How Do We Fix It?

“I don’t do this work in optimism. I do it in hope”, Braver Angels President David Blankenhorn tells us. “If we’re going to have any chance to fix this and save our country, this is what needs to be done.”Soon after the tumultuous 2016 election Braver Angels sprung to life— co-founded by David, Bill Doherty and David Lapp. Two years after its founding this nationwide volunteer-led citizen movement had its first convention attended by 72 conservative and 72 liberal delegates. This year, more than 750 reds and blues were at the Braver Angels national convention in Kenosha, Wisconsin. In the past few years Braver Angels workshops, debates, and other events have been held in all 50 states. In this episode, we hear from David about the Braver Angels origin story and much more. We also feature a brief update from Jessie Mannisto, Braver Angels Director of Debates, about her experience as a Braver Angels volunteer outside the DNC Convention in Chicago.Before co-founding Braver Angels, David Blankenhorn led the Institute for American Values, a think tank on civil society. He founded the Mississippi Community Service Corps, the Virginia Community Service Corps, and the Committee for Economic Change at Harvard University. David co-founded the National Fatherhood Initiative, and is the author of five books including “In Search of Braver Angels: Getting Along Together in Troubled Times.”In our thoughtful and provocative interview we learn more about the urgent need to push against rigid partisan divides. “We do not any longer effectively communicate with one another as citizens. That’s a big statement," says David. “But the more we think about it and the more you look at how we’re working today, I really think it’s true.”This episode is the fourth in a series of podcasts about work, ideas and people of Braver Angels. We’re grateful to them for their inspiration and support. All our podcasts are available for free here.Note: Please Subscribe to “How Do We Fix It?" Rate us and review us wherever you get podcasts. This helps spread the word about these shows and the work of Braver Angels. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

When renowned physician-scientist Francis Collins was about to have his first conversation with Christian conservative Wilk Wilkinson in early 2022, he admits that he had concerns. "I thought oh boy, this is going to be a tough one". Dr. Collins had recently stepped down as Director of NIH— The National Institutes of Health. He served under Presidents Obama, Trump, and Biden, and played a leading role in the federal response to the COVID pandemic. Podcaster Wilk Wilkinson, who lives in rural Minnesota, was intensely critical of how the government handled COVID.Today both Francis and Wilk are friends. They lead the Braver Angels' Truth and Trust Project. The goal is to build trust between ordinary Americans and the public health community in the wake of the pandemic. In each Truth and Trust gathering equal numbers of people from each side of the debate about what happened with public health listen carefully and express their views. In this episode of "How Do We Fix It?", Wilk and Francis discuss their unlikely partnership, what they've learned from those they disagree with, and how they're working together across divides."We're going to have another pandemic," says Francis. "If we do not learn the lessons of what went right and what went wrong with this one then we're going to be in a terrible spot."Both men still have different opinions on the role of government mandates in health emergencies. "When I look at anything that involves the government it's through the lens of liberty," says Wilk. "If the one entity out there that has a monopoly on force is going to restrict the liberty of the individual they better be 100% sure that what they're doing is really the only option.""I learned a lot by listening, and Wilk was a very good person to listen to, about how the pandemic was different for somebody who was in a very different place than I was", says Francis. "I also learned from Wilk and others in the Truth and Trust sessions about how sometimes the pronouncements from people like me in public health communication came across as very elitist... as opposed to really explaining the circumstance about how imperfect the data was and how uncertain we often were that we were recommending was going to turn out to be right."Francis's forthcoming book, to be published in mid-September, is "The Road to Wisdom: On Truth, Science, Faith and Trust". Wilk's podcast is "Derate The Hate." Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Toxic polarization is "the problem that eats all other problems... It's the sludge at the base of everything else," says our guest Mónica Guzmán. Think how much progress could be made on the great problems of today if politics were much more about discovering nuance than shouting slogans.This show is our second episode on the work, people, and ideas of the volunteer-led cross-partisan campaign, Braver Angels. In the coming months, we'll report on their initiatives and projects. Americans who are pissed off with politics are sometimes called "the exhausted majority." Many are tuning out toxic, divisive rhetoric that aims to settle scores instead of solving what's broken. Our guest, Braver Angels senior fellow Mónica Guzmán, has suggestions about how to be truly curious and have better conversations with those who see things differently.This loving liberal daughter of conservative immigrant parents who came to the US from Mexico, is a bridge builder, journalist and author. Her podcast is "A Braver Way". Modi’s recent book is “I Never Thought of It That Way." Our "How Do We Fix It?" interview was recorded a couple years ago. This show includes highlights and also an extract from Móni's podcast. "When you want to ask why people believe what they believe, instead ask how they came to believe what they believe," she tells us. When you ask how instead of why, you're asking for their story and then what people do is take you on a tour instead of being put on trial." Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This is our first in a series of new reports on the work, people and projects of Braver Angels— the largest volunteer-led group in the bridging community. The show was recorded a few days after the assassination attempt against Donald Trump. Our guests are Jessie Mannisto and Luke Nathan Phillips, who spent this week in Milwaukee, right outside the Fiserv Forum Arena, site of the Republican National Convention. Since its founding after the 2016 election, Braver Angels has brought together many hundreds of Republicans, Democrats, and Independents to debate, discuss, and work together to bridge partisan divides. Jessie is Director of Debates at Braver Angels, and Luke is the Publius Fellow For Public Discourse. In this episode we hear about the Braver Angels petition calling on party leaders to detoxify our politics, the mood of Republican delegates and protesters on the streets outside, the differences between media coverage of the event and what its like to be there, as well as responses to Braver Angels and its push back against polarization. "We're at both party conventions because America is at the party conventions," Luke tells us. “It’s just really interesting observing how people are feeling on the ground.""We set up Braver Angels in the wake of the 2016 election trying to keep people from hating their friends and relatives over politics," says Jessie. "Now the stakes are higher. We really are confronted with the possibility of political violence and have seen that is what we're up against.”Braver Angels are working to fix the national crisis of partisan polarization at the heart of America's political paralysis. Last month they hosted America's largest Presidential debate watch party, with hundreds of Republicans, Democrats, and independents in the same room. In this episode we also hear about "A Braver Way", the podcast hosted by Mónica Guzmán." Her show is, we think, a companion to ours —  a personal guide across the divide that gives listeners creative, practical and sometimes playful suggestions about how to disagree over politics without getting angry, depressed or disagreeable. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In the last episode Jim Meigs and Richard Davies celebrated more than nine years as co-hosts. They also announced that their podcasting partnership was ending. But "How Do We Fix It?" is not going away. Instead we plan to focus on something we've covered a great deal recently, and is of urgent importance right now: The broken nature of American politics. In the weeks to come, Richard will be the solo host of the show. We'll feature a series of creative, constructive conversations with bridge builder— people who are working to reduce polarization and push back against partisan divides. We'll shine a spotlight on the largest group in the field: Braver Angels. There are many stories we're excited to share with you here on How Do We Fix It? Watch this space. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

When we first started our podcast in the spring of 2015, Jim and Richard came from different political tribes. They still do. But during more than 400 shows they've deepened their friendship and learned a tremendous amount from each other, and our remarkable guests.While "How Do We Fix It?" podcast will continue its journey, Jim and Richard's nine years as co-hosts ends with this show. We discuss why the partnership is ending (spoiler alert: it's amicable!) and what they discovered about podcasting, politics, and how to navigate divisions at a time of rigid, painful divides."I feel like when we started, we were a couple of voices in the wilderness, searching for more open-minded conversations, looking for people willing to grapple with facts and ideas that don't fit their comfortable world views," says Jim."One of our last-minute decisions in those early days was to add a question mark to our title," says Richard. "I'm so glad we decided to do that, because fixing the current political mess starts with better listening and more challenging questions."In the years since we started our voices have grown into a movement. Some call it the bridging space with organizations such as Braver Angels, Heterodox Academy, Living Room Conversations, Listen First, Solutions Journalism Network, Common Ground Committee and many more. Media have also changed with the huge growth of podcasting, Substack, and new news sites such as The Free Press. We've enjoyed hearing from a remarkable range of guests. Among the most successful and persuasive experts are humble about their own opinions and accomplishments. They've been open-minded and curious about the views of those who sharply, and sometimes dismissively, disagreed with them. Standout examples include scientist Alina Chan, journalist and author Jonathan Rausch, writer and podcast host Yascha Mounk, and Moni Guzman of Braver Angels. In this episode Richard and Jim get personal and a bit emotional about where they've changed their minds and personally learned from each other. Please listen!Follow How Do We Fix It? on Facebook and Twitter X. Jim is a senior fellow at The Manhattan Institute. Follow him here on Twitter. He writes for City Journal and Commentary. Richard co-hosts "Let's Find Common Ground" podcast with Ashley Milne-Tyte. He's on Facebook and his Twitter handle is daviesnow. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Supporters of Ranked Choice Voting argue that we need to a big change how we vote. Our “choose-one” elections, they say, deprive voters of meaningful choices, create increasingly toxic campaign cycles, advance candidates who lack broad support and leave voters feeling like our voices are not heard. We examine the case for this form of proportional representation. Ranked Choice Voting could boost electoral turnout, reduce polarization, and cut the public cost of running elections. This relatively new reform is now being used in dozens of states, cities and counties. In 2022, Alaska implemented ranked-choice voting for the first time after a referendum revamped its elections.Our guest, Rob Richie is cofounder and senior analyst at FairVote, makes the case for how it works and why RCV is a viable way to improve electoral politics. Right now, he says, we are in this "incredibly intense winner-take-all environment" in most states. Ranked-choice voting could change the equation.Instead of picking just one candidate, voters rank as many candidates as they want in order of choice: first, second, third and so on. If your first-choice candidate is in last place, your vote counts for your highest-ranked candidate who can win by getting more than 50%. RCV removes voters' concerns that their favored candidate could split the vote.Most Americans agree Congress is not working. Retiring Senators Mitt Romney (Republican - Utah) and Joe Manchin (Democrat - West Virginia) are outspoken supporters of Ranked Choice Voting. “Every incentive in Washington is designed to make politics extreme,” says Manchin. “The growing divide between Democrats and Republicans is paralyzing Congress and worsening our nation’s problems.” Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Liberalism is out of fashion. You might say that it's under siege. From the populist right to the progressive left, liberal touchtones of limited government, personal freedom, the rule of law, and a mixed economy have come in for harsh criticism.Liberalism is assailed by many critics, but it has not failed, argues Yale Political Science Professor Bryan Garsten. "A liberal society is unique in that it offers refuge from the very people it empowers" through "institutions and different political parties. This allows the rest of us to live undisturbed," he says. Supporters argue that this form of liberty most clearly elevates the liberal project. In addition to his research and teaching, Garsten has written recent op-eds for The New York Times. His books include “Saving Persuasion: A Defense of Rhetoric and Judgement” and a collection of essays he edited about Rousseau and the Age of Enlightenment. This episode is published with assistance from The Journal of Democracy. We are grateful. The most recent print issue includes essays by five authors, who grapple with questions of liberalism's lasting relevance and its challenges for the future. Our interview features a lively discussion about the difference between liberal thought and other "isms" such as neoliberalism, libertarianism and progressivism. We learn more about the importance of community, the limits of individual freedom, and why liberal societies do not produce refugees— arguably another unique source of strength.Professor Garsten is also skeptical of some aspects of modern liberalism. "I think there's a certain language that liberals use, of science, rights and progress which sometimes has been hijacked to justify elite overreach in imposing a vision of the world onto many people of different views," he tells us. "I offer the language of refuge as an alternative way to get at what's morally admirable in liberal societies."Recommendation: Richard has just read the new book by journalist and TV commentator, Fareed Zakaria: "Age of Revolutions. Progress and Backlash From 1600 to the Present." Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In much of the country local news has collapsed, threatening civic pride and a sense of community for countless towns and cities. This dramatic change has also deepened America's divides.As our guest, journalist and public policy researcher Anna Brugmann explains in this episode, "the internet disrupted the local journalism model". Newspaper advertising revenue fell 80% since 2000. Thousands of local and regional publications closed. Most surviving newsrooms faced drastic cutbacks. Coverage of all kinds of local events— from city hall, school board meetings and football games to local businesses and zoning decisions — disappeared.First, Craigslist displaced print-based classified ads. Then Google, Facebook and other online firms became the main source of consumer advertising. We discuss the impact on local journalism. In recent decades, the news we read and listen to has largely shifted from local reporting to often highly polarizing national opinion journalism.In the first of two episodes on the changing face of the news media, we look at the retreat of local journalism and discuss solutions. These include non-profit media and changes in for-profit business models. Today, many newspapers get more revenue from subscriptions and fundraising drives than from advertising. We ask: how sustainable are these initiatives?Anna Brugmann is policy director for the advocacy organization, Rebuild Local News. According to her group, since 2004, as the U.S. population has grown, the number of newsroom employees has dropped by 57%."By almost every metric by which you measure a healthy community and a healthy democracy, the trends are in the wrong direction when local news leaves," says Anna. "In the past twenty years more than two thousands newspapers have closed in The United States."Recommendation: Jim is listening to a lot of podcasts since he unplugged his TV and stopped watching broadcast and cable news. Among his current favorite podcasts is "The Reeducation With Eli Lake". The show "challenges the common narratives the mainstream media and others push". Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Diversity equity and inclusion: Sounds like a good thing in an incredibly diverse country such as ours, especially when teaching young people at American colleges and universities.But the DEI industry - or DEI Inc. — has arguably gone off the rails. There’s a big difference between the intentions behind a lot of diversity training and the results. We learn about the crucial difference between training and education, and hear the case against the Stop WOKE Act in Florida.History professors Amna Khalid and Jeff Snyder share their deep concerns about a growing industry. There is no reliable evidence that diversity, equity and inclusion training sessions at colleges, non-profits, and large corporations actually work. In many places, DEI could be making things worse, imposing an ideological litmus test and encouraging cynicism and dishonesty at places of learning.Amna specializes in modern South Asian history, the history of medicine and the global history of free expression. Growing up under a series of military dictatorships in Pakistan, she has a strong interest in issues relating to free speech.Jeff is also a Professor at Carleton: A historian of education, who studies questions of race, national identity and the purpose of public education in a diverse, democratic society. He’s the author of Making Black History: The Color Line, Culture and Race in the Age of Jim Crow.  Jeff and Amna released this YouTube video about DEI. They speak regularly together about academic freedom, free speech and campus politics at colleges and universities. They also write frequently on these issues for newspapers and magazines, including The Chronicle of Higher Education, The New Republic and The Washington Post. Amna hosts a podcast and blog called “Banished,” which explores censorship controversies in the past and present. Recommendation: Richard has been watching "Nada" on Hulu, a gentle and funny TV series from Argentina about a food critic in Buenos Aires and his observations on life and eating. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

News coverage of Super Tuesday and other party primaries focused mainly on base voters— Democrats and Republicans. But most Americans are actually on the political sidelines or somewhere in the middle. Many have a mix of conservative and liberal views.This episode is about them. Our guest is Shannon Watson, the Founder and Executive Director of Majority in the Middle. Her Minnesota-based non-profit group works to give voters and elected officials a place to gather outside the extremes. "We try to elevate the people who are demonstrating the behavior we want to see", Shannon tells us. "When it's only the rabble-rousers who get the coverage then there is an incentive to be one of them." Majority in the Middle also promotes structural changes in governing that will remove barriers to cooperation across the political aisle. While the two parties have a stranglehold on many aspects of elections and governance, record numbers of Americans no longer register as Republican or Democrat. They prefer the label "independent". At the same time, the right and left have changed. Among pro-Trump conservatives, we see a decline in support for free trade and military spending to help traditional allies. The former president has also resisted calls to limit spending on Medicare and social security.Younger Democrats are much less likely to support Israel. The rise of identity politics has also pushed the party to the left.While we've always had partisan division the level of vitriol can obscure the fact that Americans are much more closely aligned on issues such as gun rights, abortion, and immigration than we are led to believe."Not all Democrats agree with all Democrats, and not all Republicans agree with all Republicans," says Shannon Watson.Our podcast conversation mentions the Political Typology Quiz, conducted by Pew Research Center. Polling of more than 10,000 U.S. adults showed that while partisan polarization remains a dominant fact of political life, "the gulf that separates Republicans and Democrats sometimes obscures the divisions and diversity of views that exist within both partisan coalitions – and the fact that many Americans do not fit easily into either one."You can take the Typology Quiz here and see your personal views fit in with nine broad categories of left and right. Recommendation: Jim enjoyed reading "The Wager: A Tale of Shipwreck, Mutiny and Murder", by David Grann. Our co-host has had a long fascination with survival and exploration stories. He calls this non-fiction book "a ripping read and a fascinating story." Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Only four-in-ten Americans say they have a lot of trust in the news media. That's a big problem for our democracy, especially in this volatile presidential election year. While journalists are supposed to tell the truth and get the story right, just 35% of right-of-center voters have some trust in what they see on the news.Democrats and independents are much more likely to trust journalists, but Americans of almost all shades of opinion are skeptical of the journalists, not only questioning the quality of their work but the intentions behind it.Our guest is Joy Mayer, Director of the non-profit group, Trusting News, which has partnered with many local newsrooms around the country to help journalists earn consumers' trust.While many reporters, writers and editors are reluctant to discuss their politics, most journalists have liberal or progressive views. "I think it's something we need to talk about more openly," Joy tells us.In this episode, we look at bias, transparency, and constructive steps that the newsrooms can take to improve their reputation with a broad cross-section of Americans.We first recorded our interview with Joy in the late summer of 2021. Since then polling shows that the gulf between many journalists and their readers, listeners, and viewers is as wide as ever.Americans of all political views are switching off the news. Audiences are shrinking for local TV stations, most newspapers and public radio, even as they release podcasts, email newsletters and other newer forms of content. Polling by Pew Research found that more than half of journalists surveyed say every side does not always deserve equal coverage in the news. But three-quarters of the public say journalists should always strive to give all sides equal coverage.Recommendation: Richard has just finished watching the first two seasons of "Dark Winds", a TV thriller and crime drama set on a Navajo Indian reservation in the southwest. Almost all of the actors and crew are native americans. Richard says: "This series is beautiful, exciting and compelling. The acting is first rate The scenery alone is reason enough to watch it." Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

What is the point of a good education? Do we need it to learn a narrow set of skills ro help us get ahead in the workplace, or should knowledge and learning to be used over a lifetime to acquire wisdom that enables us to think more deeply about our place in the world?This question has profound resonance at a time of angry divides over American politics and moral confusion at elite American universities. The President of Harvard, Claudine Gay, resigned after months of campus unrest and controversy. In December, Gay and two other university presidents faced widespread criticism for their testimony at Congressional hearings about antisemitism on their campuses.In this episode, we hear from an university educator who makes the case for liberal education that gives students the tools needed to have a deeper sense of purpose. Roosevelt Montás is the author of "Rescuing Socrates: How The Great Books Changed My Life And Why They Matter For a New Generation".He believes that the ideas and writings of Plato, Socrates, Shakespeare, Ghandi and many others aren't just for a few privileged students. They're for everybody, and that encountering these thinkers as a poor immigrant teenager changed his life.Montás is senior lecturer in American Studies and English at Columbia University, and director of the Center for American Studies Freedom and Citizenship Program, which introduces low-income high school students to primary texts in moral and political thought, as well as seminars in American Studies including “Freedom and Citizenship in the United States.” From 2008 to 2018, he was director of Columbia’s Center for the Core Curriculum."There is a prevailing cultural attitude that liberal education— the study of literature and philosophy — is appropriate only to the elite," Roosevelt tells us. "That is a really pernicious idea." He argues that the students who benefit the most from the foundational wisdom in the "great books" come from poor and marginalized backgrounds.Recommendation: Richard watched and greatly enjoyed the Anglo-Japanese Netflix TV series, "Giri / Haji", — duty/shame in Japanese— a thriller about a Tokyo detective scouring the London underworld to find his allegedly deceased brother. The series was filmed in Tokyo and London.  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From the economy and prospects for a Biden vs Trump rematch to the future for global energy and artificial intelligence, Richard and Jim make their forecasts for 2024. And we re-visit our predictions from exactly a year ago and report on precisely how we did. "It's sort of like weather forecasters and opinion pollsters going back and owning up to their mistakes," says Richard. "I mean, who often do we see that!"Once again, Meigs and Davies make their best guesses about what's to come this year. Will Donald Trump maintain his slim lead in the polls over President Biden? Is there a much higher risk than most experts expect for energy supplies during the winter months? How big are the chances for a wider war in the Middle East?Fresh off his A+ forecast on the 2023 economy, when Richard out-forecasted the overwhelming majority of experts, we'll get more predictions about this year. Don't make any more investments without hearing this episode!Jim, who writes with perception and foresight about nuclear power and our frayed power grid, will share his updated insights on the year to come for energy, and attempts to cut carbon dioxide levels in the Earth's atmosphere. We also hear about the migration crisis on the Southern border, the long frustrating retreat of COVID, and the grim outlook for the war in Ukraine. As usual, both hosts share some surprising opinions and air a few lively disagreements.Read Jim's new article in City Journal, "Where Now For Nuclear Power".Listen to our sister show "Let's Find Common Ground". Here's their latest episode with Christian Science Monitor Editor, Mark Sappenfield. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

We continue our discussion with Yascha Mounk, one of the leading public intellectuals of our time. The subject is a hugely influential ideology that attempts to put racial, sexual and gender identity at the center of our social, cultural and political life. The "identity synthesis", Mounk argues, denies that members of different groups can truly understand one another and this stifles public discourse.In this podcast episode, we learn why an obsession with identity undermines social justice, fuels culture wars, and boosts hateful hardliners on the right and left— from Donald Trump to protesters who support Hamas and its murderous attacks on Israeli civilians. We also hear how to politely but firmly push back against those who have become ensnared in "The Identity Trap," the name of Yascha Mounk's new book."Categories like race and gender and sexual orientation help to explain what's going on in the world, but they're not the only categories that help to explain it," Mounk tells us. "There's also social class, religion and patriotism as well as individual actions, attributes and aspirations.""The Identity Trap" has been called "the most ambitious and comprehensive account to date of the origins, consequences and limitations" of "wokeness". In our last episode, Yascha Mounk explained how postmodernism, postcolonialism and critical race theory gained currency on many college campuses by 2020. Today, a simplified version of these ideas exerts a strong influence in business, government and media. In this episode, Mounk urges listeners to claim the moral high ground. "Don’t apologize about arguing against a worldview that emphasizes identity to the exclusion of other factors". Recognize we have genuine disagreements but argue for convictions that you believe will result in a better world. People are open to persuasion, he says.Mounk mentions two of the most effective critics of the identity ideology were once very drawn to it: Maurice Mitchell of the Working Families Party and interfaith organizer, Eboo Patel.Recommendation: Richard has just read "The Speech", by Gary Younge, who writes for the Guardian and The Nation. His book is the story behind Martin Luther King Jr.'s powerful "I have a Dream" speech delivered to a vast audience in 1963. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Having skewered right-wing populism and its demagogues in his two previous best-selling books, politics professor, writer, and podcaster Yasha Mounk turns now to the threat posed to liberalism from those progressives who champion "woke" identity politics. We discuss his latest, "The Identity Trap: A Story of Ideas and Power In Our Time."This episode— the first of two with Yasha Mounk — looks at the complex roots of a highly influential ideology based on personal identity— specifically race, gender and sexual orientation. These are said to determine a person's power, role in society, and how they see themselves. Mounk explains how the identity synthesis, which has become widely accepted in many universities, nonprofits and large corporations, had its origins in several intellectual traditions, including post-colonialism, postmodernism and critical race theory.Our interview mentions ideas and concepts raised by Michel Foucault, Derrick Bell, Kimberlé Krenshaw, Edward Said, Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, and others. We learn how these thinkers sharply criticized modern liberalism and the civil rights movement of the Sixties and beyond.Yascha Mounk is a German-born American who teaches international affairs at Johns Hopkins University. His writing appears in The Atlantic and other publications. He is also founder and editor-in-chief of the Substack publication "Persuasion", and hosts the podcast, "The Good Fight".Mounk's new book has won widespread critical praise. The Washington Post said that "Mounk has told the story of the Great Awokening better than any other writer who has attempted to make sense of it."Recommendation: Jim is reading "UFO: The Inside Story of the US Government's Search for Alien Life Here— and Out There: by Garrett Graff. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Yes, it's our 400th episode. But instead of looking back over the past eight-and-a-half years of our podcasts, we consider the future: How collective optimism or pessimism can have a huge impact on the economy, risk taking, and the acceptance of new technologies that spark growth and innovation.Our guest is scholar and journalist James Pethokoukis of the American Enterprise Institute, author of "The Conservative Futurist: How To Create the Sci-Fi World We Were Promised."In this episode he argues that in the decades after World War Two and during the space race, America was the world's dream factory. TV and movies helped to turn imagination into reality, from curing polio to landing on the Moon to creating the internet. In those years we were confident that more wonders lay just over the horizon: clean and infinite energy, a cure for cancer, computers and robots as humanity’s great helpers. But as we moved into the late 20th century, we grew cautious, even cynical, about what the future held and our ability to shape it. James Pethokoukis says that this year— 2023— marks the 50th anniversary of the start of the Great Downshift in technological progress and economic growth, followed by decades of economic stagnation, downsized dreams, and a popular culture fixated on catastrophe."If you cannot imagine or have someone present a plausible imagining of a better tomorrow, why should we take any risks today?", Jim tells us. "There will be failures. Failure is part of taking a risk. It's part of a capitalist economy, and if you're not seeing failures, you're not taking large enough risks or a big enough swing at the plate"In our interview examine the impact of popular entertainment and its impact on our collective ambitions: "I think it influences how we think about the future, and that influences the decisions we make right now in the present."We discuss the current debate over artificial intelligence, and how future breakthroughs might be held back: "If all we can imagine is AI taking all our jobs, only enriching a slice of the population or somehow killing us, why would we want to do anything?"Among public policy decisions James Pethokoukis endorses are a dramatic increase in government spending on research and development as well as sharp cuts in red tape and severe environmental restrictions that prevent the construction of new transmission lines and other building blocks for clean technology projects. This is a wide-ranging conversation.In the interview we mention the controversial best-selling book, "The Population Bomb" co-authored by Paul and Anne Erlich, and the work of Persian author, futurist, and philosopher Fereidoun M. Esfandiary.Recommendation: Richard recommends a daily or weekly spiritual practice that could include prayer, meditation or yoga. He believes that a regular discipline that involves giving gratitude and thinking of the inner self can improve mental well-being. "We are often unkind to each other because we are unforgiving of ourselves and ungrateful for the world we have been born into," Richard days. "It’s no accident that a decline in church attendance in America has something to do with the rise in incivility." Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Affective polarization in America – the gap between voters' positive feelings about their own political party or "side" and negative feelings toward the opposing party – has sharply increased during the past two decades.We speak with two leaders in local government and a nationwide students group about effective ways to bridge divides. Erica Manuel is CEO and Executive Director at the Institute for Local Government in Roseville, California. She has over 20 years of experience helping public, private and nonprofit organizations implement innovative policies to provide strong leadership, advance climate resilience, support economic development, engage communities, and drive positive change.Manu Meel is CEO of BridgeUSA, a student-led nonprofit organization that creates spaces at colleges and high schools for open discussion among students about political issues. BridgeUSA began in 2016 at the universities of Notre Dame, CU-Boulder and UC Berkeley in response to growing polarization on campus.  Erica and Manu were interviewed by our co-host Richard Davies at the 2023 Braver Angels Convention in Gettysburg, Pennsylvania. Both of them played leading roles at the cross-partisan gathering of Democrats, Republicans and independent citizens. Braver Angels is part of the growing movement of bridging organizations, who are finding new ways to push back against rigid and dehumanizing political divides. Many young people on college campuses are "just scared to say what's on their minds, and walking on eggshells," Manu tells us. He blames "the loudest voices" for silencing open discussion. "This is not a problem of the majority," he says. "It is a problem of the loudest voices imposing their closed-mindedness on an exhausted majority."Both Erica and Manu insist they're hopeful that the crisis of polarization can be successfully overcome. "I'm hopeful because not a single person I've talked to has said why on earth would you do that? Why on earth would you talk to someone on the other side? Why on earth would you want to treat someone like a human being with dignity?" Erica tells Richard.Recommendation: Jim recommends Commentary Magazine, a monthly publication of conservative "non-Trumpy" opinion. He writes its tech commentary and is a frequent guest on Commentary's daily podcast.  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It's easy to look at the impacts of rigid polarization and blame our leaders and political parties, the media, or the education system. In this episode, we hear an argument that the first thing all of us should do is focus on what we can control: ourselves. We discuss how to learn to live with others despite deep divisions. All democracies need protests and debates to flourish. But we also need to respect ourselves and acknowledge the dignity of others.Alexandra Hudson is the author of the new book, "The Soul of Civility", and an adjunct professor in philanthropy at Indiana University. She argues that civility is a key solution for polarization and a breakdown in social order. In her writing she examines how civility—a respect for the humanity of others—transcends political disagreements. Civility, she writes, is not a technique, but a disposition: "a way of seeing others as beings endowed with dignity and inherently valuable."The divided state of the world "is a timeless problem. It's an intractable problem, but there's no policy solutions or simple cure," Lexi tells us. "It requires constant vigilance on behalf of each of us. That's humbling."We learn about the crucial difference between outward politeness, polish or poise, and civility which requires constant internal work and the application of true character. We individually have the power to improve and change, Lexi says. Her book looks at arguments for civility from the ancient times until the present day.Recommendation: Richard recently read "The Spinning Heart" by the Irish writer Donal Ryan. This short, powerful novel set in a small town in Ireland in the wake of the 2008 financial collapse. People are left without work, with routine and meaning in their lives. Each short chapter is from the vantage point of a different speaker who has been wounded — by the economy as well as by their parents, their lovers, by life. The book is funny and poignant. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Destructive conflict aims to destroy the other side. But constructive conflict can be a force for good.In this episode we learn how good conflict helps move people beyond polarization, slogans, and angry tweets to a place where they can connect and grow— even as they strongly disagree. Hélène Biandudi Hofer says that when we have the vocabulary and basic skills to investigate conflict with curiosity, it can change everything.Journalists Hélène Biandudi Hofer and Amanda Ripley co-founded Good Conflict, which works with news organizations, non-profits, elected officials, educators, religious leaders, and others to lean into conflict in a constructive, productive way. Hélène developed and managed the Solutions Journalism Network’s Complicating the Narratives project. She trained more than a thousand journalists across 125 newsrooms throughout the world."I believe story is the most underutilized and under-appreciated thing to help people understand those we disagree with and who are vastly different from ourselves," she tells us. In this podcast, we hear about the specific tools, skills and vocabulary Hélène uses to help people respond to disagreements without sliding into contempt.Co-hosts and Richard come to this subject from very different places. While Richard says he "sometimes falls into a trap of trying to avoid conflict and ignoring that it's a needed part of life." Jim responds: "I like a good argument. I think it's healthy and kind of exciting sometimes to have a difference of opinion, especially with a good friend."This episode and others about polarization are funded in part by a grant from Solutions Journalism Network. Richard is one of this year's Complicating The Narratives Fellows.This week's recommendation: Jim is an enthusiastic listener to the podcast, "The Rest Is History", hosted by historians Tom Holland and Dominic Sandbrook. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.