moving away and not towards the solution, and that’s why it’s so serious.”

To restore the health of U.S. democracy, Radwell calls on the “exhausted majority” to re-engage using that formula.

“The first step,” Radwell explains, “is for the exhausted majority to realize that they are, in fact, the majority.” This realization can help them get over the fear that may hold them back from engaging in today’s bitter debates. “This is about fundamentally rejecting the paradigm of debate today — the demonization, the ad hominem attacks,” he said. “It’s about forcing the debate to consider data and facts and reason. And I think we, as business people, have a huge role to play here.”

How can companies play a pragmatic, constructive role?

Radwell suggests that private sector business leaders are uniquely positioned to help, because so many of them use the U.S. “success formula” — relying on data and debate, and bringing in many perspectives — as a matter of course.

Though some business leaders fear that in today’s environment, speaking out about issues will bring on the wrath of certain groups or get them “canceled.” Still, Radwell said there are productive, nonpartisan avenues to engage on key issues that don’t throw businesses into the middle of controversial debates. “What I try to show business people is, in fact, they can get involved in a completely nonpartisan way that has nothing to do with the hot-button issues of today. By engaging in the process of democracy systems, business leaders can make a huge contribution without touching radioactive issues.”

It starts with business leaders getting engaged locally, seeing what issues people in their communities care about, and plugging into existing efforts that make the democratic system more trustworthy and fair — led by citizens. Radwell gave four examples of such pro-democratic reforms: redistricting, open primaries, ranked-choice voting, and money in politics.

Speaking to the issue of open primaries as an example, Radwell said because of safe red or blue districts and closed primaries, 8% of the electorate is responsible for electing 84% of the U.S. Congress. He said there are already groups working on these and other structural reforms so businesses have no need to reinvent the wheel. “And that’s what I encourage business to do: to plug into this structure that’s out there,” he said.

Specific pro-democratic groups noted by Radwell included Business for America, Unite America, American Promise, and RepresentUs. He said the political depolarization group Braver Angels deals directly with mindset rather than structural changes. Business leaders can also help support economic fairness by providing job training or educational programs.

“You don’t have to give up your career to do this,” Radwell said. “You can focus on continuing to run your business, but doing these one or two or three additional things to support what I call the pro-democracy movement.”

The view, thoughts, and opinions expressed in this writing do not represent an endorsement or advocating by the ERB Institute of the work or organizations cited in this writing.


Read More

Nicolas Maduro’s Capture: Sovereignty Only Matters When It’s Convenient

US Capitol and South America. Nicolas Maduro’s capture is not the end of an era. It marks the opening act of a turbulent transition

AI generated

Nicolas Maduro’s Capture: Sovereignty Only Matters When It’s Convenient

The U.S. capture of Nicolás Maduro will be remembered as one of the most dramatic American interventions in Latin America in a generation. But the real story isn’t the raid itself. It’s what the raid reveals about the political imagination of the hemisphere—how quickly governments abandon the language of sovereignty when it becomes inconvenient, and how easily Washington slips back into the posture of regional enforcer.

The operation was months in the making, driven by a mix of narcotrafficking allegations, geopolitical anxiety, and the belief that Maduro’s security perimeter had finally cracked. The Justice Department’s $50 million bounty—an extraordinary price tag for a sitting head of state—signaled that the U.S. no longer viewed Maduro as a political problem to be negotiated with, but as a criminal target to be hunted.

Keep ReadingShow less
Red elephants and blue donkeys

The ACA subsidy deadline reveals how Republican paralysis and loyalty-driven leadership are hollowing out Congress’s ability to govern.

Carol Yepes

Governing by Breakdown: The Cost of Congressional Paralysis

Picture a bridge with a clearly posted warning: without a routine maintenance fix, it will close. Engineers agree on the repair, but the construction crew in charge refuses to act. The problem is not that the fix is controversial or complex, but that making the repair might be seen as endorsing the bridge itself.

So, traffic keeps moving, the deadline approaches, and those responsible promise to revisit the issue “next year,” even as the risk of failure grows. The danger is that the bridge fails anyway, leaving everyone who depends on it to bear the cost of inaction.

Keep ReadingShow less
White House
A third party candidate has never won the White House, but there are two ways to examine the current political situation, writes Anderson.
DEA/M. BORCHI/Getty Images

250 Years of Presidential Scandals: From Harding’s Oil Bribes to Trump’s Criminal Conviction

During the 250 years of America’s existence, whenever a scandal involving the U.S. President occurred, the public was shocked and dismayed. When presidential scandals erupt, faith and trust in America – by its citizens as well as allies throughout the world – is lost and takes decades to redeem.

Below are several of the more prominent presidential scandals, followed by a suggestion as to how "We the People" can make America truly America again like our founding fathers so eloquently established in the constitution.

Keep ReadingShow less
Money and the American flag
Half of Americans want participatory budgeting at the local level. What's standing in the way?
SimpleImages/Getty Images

For the People, By the People — Or By the Wealthy?

When did America replace “for the people, by the people” with “for the wealthy, by the wealthy”? Wealthy donors are increasingly shaping our policies, institutions, and even the balance of power, while the American people are left as spectators, watching democracy erode before their eyes. The question is not why billionaires need wealth — they already have it. The question is why they insist on owning and controlling government — and the people.

Back in 1968, my Government teacher never spoke of powerful think tanks like the Heritage Foundation, now funded by billionaires determined to avoid paying their fair share of taxes. Yet here in 2025, these forces openly work to control the Presidency, Congress, and the Supreme Court through Project 2025. The corruption is visible everywhere. Quid pro quo and pay for play are not abstractions — they are evident in the gifts showered on Supreme Court justices.

Keep ReadingShow less