Podcasts about braver angels

What does it mean to be a "reconciliation entrepreneur" in today's world? Our guest, Mark Beckwith, reveals how Braver Angels works to strengthen our democratic republic by bringing people together from across the partisan divide. Hear about their work with legislators and college campuses, and how the principle of "religious" meaning "to bring people together" can be applied to bridge the gap between mainline and evangelical Christians. #ReconciliationEntrepreneur #Bipartisan #IntergroupDialogue #FaithInAction #ProblemSolvers

Given the country's political divide, we often hear that conversations are the key to empathy and connection. Which is true. But that also doesn't scale very well. One way to combat this is to correct dangerous political misperceptions and help us find more overlap. In fact, a Hidden Tribes study shows that 85% of Americans are more similar than we think.Today, James Coan explains the Perception Gap and how it forces us to see each other as threats rather than with compassion. This applies to the workplace as much as politics. He talks about why conversations are great, but indirect interceptions also help close this gap and bring us together. This includes More Like US's work in education, journalism, and the arts to portray each other in a more accurate light. James also shares some advice for creatives and creators on how they can help. The work is intriguing and frankly, makes a lot of sense - and it can be used by corporate leaders as well. This conversation could not be more important right now, so please learn more about their work and take a listen. To access the episode transcript, please search for the episode title at www.TheEmpathyEdge.comKey Takeaways:Books, movies, and other media that feature characters who are “not like us” are not there to convert your children; they are there to expose people to different experiences and lives for better understanding. We're never going to be able to tap into the conversations and the empathy of listening to one another until we realize that we're closer than we think we are.People who feel threatened, especially to their safety and security, are more open to authoritarian tendencies. By focusing on the desire for atypical leadership, people are able to work better together rather than fight. "Every day Americans tend to be more similar ideologically than fellow Americans tend to realize. An average Democrat or Republican will agree on more and are less extreme than people realize." — James CoanEpisode References: Mónica Guzmán: How to Have Fearlessly Curious Conversations in Divided Political TimesEdwin Rutsch: How Empathy Circles Can Change the WorldSimilarity HubTrusting NewsHidden Tribes StudyBridge Entertainment LabsBuildersBraver AngelsStanford Strengthening Democracy ChallengeFrom Our Partner:SparkEffect partners with organizations to unlock the full potential of their greatest asset: their people. Through their tailored assessments and expert coaching at every level, SparkEffect helps organizations manage change, sustain growth, and chart a path to a brighter future.Go to sparkeffect.com/edge now and download your complimentary Professional and Organizational Alignment Review today.About James Coan, Co-Founder and Executive Director, More Like USJames Coan is Co-Founder and Executive Director of More Like US, which corrects dangerous political misperceptions of each other at scale. He previously served as DC Alliance Co-chair and Mid-Atlantic Regional Lead for Braver Angels, one of the largest organizations dedicated to reducing political divides, and previously co-led social media and Ambassador outreach nationally. He has been involved closely in the field since shortly after the 2016 election, with a main interest in achieving goals at scale. He brings 10+ years of strategy consulting experience and has worked at a think tank after receiving a degree in public policy from Princeton.Connect with James Coan More Like US: https://www.morelikeus.org/ LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/james-coan-6465b15/ Connect with Maria:Get Maria's books on empathy: Red-Slice.com/booksLearn more about Maria's work: Red-Slice.comHire Maria to speak: Red-Slice.com/Speaker-Maria-RossTake the LinkedIn Learning Course! Leading with EmpathyLinkedIn: Maria RossInstagram: @redslicemariaFacebook: Red SliceThreads: @redslicemariaWe would love to get your thoughts on the show! Please click https://bit.ly/edge-feedback to take this 5-minute survey, thanks!

If you're disturbed or simply turned off by America's rigid political divisions this is the show for you. We discuss creative skills and practices that put a little hope back in your political lifeDoug Teschner and Beth Malow are co-authors of the forthcoming book "Beyond the Politics of Contempt: Practical Steps to Build Positive Relationships in Divided Times." Their work builds on what they've both learned as bridge builders and Braver Angels volunteers. They also write about their work on Substack.Imagine a country where people of opposing political beliefs and different social, geographical and educational backgrounds get along pretty well, and manage to make progress together on vital issues that they care about. Our two guests show how it can be done."We've always had debate and disagreement," Doug tells us. "The concern now is that this has become personalized. If you don't agree with me that means you're evil." People should disagree, but when it's about "us versus them, this is really dangerous for our country."Most Americans want to get along, says Beth. "I just think there are forces out there tearing us apart because that's what they see their profit and power in... We need to stand up and say enough is enough. We're better than this."Beth Malow leans blue. Doug Teschner leans red. He is a former Republican State Legislator in New Hampshire. Doug served as a Peace Corps country director in Ukraine and West Africa. He volunteers for Braver Angels as New England political leader. Beth Malow is a neurology physician, science and health communicator and lives in Vermont. She is also a trained volunteer moderator and debate chair for Braver Angels.This is our latest episode on the people, projects, and ideas of Braver Angels: The volunteer-led nationwide citizens' group that's working to bring people together across rigid and often antagonistic divides. During our interview Beth mentioned a May 20th Braver Angels New Hampshire debate that she's involved with.Our podcast host, Richard Davies, is a media trainer who works with clients to strengthen their public speaking, messaging, and interview skills. His email is daviescontentatgmail,com. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Hometown Radio 05/13/25 3p: Spotlight on Braver Angels then Dave & Craig get caught up

MIT Concourse is a program for first-year students at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology that “brings science into conversation with the humanities.” It also hosts the Civil Discourse Project, which seeks to “reinvigorate the open exchange of ideas at MIT.” In this episode of Higher Ed Now, ACTA's Bryan Paul interviews Senior Lecturer Linda Rabieh to learn how the Civil Discourse Project has used the Braver Angels debate format championed by the College Debates and Discourse Alliance — a joint program of the American Council of Trustees and Alumni, Braver Angels, and BridgeUSA — to prepare our nation's future STEM leaders for thoughtful, engaged citizenship. He also speaks with Mariam Abdelbarr, Isaac Lock, and Siddhu Pachipala, three students who have helped plan and conduct debates at MIT.

With Pennsylvania’s primary election just weeks away, Secretary of the Commonwealth Al Schmidt joined WITF’s The Spark to walk voters through the critical deadlines and options for casting their ballots. “The primary in Pennsylvania is May 20th,” Secretary Schmidt reminded listeners, noting that “the last day to register to vote is May 5th” and “the last day to apply to vote by mail … is May 13th.” For people of faith, civil discourse often begins in recognizing the image of God and/or the inherent dignity in our conversation partner. As a result, Braver Angels approach involves mutual respect. Respect, not agreement, is an essential key for a healthy discussion. Asia speaks with two representatives of Braver Faith to speak on their process and the benefitsSupport WITF: https://www.witf.org/support/give-now/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

On May 2, Braver Angels’ own Red Co-Chair of Braver Faith, Lenny Greenberg, and Reverend Chad Butz joined The Spark to explore how faith communities can heal our fractured political landscape. Lenny, a retired high-tech executive, explained that “we must learn to talk to each other about our disagreements in a civil way again,” while Pastor Chad reflected on the shared mission of church and Braver Angels: “Relationship is at the heart of what it means to be Christian… and Braver Angels teaches us to compromise for the benefit of the relationship.” Both guests underscored the importance of releasing our need to be right so that love and care for our fellow humans can guide us toward a more united future.Support WITF: https://www.witf.org/support/give-now/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

ACTA's Program Coordinator for the College Debates and Discourse Alliance, Kayla Johnston, returns to her alma mater, the University of North Carolina (UNC)–Greensboro, for a conversation with two student leaders: Lauren Fletcher and Matt Kircher. Thanks to the generous support of the Barnes Family Foundation, the College Debates and Discourse Alliance has brought its debates and dialogues to over 11 institutions within the UNC System. As Lee Barnes Campus Debate Student Fellows, Ms. Fletcher and Mr. Kircher have organized several Braver Angels debates at UNC–Greensboro since the fall of 2023. Together, they reflect on how our programming has helped revive a culture of open dialogue, viewpoint diversity, and free expression on campus.

In this weekend's episode, three segments from this past week's Washington Journal. First, author and filmmaker Chris Whipple discusses his book "Uncharted: How Trump Beat Biden, Harris, and the Odds in the Wildest Campaign in History." Then, University of Pennsylvania Economics professor Jesús Fernández-Villaverde -- discusses declining fertility rates in the U-S – and the economic impact. Plus, a conversation with Bill Doherty, co-founder of the non-profit group Braver Angels – about efforts to reduce political polarization in America. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

A year ago, the great American historian Adam Hochschild came on KEEN ON AMERICA to discuss American Midnight, his best selling account of the crisis of American democracy after World War One. A year later, is history really repeating itself in today's crisis of American democracy? For Hochschild, there are certainly parallels between the current political situation in the US and post WW1 America. Describing how wartime hysteria and fear of communism led to unprecedented government repression, including mass imprisonment for political speech, vigilante violence, and press censorship. Hochschild notes eery similarities to today's Trump's administration. He expresses concern about today's threats to democratic institutions while suggesting the importance of understanding Trump supporters' grievances and finding ways to bridge political divides. Five Key Takeaways* The period of 1917-1921 in America saw extreme government repression, including imprisoning people for speech, vigilante violence, and widespread censorship—what Hochschild calls America's "Trumpiest" era before Trump.* American history shows recurring patterns of nativism, anti-immigrant sentiment, and scapegoating that politicians exploit during times of economic or social stress.* The current political climate shows concerning parallels to this earlier period, including intimidation of opposition, attacks on institutions, and the widespread acceptance of authoritarian tendencies.* Hochschild emphasizes the importance of understanding the grievances and suffering that lead people to support authoritarian figures rather than dismissing their concerns.* Despite current divisions, Hochschild believes reconciliation is possible and necessary, pointing to historical examples like President Harding pardoning Eugene Debs after Wilson imprisoned him. Full Transcript Andrew Keen: Hello, everybody. We recently celebrated our 2500th edition of Keen On. Some people suggest I'm mad. I think I probably am to do so many shows. Just over a little more than a year ago, we celebrated our 2000th show featuring one of America's most distinguished historians, Adam Hochschild. I'm thrilled that Adam is joining us again a year later. He's the author of "American Midnight, The Great War, A Violent Peace, and Democracy's Forgotten Crisis." This was his last book. He's the author of many other books. He is now working on a book on the Great Depression. He's joining us from his home in Berkeley, California. Adam, to borrow a famous phrase or remix a famous phrase, a year is a long time in American history.Adam Hochschild: That's true, Andrew. I think this past year, or actually this past 100 days or so has been a very long and very difficult time in American history that we all saw coming to some degree, but I don't think we realized it would be as extreme and as rapid as it has been.Andrew Keen: Your book, Adam, "American Midnight, A Great War of Violent Peace and Democracy's Forgotten Crisis," is perhaps the most prescient warning. When you researched that you were saying before we went live that your books usually take you between four and five years, so you couldn't really have planned for this, although I guess you began writing and researching American Midnight during the Trump 1.0 regime. Did you write it as a warning to something like is happening today in America?Adam Hochschild: Well, I did start writing it and did most of the work on it during Trump's first term in office. So I was very struck by the parallels. And they're in plain sight for everybody to see. There are various dark currents that run through this country of ours. Nativism, threats to deport troublemakers. Politicians stirring up violent feelings against immigrants, vigilante violence, all those things have been with us for a long time. I've always been fascinated by that period, 1917 to 21, when they surged to the surface in a very nasty way. That was the subject of the book. Naturally, I hoped we wouldn't have to go through anything like that again, but here we are definitely going through it again.Andrew Keen: You wrote a lovely piece earlier this month for the Washington Post. "America was at its Trumpiest a hundred years ago. Here's how to prevent the worst." What did you mean by Trumpiest, Adam? I'm not sure if you came up with that title, but I know you like the term. You begin the essay. What was the Trumpiest period in American life before Donald Trump?Adam Hochschild: Well, I didn't invent the word, but I certainly did use it in the piece. What I meant by that is that when you look at this period just over 100 years ago, 1917 to 1921, Woodrow Wilson's second term in office, two things happened in 1917 that kicked off a kind of hysteria in this country. One was that Wilson asked the American Congress to declare war on Germany, which it promptly did, and when a country enters a major war, especially a world war, it sets off a kind of hysteria. And then that was redoubled some months later when the country received news of the Russian Revolution, and many people in the establishment in America were afraid the Russian Revolution might come to the United States.So, a number of things happened. One was that there was a total hysteria against all things German. There were bonfires of German books all around the country. People would take German books out of libraries, schools, college and university libraries and burn them in the street. 19 such bonfires in Ohio alone. You can see pictures of it on the internet. There was hysteria about the German language. I heard about this from my father as I was growing up because his father was a Jewish immigrant from Germany. They lived in New York City. They spoke German around the family dinner table, but they were terrified of doing so on the street because you could get beaten up for that. Several states passed laws against speaking German in public or speaking German on the telephone. Eminent professors declared that German was a barbaric language. So there was that kind of hysteria.Then as soon as the United States declared war, Wilson pushed the Espionage Act through Congress, this draconian law, which essentially gave the government the right to lock up anybody who said something that was taken to be against the war. And they used this law in a devastating way. During those four years, roughly a thousand Americans spent a year or more in jail and a much larger number, shorter periods in jail solely for things that they wrote or said. These were people who were political prisoners sent to jail simply for something they wrote or said, the most famous of them was Eugene Debs, many times the socialist candidate for president. He'd gotten 6% of the popular vote in 1912 and in 1918. For giving an anti-war speech from a park bandstand in Ohio, he was sent to prison for 10 years. And he was still in prison two years after the war ended in November, 1920, when he pulled more than 900,000 votes for president from his jail cell in the federal penitentiary in Atlanta.So that was one phase of the repression, political prisoners. Another was vigilante violence. The government itself, the Department of Justice, chartered a vigilante group, something called the American Protective League, which went around roughing up people that it thought were evading the draft, beating up people at anti-war rallies, arresting people with citizens arrest whom they didn't have their proper draft papers on them, holding them for hours or sometimes for days until they could produce the right paperwork.Andrew Keen: I remember, Adam, you have a very graphic description of some of this violence in American Midnight. There was a story, was it a union leader?Adam Hochschild: Well, there is so much violence that happened during that time. I begin the book with a graphic description of vigilantes raiding an office of the Wobblies, the Industrial Workers of the World, in Tulsa, Oklahoma, taking a bunch of wobblies out into the prairie at night, stripping them, whipping them, flogging them fiercely, and then tarring and feathering them, and firing shotguns over their heads so they would run off into the Prairie at Night. And they did. Those guys were lucky because they survive. Other people were killed by this vigilante violence.And the final thing about that period which I would mention is the press censorship. The Espionage Act gave the Postmaster General the power to declare any publication in the United States unmailable. And for a newspaper or a magazine that was trying to reach a national audience, the only way you could do so was through the US mail because there was no internet then. No radio, no TV, no other way of getting your publication to somebody. And this put some 75 newspapers and magazines that the government didn't like out of business. It in addition censored three or four hundred specific issues of other publications as well.So that's why I feel this is all a very dark period of American life. Ironically, that press censorship operation, because it was run by the postmaster general, who by the way loved being chief censor, it was ran out of the building that was then the post office headquarters in Washington, which a hundred years later became the Trump International Hotel. And for $4,000 a night, you could stay in the Postmaster General's suite.Andrew Keen: You, Adam, the First World War is a subject you're very familiar with. In addition to American Midnight, you wrote "To End All Wars, a story of loyalty and rebellion, 1914 to 18," which was another very successful of your historical recreations. Many countries around the world experience this turbulence, the violence. Of course, we had fascism in the 20s in Europe. And later in the 30s as well. America has a long history of violence. You talk about the violence after the First World War or after the declaration. But I was just in Montgomery, Alabama, went to the lynching museum there, which is considerably troubling. I'm sure you've been there. You're not necessarily a comparative political scientist, Adam. How does America, in its paranoia during the war and its clampdown on press freedom, on its violence, on its attempt to create an authoritarian political system, how does it compare to other democracies? Is some of this stuff uniquely American or is it a similar development around the world?Adam Hochschild: You see similar pressures almost any time that a major country is involved in a major war. Wars are never good for civil liberties. The First World War, to stick with that period of comparison, was a time that saw strong anti-war movements in all of the warring countries, in Germany and Britain and Russia. There were people who understood at the time that this war was going to remake the world for the worse in every way, which indeed it did, and who refused to fight. There were 800 conscientious objectors jailed in Russia, and Russia did not have much freedom of expression to begin with. In Germany, many distinguished people on the left, like Rosa Luxemburg, were sent to jail for most of the war.Britain was an interesting case because I think they had a much longer established tradition of free speech than did the countries on the continent. It goes way back and it's a distinguished and wonderful tradition. They were also worried for the first two and a half, three years of the war before the United States entered, that if they crack down too hard on their anti-war movement, it would upset people in the United States, which they were desperate to draw into the war on their side. Nonetheless, there were 6,000 conscientious objectors who were sent to jail in England. There was intermittent censorship of anti-war publications, although some were able to publish some of the time. There were many distinguished Britons, such as Bertrand Russell, the philosopher who later won a Nobel Prize, sent to jails for six months for his opposition to the war. So some of this happened all over.But I think in the United States, especially with these vigilante groups, it took a more violent form because remember the country at that time was only a few decades away from these frontier wars with the Indians. And the westward expansion of the United States during the 19th century, the western expansion of white settlement was an enormously bloody business that was almost genocidal for the Native Americans. Many people had participated in that. Many people saw that violence as integral to what the country was. So there was a pretty well-established tradition of settling differences violently.Andrew Keen: I'm sure you're familiar with Stephen Hahn's book, "A Liberal America." He teaches at NYU, a book which in some ways is very similar to yours, but covers all of American history. Hahn was recently on the Ezra Klein show, talking like you, like we're talking today, Adam, about the very American roots of Trumpism. Hahn, it's an interesting book, traces much of this back to Jackson and the wars of the frontier against Indians. Do you share his thesis on that front? Are there strong similarities between Jackson, Wilson, and perhaps even Trump?Adam Hochschild: Well, I regret to say I'm not familiar with Hahn's book, but I certainly do feel that that legacy of constant war for most of the 19th century against the Native Americans ran very deep in this country. And we must never forget how appealing it is to young men to take part in war. Unfortunately, all through history, there have been people very tempted by this. And I think when you have wars of conquest, such as happen in the American West, against people who are more poorly armed, or colonial wars such as Europe fought in Africa and Asia against much more poorly-armed opponents, these are especially appealing to young people. And in both the United States and in the European colonization of Africa, which I know something about. For young men joining in these colonizing or conquering adventures, there was a chance not just to get martial glory, but to also get rich in the process.Andrew Keen: You're all too familiar with colonial history, Adam. Another of your books was about King Leopold's Congo and the brutality there. Where was the most coherent opposition morally and politically to what was happening? My sense in Trump's America is perhaps the most persuasive and moral critique comes from the old Republican Center from people like David Brooks, Peter Wayno has been on the show many times, Jonathan Rausch. Where were people like Teddy Roosevelt in this narrative? Were there critics from the right as well as from the left?Adam Hochschild: Good question. I first of all would give a shout out to those Republican centrists who've spoken out against Trump, the McCain Republicans. There are some good people there - Romney, of course as well. They've been very forceful. There wasn't really an equivalent to that, a direct equivalent to that in the Wilson era. Teddy Roosevelt whom you mentioned was a far more ferocious drum beater than Wilson himself and was pushing Wilson to declare war long before Wilson did. Roosevelt really believed that war was good for the soul. He desperately tried to get Wilson to appoint him to lead a volunteer force, came up with an elaborate plan for this would be a volunteer army staffed by descendants of both Union and Confederate generals and by French officers as well and homage to the Marquis de Lafayette. Wilson refused to allow Roosevelt to do this, and plus Roosevelt was, I think, 58 years old at the time. But all four of Roosevelt's sons enlisted and joined in the war, and one of them was killed. And his father was absolutely devastated by this.So there was not really that equivalent to the McCain Republicans who are resisting Trump, so to speak. In fact, what resistance there was in the U.S. came mostly from the left, and it was mostly ruthlessly silenced, all these people who went to jail. It was silenced also because this is another important part of what happened, which is different from today. When the federal government passed the Espionage Act that gave it these draconian powers, state governments, many of them passed copycat laws. In fact, a federal justice department agent actually helped draft the law in New Hampshire. Montana locked up people serving more than 60 years cumulatively of hard labor for opposing the war. California had 70 people in prison. Even my hometown of Berkeley, California passed a copycat law. So, this martial spirit really spread throughout the country at that time.Andrew Keen: So you've mentioned that Debs was the great critic and was imprisoned and got a considerable number of votes in the election. You're writing a book now about the Great Depression and FDR's involvement in it. FDR, of course, was a distant cousin of Teddy Roosevelt. At this point, he was an aspiring Democratic politician. Where was the critique within the mainstream Democratic party? Were people like FDR, who had a position in the Wilson administration, wasn't he naval secretary?Adam Hochschild: He was assistant secretary of the Navy. And he went to Europe during the war. For an aspiring politician, it's always very important to say I've been at the front. And so he went to Europe and certainly made no sign of resistance. And then in 1920, he was the democratic candidate for vice president. That ticket lost of course.Andrew Keen: And just to remind ourselves, this was before he became disabled through polio, is that correct?Adam Hochschild: That's right. That happened in the early 20s and it completely changed his life and I think quite deepened him as a person. He was a very ambitious social climbing young politician before then but I think he became something deeper. Also the political parties at the time were divided each party between right and left wings or war mongering and pacifist wings. And when the Congress voted on the war, there were six senators who voted against going to war and 50 members of the House of Representatives. And those senators and representatives came from both parties. We think of the Republican Party as being more conservative, but it had some staunch liberals in it. The most outspoken voice against the war in the Senate was Robert LaFollette of Wisconsin, who was a Republican.Andrew Keen: I know you write about La Follette in American Midnight, but couldn't one, Adam, couldn't won before the war and against domestic repression. You wrote an interesting piece recently for the New York Review of Books about the Scopes trial. William Jennings Bryan, of course, was involved in that. He was the defeated Democratic candidate, what in about three or four presidential elections in the past. In the early 20th century. What was Bryan's position on this? He had been against the war, is that correct? But I'm guessing he would have been quite critical of some of the domestic repression.Adam Hochschild: You know, I should know the answer to that, Andrew, but I don't. He certainly was against going to war. He had started out in Wilson's first term as Wilson's secretary of state and then resigned in protest against the military buildup and what he saw as a drift to war, and I give him great credit for that. I don't recall his speaking out against the repression after it began, once the US entered the war, but I could be wrong on that. It was not something that I researched. There were just so few voices speaking out. I think I would remember if he had been one of them.Andrew Keen: Adam, again, I'm thinking out loud here, so please correct me if this is a dumb question. What would it be fair to say that one of the things that distinguished the United States from the European powers during the First World War in this period it remained an incredibly insular provincial place barely involved in international politics with a population many of them were migrants themselves would come from Europe but nonetheless cut off from the world. And much of that accounted for the anti-immigrant, anti-foreign hysteria. That exists in many countries, but perhaps it was a little bit more pronounced in the America of the early 20th century, and perhaps in some ways in the early 21st century.Adam Hochschild: Well, we remain a pretty insular place in many ways. A few years ago, I remember seeing the statistic in the New York Times, I have not checked to see whether it's still the case, but I suspect it is that half the members of the United States Congress do not have passports. And we are more cut off from the world than people living in most of the countries of Europe, for example. And I think that does account for some of the tremendous feeling against immigrants and refugees. Although, of course, this is something that is common, not just in Europe, but in many countries all over the world. And I fear it's going to get all the stronger as climate change generates more and more refugees from the center of the earth going to places farther north or farther south where they can get away from parts of the world that have become almost unlivable because of climate change.Andrew Keen: I wonder Democratic Congress people perhaps aren't leaving the country because they fear they won't be let back in. What were the concrete consequences of all this? You write in your book about a young lawyer, J. Edgar Hoover, of course, who made his name in this period. He was very much involved in the Palmer Raids. He worked, I think his first job was for Palmer. How do you see this structurally? Of course, many historians, biographers of Hoover have seen this as the beginning of some sort of American security state. Is that over-reading it, exaggerating what happened in this period?Adam Hochschild: Well, security state may be too dignified a word for the hysteria that reigned in the country at that time. One of the things we've long had in the United States is a hysteria, paranoia directed at immigrants who are coming from what seems to be a new and threatening part of the world. In the mid-19th century, for example, we had the Know-Nothing Party, as it was called, who were violently opposed to Catholic immigrants coming from Ireland. Now, they were people of Anglo-Saxon descent, pretty much, who felt that these Irish Catholics were a tremendous threat to the America that they knew. There was much violence. There were people killed in riots against Catholic immigrants. There were Catholic merchants who had their stores burned and so on.Then it began to shift. The Irish sort of became acceptable, but by the end of the 19th century, beginning of the 20th century the immigrants coming from Europe were now coming primarily from southern and eastern Europe. In other words, Italians, Sicilians, Poles, and Jews. And they became the target of the anti-immigrant crusaders with much hysteria directed against them. It was further inflamed at that time by the Eugenics movement, which was something very strong, where people believed that there was a Nordic race that was somehow superior to everybody else, that the Mediterraneans were inferior people, and that the Africans were so far down the scale, barely worth talking about. And this culminated in 1924 with the passage of the Johnson-Reed Immigration Act that year, which basically slammed the door completely on immigrants coming from Asia and slowed to an absolute trickle those coming from Europe for the next 40 years or so.Andrew Keen: It wasn't until the mid-60s that immigration changed, which is often overlooked. Some people, even on the left, suggest that it was a mistake to radically reform the Immigration Act because we would have inevitably found ourselves back in this situation. What do you think about that, Adam?Adam Hochschild: Well, I think a country has the right to regulate to some degree its immigration, but there always will be immigration in this world. I mean, my ancestors all came from other countries. The Jewish side of my family, I'm half Jewish, were lucky to get out of Europe in plenty of time. Some relatives who stayed there were not lucky and perished in the Holocaust. So who am I to say that somebody fleeing a repressive regime in El Salvador or somewhere else doesn't have the right to come here? I think we should be pretty tolerant, especially if people fleeing countries where they really risk death for one reason or another. But there is always gonna be this strong anti-immigrant feeling because unscrupulous politicians like Donald Trump, and he has many predecessors in this country, can point to immigrants and blame them for the economic misfortunes that many Americans are experiencing for reasons that don't have anything to do with immigration.Andrew Keen: Fast forward Adam to today. You were involved in an interesting conversation on the Nation about the role of universities in the resistance. What do you make of this first hundred days, I was going to say hundred years that would be a Freudian error, a hundred days of the Trump regime, the role, of big law, big universities, newspapers, media outlets? In this emerging opposition, are you chilled or encouraged?Adam Hochschild: Well, I hope it's a hundred days and not a hundred years. I am moderately encouraged. I was certainly deeply disappointed at the outset to see all of those tech titans go to Washington, kiss the ring, contribute to Trump's inauguration festivities, be there in the front row. Very depressing spectacle, which kind of reminds one of how all the big German industrialists fell into line so quickly behind Hitler. And I'm particularly depressed to see the changes in the media, both the Los Angeles Times and the Washington Post becoming much more tame when it came to endorsing.Andrew Keen: One of the reasons for that, Adam, of course, is that you're a long-time professor at the journalism school at UC Berkeley, so you've been on the front lines.Adam Hochschild: So I really care about a lively press that has free expression. And we also have a huge part of the media like Fox News and One American Network and other outlets that are just pouring forth a constant fire hose of lies and falsehood.Andrew Keen: And you're being kind of calling it a fire hose. I think we could come up with other terms for it. Anyway, a sewage pipe, but that's another issue.Adam Hochschild: But I'm encouraged when I see media organizations that take a stand. There are places like the New York Times, like CNN, like MSNBC, like the major TV networks, which you can read or watch and really find an honest picture of what's going on. And I think that's a tremendously important thing for a country to have. And that you look at the countries that Donald Trump admires, like Putin's Russia, for example, they don't have this. So I value that. I want to keep it. I think that's tremendously important.I was sorry, of course, that so many of those big law firms immediately cave to these ridiculous and unprecedented demands that he made, contributing pro bono work to his causes in return for not getting banned from government buildings. Nothing like that has happened in American history before, and the people in those firms that made those decisions should really be ashamed of themselves. I was glad to see Harvard University, which happens to be my alma mater, be defiant after caving in a little bit on a couple of issues. They finally put their foot down and said no. And I must say, feeling Harvard patriotism is a very rare emotion for me. But this is the first time in 50 years that I've felt some of it.Andrew Keen: You may even give a donation, Adam.Adam Hochschild: And I hope other universities are going to follow its lead, and it looks like they will. But this is pretty unprecedented, a president coming after universities with this determined of ferocity. And he's going after nonprofit organizations as well. There will be many fights there as well, I'm sure we're just waiting to hear about the next wave of attacks which will be on places like the Ford Foundation and the Carnegie Corporation and other big nonprofits. So hold on and wait for that and I hope they are as defiant as possible too.Andrew Keen: It's a little bit jarring to hear a wise historian like yourself use the word unprecedented. Is there much else of this given that we're talking historically and the similarities with the period after the first world war, is there anything else unprecedented about Trumpism?Adam Hochschild: I think in a way, we have often had, or not often, but certainly sometimes had presidents in this country who wanted to assume almost dictatorial powers. Richard Nixon certainly is the most recent case before Trump. And he was eventually stopped and forced to leave office. Had that not happened, I think he would have very happily turned himself into a dictator. So we know that there are temptations that come with the desire for absolute power everywhere. But Trump has gotten farther along on this process and has shown less willingness to do things like abide by court orders. The way that he puts pressure on Republican members of Congress.To me, one of the most startling, disappointing, remarkable, and shocking things about these first hundred days is how very few Republican members to the House or Senate have dared to defy Trump on anything. At most, these ridiculous set of appointees that he muscled through the Senate. At most, they got three Republican votes against them. They couldn't muster the fourth necessary vote. And in the House, only one or two Republicans have voted against Trump on anything. And of course, he has threatened to have Elon Musk fund primaries against any member of Congress who does defy him. And I can't help but think that these folks must also be afraid of physical violence because Trump has let all the January 6th people out of jail and the way vigilantes like that operate is they first go after the traitors on their own side then they come for the rest of us just as in the first real burst of violence in Hitler's Germany was the night of the long knives against another faction of the Nazi Party. Then they started coming for the Jews.Andrew Keen: Finally, Adam, your wife, Arlie, is another very distinguished writer.Adam Hochschild: I've got a better picture of her than that one though.Andrew Keen: Well, I got some very nice photos. This one is perhaps a little, well she's thinking Adam. Everyone knows Arlie from her hugely successful work, "Strangers in their Own Land." She has a new book out, "Stolen Pride, Lost Shame and the Rise of the Right." I don't want to put words into Arlie's mouth and she certainly wouldn't let me do that, Adam, but would it be fair to say that her reading, certainly of recent American history, is trying to bring people back together. She talks about the lessons she learned from her therapist brother. And in some ways, I see her as a kind of marriage counselor in America. Given what's happening today in America with Trump, is this still an opportunity? This thing is going to end and it will end in some ways rather badly and perhaps bloodily one way or the other. But is this still a way to bring people, to bring Americans back together? Can America be reunited? What can we learn from American Midnight? I mean, one of the more encouraging stories I remember, and please correct me if I'm wrong. Wasn't it Coolidge or Harding who invited Debs when he left prison to the White House? So American history might be in some ways violent, but it's also made up of chapters of forgiveness.Adam Hochschild: That's true. I mean, that Debs-Harding example is a wonderful one. Here is Debs sent to prison by Woodrow Wilson for a 10-year term. And Debs, by the way, had been in jail before for his leadership of a railway strike when he was a railway workers union organizer. Labor organizing was a very dangerous profession in those days. But Debs was a fairly gentle man, deeply committed to nonviolence. About a year into, a little less than a year into his term, Warren Harding, Woodrow Wilson's successor, pardoned Debs, let him out of prison, invited him to visit the White House on his way home. And they had a half hour's chat. And when he left the building, Debs told reporters, "I've run for the White house five times, but this is the first time I've actually gotten here." Harding privately told a friend. This was revealed only after his death, that he said, "Debs was right about that war. We never should have gotten involved in it."So yeah, there can be reconciliation. There can be talk across these great differences that we have, and I think there are a number of organizations that are working on that specific project, getting people—Andrew Keen: We've done many of those shows. I'm sure you're familiar with the organization Braver Angels, which seems to be a very good group.Adam Hochschild: So I think it can be done. I really think it could be done and it has to be done and it's important for those of us who are deeply worried about Trump, as you and I are, to understand the grievances and the losses and the suffering that has made Trump's backers feel that here is somebody who can get them out of the pickle that they're in. We have to understand that, and the Democratic Party has to come up with promising alternatives for them, which it really has not done. It didn't really offer one in this last election. And the party itself is in complete disarray right now, I fear.Andrew Keen: I think perhaps Arlie should run for president. She would certainly do a better job than Kamala Harris in explaining it. And of course they're both from Berkeley. Finally, Adam, you're very familiar with the history of Africa, Southern Africa, your family I think was originally from there. Might we need after all this, when hopefully the smoke clears, might we need a Mandela style truth and reconciliation committee to make sense of what's happening?Adam Hochschild: My family's actually not from there, but they were in business there.Andrew Keen: Right, they were in the mining business, weren't they?Adam Hochschild: That's right. Truth and Reconciliation Committee. Well, I don't think it would be on quite the same model as South Africa's. But I certainly think we need to find some way of talking across the differences that we have. Coming from the left side of that divide I just feel all too often when I'm talking to people who feel as I do about the world that there is a kind of contempt or disinterest in Trump's backers. These are people that I want to understand, that we need to understand. We need to understand them in order to hear what their real grievances are and to develop alternative policies that are going to give them a real alternative to vote for. Unless we can do that, we're going to have Trump and his like for a long time, I fear.Andrew Keen: Wise words, Adam. I hope in the next 500 episodes of this show, things will improve. We'll get you back on the show, keep doing your important work, and I'm very excited to learn more about your new project, which we'll come to in the next few months or certainly years. Thank you so much.Adam Hochschild: OK, thank you, Andrew. Good being with you. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit keenon.substack.com/subscribe

Enjoying the show? Subscribe to hear the rest of How Do We Fix It? episodes!

Many Americans think Trump is harming democracy; they see him as acting undemocratically in various ways. At the same time, Republicans and Trump supporters can view Democrats/liberals as themselves acting in highly undemocratic ways: as embracing various beliefs and actions that violate the spirit of democracy. I talk to Elizabeth Doll, who has worked in the political depolarization/bridge-building space for several years; she is currently the Director of Braver Politics for the organization Braver Angels. She is also someone who has been frustrated with various stances of liberal “defenders of democracy” that she sees as undemocratic and hypocritical. Topics discussed include: why anti-Trump people should want to understand these criticisms; various Republican-side views that liberals have behaved “undemocratically,” the debate over the electoral college; the debate over adding Supreme Court justices (stacking the court); the ambiguity in the word “democracy” and how that ambiguity leads to many things being called “undemocratic,"; why trying to understand each others' concerns is important for reducing toxicity, and more. Learn more and sign up for a premium subscription at PeopleWhoReadPeople.com.

We release this show at a moment of high political drama. Economics, financial markets, and America's relations with the rest of the world are in a state of tumult. So how on earth do we talk with and listen to people on the other side? Should you even try? Jessie Mannisto, Director of Debates at Braver Angels says “yes!” In this episode we learn why understanding those who you disagree with is a vital first step to repairing civic relations. We discuss the First 100 Days Debates: “Is President Trump Making America Great?” Braver Angels is holding a series of structured debates this spring on birthright citizenship, DEI, foreign policy, the limits of executive power and more.Everyone has an opinion about the President and his Administration. “Right now we are all in some way emotionally activated, whether with triumph or with fear and anger,” Jess tells How Do We Fix It? host Richard Davies. “At Braver Angels we are coming together to try to live well in a polarized time.”This episode is our latest report on the people, projects, and ideas of America's largest cross-partisan group that's boosting civic friendship. Bringing Americans together to bridge the partisan divide and strengthen our democratic republic is vital work. At a time of so much anger and misunderstanding the repair of our national conversation may be the biggest challenge the nation faces. Subscribe to our podcast. Like us at your favorite podcast platform. Head to Braver Angels to learn more about the work they're doing.Jessie Mannisto came to Braver Angels as a volunteer after being "cancelled" by friends for disagreeing with some of their political views—an experience that led her to seek a space where she could, in the words of the Braver Angels Way, "speak freely and fully without fear." Now she works to cultivate such a space for others, regardless of their beliefs. She also trains Braver Angels members to chair their own debates; one major part of this is mastering our own responses to fear and anger so that we can support others in doing the same, learning from those emotions what they are trying to tell us and using this information constructively.Before joining Braver Angels, Jessie served as a leadership analyst at the Central Intelligence Agency focusing on Eastern Europe. She is also the founder and editor emerita of Third Factor, a magazine and membership community for creative and intellectually excitable people striving to develop and live by their values. She is a native of Detroit, Michigan. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It's a small world. The great David Rieff came to my San Francisco studio today for in person interview about his new anti-woke polemic Desire and Fate. And half way through our conversation, he brought up Daniel Bessner's This Is America piece which Bessner discussed on yesterday's show. I'm not sure what that tells us about wokeness, a subject which Rieff and I aren't in agreement. For him, it's the thing-in-itself which make sense of our current cultural malaise. Thus Desire and Fate, his attempt (with a great intro from John Banville) to wake us up from Wokeness. For me, it's a distraction. I've included the full transcript below. Lots of good stuff to chew on. Keen On America is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. 5 KEY TAKEAWAYS * Rieff views "woke" ideology as primarily American and post-Protestant in nature, rather than stemming solely from French philosophy, emphasizing its connections to self-invention and subjective identity.* He argues that woke culture threatens high culture but not capitalism, noting that corporations have readily embraced a "baudlerized" version of identity politics that avoids class discussions.* Rieff sees woke culture as connected to the wellness movement, with both sharing a preoccupation with "psychic safety" and the metaphorical transformation of experience in which "words” become a form of “violence."* He suggests young people's material insecurity contributes to their focus on identity, as those facing bleak economic prospects turn inward when they "can't make their way in the world."* Rieff characterizes woke ideology as "apocalyptic but not pessimistic," contrasting it with his own genuine pessimism which he considers more realistic about human nature and more cheerful in its acceptance of life's limitations. FULL TRANSCRIPTAndrew Keen: Hello everybody, as we digest Trump 2.0, we don't talk that much these days about woke and woke ideology. There was a civil war amongst progressives, I think, on the woke front in 2023 and 2024, but with Donald Trump 2.0 and his various escapades, let's just talk these days about woke. We have a new book, however, on the threat of woke by my guest, David Rieff. It's called Desire and Fate. He wrote it in 2023, came out in late 2024. David's visiting the Bay Area. He's an itinerant man traveling from the East Coast to Latin America and Europe. David, welcome to Keen on America. Do you regret writing this book given what's happened in the last few months in the United States?David Rieff: No, not at all, because I think that the road to moral and intellectual hell is trying to censor yourself according to what you think is useful. There's a famous story of Jean Paul Sartre that he said to the stupefaction of a journalist late in his life that he'd always known about the gulag, and the journalist pretty surprised said, well, why didn't you say anything? And Sartre said so as not to demoralize the French working class. And my own view is, you know, you say what you have to say about this and if I give some aid and comfort to people I don't like, well, so be it. Having said that, I also think a lot of these woke ideas have their, for all of Trump's and Trump's people's fierce opposition to woke, some of the identity politics, particularly around Jewish identity seems to me not that very different from woke. Strangely they seem to have taken, for example, there's a lot of the talk about anti-semitism on college campuses involves student safety which is a great woke trope that you feel unsafe and what people mean by that is not literally they're going to get shot or beaten up, they mean that they feel psychically unsafe. It's part of the kind of metaphorization of experience that unfortunately the United States is now completely in the grips of. But the same thing on the other side, people like Barry Weiss, for example, at the Free Press there, they talk in the same language of psychic safety. So I'm not sure there's, I think there are more similarities than either side is comfortable with.Andrew Keen: You describe Woke, David, as a cultural revolution and you associated in the beginning of the book with something called Lumpen-Rousseauism. As we joked before we went live, I'm not sure if there's anything in Rousseau which isn't Lumpen. But what exactly is this cultural revolution? And can we blame it on bad French philosophy or Swiss French?David Rieff: Well, Swiss-French philosophy, you know exactly. There is a funny anecdote, as I'm sure you know, that Rousseau made a visit to Edinburgh to see Hume and there's something in Hume's diaries where he talks about Rousseau pacing up and down in front of the fire and suddenly exclaiming, but David Hume is not a bad man. And Hume notes in his acerbic way, Rousseau was like walking around without his skin on. And I think some of the woke sensitivity stuff is very much people walking around without their skin on. They can't stand the idea of being offended. I don't see it as much - of course, the influence of that version of cultural relativism that the French like Deleuze and Guattari and other people put forward is part of the story, but I actually see it as much more of a post-Protestant thing. This idea, in that sense, some kind of strange combination of maybe some French philosophy, but also of the wellness movement, of this notion that health, including psychic health, was the ultimate good in a secular society. And then the other part, which again, it seems to be more American than French, which is this idea, and this is particularly true in the trans movement, that you can be anything you want to be. And so that if you feel yourself to be a different gender, well, that's who you are. And what matters is your own subjective sense of these things, and it's up to you. The outside world has no say in it, it's what you feel. And that in a sense, what I mean by post-Protestant is that, I mean, what's the difference between Protestantism and Catholicism? The fundamental difference is, it seems to me, that in Roman Catholic tradition, you need the priest to intercede with God, whereas in Protestant tradition, it is, except for the Anglicans, but for most of Protestantism, it's you and God. And in that sense it seems to me there are more of what I see in woke than this notion that some of the right-wing people like Chris Rufo and others have that this is cultural French cultural Marxism making its insidious way through the institutions.Andrew Keen: It's interesting you talk about the Protestant ethic and you mentioned Hume's remark about Rousseau not having his skin on. Do you think that Protestantism enabled people to grow thick skins?David Rieff: I mean, the Calvinist idea certainly did. In fact, there were all these ideas in Protestant culture, at least that's the classical interpretation of deferred gratification. Capitalism was supposed to be the work ethic, all of that stuff that Weber talks about. But I think it got in the modern version. It became something else. It stopped being about those forms of disciplines and started to be about self-invention. And in a sense, there's something very American about that because after all you know it's the Great Gatsby. It's what's the famous sentence of F. Scott Fitzgerald's: there are no second acts in American lives.Andrew Keen: This is the most incorrect thing anyone's ever said about America. I'm not sure if he meant it to be incorrect, did he? I don't know.David Rieff: I think what's true is that you get the American idea, you get to reinvent yourself. And this notion of the dream, the dream become reality. And many years ago when I was spending a lot of time in LA in the late 80s, early 90s, at LAX, there was a sign from the then mayor, Tom Bradley, about how, you know, if you can dream it, it can be true. And I think there's a lot in identitarian woke idea which is that we can - we're not constricted by history or reality. In fact, it's all the present and the future. And so to me again, woke seems to me much more recognizable as something American and by extension post-Protestant in the sense that you see the places where woke is most powerful are in the other, what the encampment kids would call settler colonies, Australia and Canada. And now in the UK of course, where it seems to me by DI or EDI as they call it over there is in many ways stronger in Britain even than it was in the US before Trump.Andrew Keen: Does it really matter though, David? I mean, that's my question. Does it matter? I mean it might matter if you have the good or the bad fortune to teach at a small, expensive liberal arts college. It might matter with some of your dinner parties in Tribeca or here in San Francisco, but for most people, who cares?David Rieff: It doesn't matter. I think it matters to culture and so what you think culture is worth, because a lot of the point of this book was to say there's nothing about woke that threatens capitalism, that threatens the neo-liberal order. I mean it's turning out that Donald Trump is a great deal bigger threat to the neoliberal order. Woke was to the contrary - woke is about talking about everything but class. And so a kind of baudlerized, de-radicalized version of woke became perfectly fine with corporate America. That's why this wonderful old line hard lefty Adolph Reed Jr. says somewhere that woke is about diversifying the ruling class. But I do think it's a threat to high culture because it's about equity. It's about representation. And so elite culture, which I have no shame in proclaiming my loyalty to, can't survive the woke onslaught. And it hasn't, in my view. If you look at just the kinds of books that are being written, the kinds of plays that are been put on, even the opera, the new operas that are being commissioned, they're all about representing the marginalized. They're about speaking for your group, whatever that group is, and doing away with various forms of cultural hierarchy. And I'm with Schoenberg: if it's for everybody, if it's art, Schoenberg said it's not for everybody, and if it's for everybody it's not art. And I think woke destroys that. Woke can live with schlock. I'm sorry, high culture can live with schlock, it always has, it always will. What it can't live with is kitsch. And by which I mean kitsch in Milan Kundera's definition, which is to have opinions that you feel better about yourself for holding. And that I think is inimical to culture. And I think woke is very destructive of those traditions. I mean, in the most obvious sense, it's destructive of the Western tradition, but you know, the high arts in places like Japan or Bengal, I don't think it's any more sympathetic to those things than it is to Shakespeare or John Donne or whatever. So yeah, I think it's a danger in that sense. Is it a danger to the peace of the world? No, of course not.Andrew Keen: Even in cultural terms, as you explain, it is an orthodoxy. If you want to work with the dominant cultural institutions, the newspapers, the universities, the publishing houses, you have to play by those rules, but the great artists, poets, filmmakers, musicians have never done that, so all it provides, I mean you brought up Kundera, all it provides is something that independent artists, creative people will sneer at, will make fun of, as you have in this new book.David Rieff: Well, I hope they'll make fun of it. But on the other hand, I'm an old guy who has the means to sneer. I don't have to please an editor. Someone will publish my books one way or another, whatever ones I have left to write. But if you're 25 years old, maybe you're going to sneer with your pals in the pub, but you're gonna have to toe the line if you want to be published in whatever the obvious mainstream place is and you're going to be attacked on social media. I think a lot of people who are very, young people who are skeptical of this are just so afraid of being attacked by their peers on various social media that they keep quiet. I don't know that it's true that, I'd sort of push back on that. I think non-conformists will out. I hope it's true. But I wonder, I mean, these traditions, once they die, they're very hard to rebuild. And, without going full T.S. Eliot on you, once you don't think you're part of the past, once the idea is that basically, pretty much anything that came before our modern contemporary sense of morality and fairness and right opinion is to be rejected and that, for example, the moral character of the artist should determine whether or not the art should be paid attention to - I don't know how you come back from that or if you come back from that. I'm not convinced you do. No, other arts will be around. And I mean, if I were writing a critical review of my own book, I'd say, look, this culture, this high culture that you, David Rieff, are writing an elegy for, eulogizing or memorializing was going to die anyway, and we're at the beginning of another Gutenbergian epoch, just as Gutenberg, we're sort of 20 years into Marshall McLuhan's Gutenberg galaxy, and these other art forms will come, and they won't be like anything else. And that may be true.Andrew Keen: True, it may be true. In a sense then, to extend that critique, are you going full T.S. Eliot in this book?David Rieff: Yeah, I think Eliot was right. But it's not just Eliot, there are people who would be for the wokesters more acceptable like Mandelstam, for example, who said you're part of a conversation that's been going on long before you were born, that's going to be going on after you are, and I think that's what art is. I think the idea that we make some completely new thing is a childish fantasy. I think you belong to a tradition. There are periods - look, this is, I don't find much writing in English in prose fiction very interesting. I have to say I read the books that people talk about because I'm trying to understand what's going on but it doesn't interest me very much, but again, there have been periods of great mediocrity. Think of a period in the late 17th century in England when probably the best poet was this completely, rightly, justifiably forgotten figure, Colley Cibber. You had the great restoration period and then it all collapsed, so maybe it'll be that way. And also, as I say, maybe it's just as with the print revolution, that this new culture of social media will produce completely different forms. I mean, everything is mortal, not just us, but cultures and civilizations and all the rest of it. So I can imagine that, but this is the time I live in and the tradition I come from and I'm sorry it's gone, and I think what's replacing it is for the most part worse.Andrew Keen: You're critical in the book of what you, I'm quoting here, you talk about going from the grand inquisitor to the grand therapist. But you're very critical of the broader American therapeutic culture of acute sensitivity, the thin skin nature of, I guess, the Rousseau in this, whatever, it's lumpen Rousseauanism. So how do you interpret that without psychologizing, or are you psychologizing in the book? How are you making sense of our condition? In other words, can one critique criticize therapeutic culture without becoming oneself therapeutic?David Rieff: You mean the sort of Pogo line, we've met the enemy and it is us. Well, I suppose there's some truth to that. I don't know how much. I think that woke is in some important sense a subset of the wellness movement. And the wellness movement after all has tens and tens of millions of people who are in one sense or another influenced by it. And I think health, including psychic health, and we've moved from wellness as corporal health to wellness as being both soma and psyche. So, I mean, if that's psychologizing, I certainly think it's drawing the parallel or seeing woke in some ways as one of the children of the god of wellness. And that to me, I don't know how therapeutic that is. I think it's just that once you feel, I'm interested in what people feel. I'm not necessarily so interested in, I mean, I've got lots of opinions, but what I think I'm better at than having opinions is trying to understand why people think what they think. And I do think that once health becomes the ultimate good in a secular society and once death becomes the absolutely unacceptable other, and once you have the idea that there's no real distinction of any great validity between psychic and physical wellness, well then of course sensitivity to everything becomes almost an inevitable reaction.Andrew Keen: I was reading the book and I've been thinking about a lot of movements in America which are trying to bring people together, dealing with America, this divided America, as if it's a marriage in crisis. So some of the most effective or interesting, I think, thinkers on this, like Arlie Hochschild in Berkeley, use the language of therapy to bring or to try to bring America back together, even groups like the Braver Angels. Can therapy have any value or that therapeutic culture in a place like America where people are so bitterly divided, so hateful towards one another?David Rieff: Well, it's always been a country where, on the one hand, people have been, as you say, incredibly good at hatred and also a country of people who often construe themselves as misfits and heretics from the Puritans forward. And on the other hand, you have that small-town American idea, which sometimes I think is as important to woke and DI as as anything else which is that famous saying of small town America of all those years ago which was if you don't have something nice to say don't say anything at all. And to some extent that is, I think, a very powerful ancestor of these movements. Whether they're making any headway - of course I hope they are, but Hochschild is a very interesting figure, but I don't, it seems to me it's going all the other way, that people are increasingly only talking to each other.Andrew Keen: What this movement seems to want to do is get beyond - I use this word carefully, I'm not sure if they use it but I'm going to use it - ideology and that we're all prisoners of ideology. Is woke ideology or is it a kind of post-ideology?David Rieff: Well, it's a redemptive idea, a restorative idea. It's an idea that in that sense, there's a notion that it's time for the victims, for the first to be last and the last to be first. I mean, on some level, it is as simple as that. On another level, as I say, I do think it has a lot to do with metaphorization of experience, that people say silence is violence and words are violence and at that point what's violence? I mean there is a kind of level to me where people have gotten trapped in the kind of web of their own metaphors and now are living by them or living shackled to them or whatever image you're hoping for. But I don't know what it means to get beyond ideology. What, all men will be brothers, as in the Beethoven-Schiller symphony? I mean, it doesn't seem like that's the way things are going.Andrew Keen: Is the problem then, and I'm thinking out loud here, is the problem politics or not enough politics?David Rieff: Oh, I think the problem is that now we don't know, we've decided that everything is part, the personal is the political, as the feminists said, 50, 60 years ago. So the personal's political, so the political is the personal. So you have to live the exemplary moral life, or at least the life that doesn't offend anybody or that conforms to whatever the dominant views of what good opinions are, right opinions are. I think what we're in right now is much more the realm of kind of a new set of moral codes, much more than ideology in the kind of discrete sense of politics.Andrew Keen: Now let's come back to this idea of being thin-skinned. Why are people so thin-skinned?David Rieff: Because, I mean, there are lots of things to say about that. One thing, of course, that might be worth saying, is that the young generations, people who are between, let's say, 15 and 30, they're in real material trouble. It's gonna be very hard for them to own a house. It's hard for them to be independent and unless the baby boomers like myself will just transfer every penny to them, which doesn't seem very likely frankly, they're going to live considerably worse than generations before. So if you can't make your way in the world then maybe you make your way yourself or you work on yourself in that sort of therapeutic sense. You worry about your own identity because the only place you have in the world in some way is yourself, is that work, that obsession. I do think some of these material questions are important. There's a guy you may know who's not at all woke, a guy who teaches at the University of Washington called Danny Bessner. And I just did a show with him this morning. He's a smart guy and we have a kind of ironic correspondence over email and DM. And I once said to him, why are you so bitter about everything? And he said, you want to know why? Because I have two children and the likelihood is I'll never get a teaching job that won't require a three hour commute in order for me to live anywhere that I can afford to live. And I thought, and he couldn't be further from woke, he's a kind of Jacobin guy, Jacobin Magazine guy, and if he's left at all, it's kind of old left, but I think a lot of people feel that, that they feel their practical future, it looks pretty grim.Andrew Keen: But David, coming back to the idea of art, they're all suited to the world of art. They don't have to buy a big house and live in the suburbs. They can become poets. They can become filmmakers. They can put their stuff up on YouTube. They can record their music online. There are so many possibilities.David Rieff: It's hard to monetize that. Maybe now you're beginning to sound like the people you don't like. Now you're getting to sound like a capitalist.Andrew Keen: So what? Well, I don't care if I sound like a capitalist. You're not going to starve to death.David Rieff: Well, you might not like, I mean, it's fine to be a barista at 24. It's not so fine at 44. And are these people going to ever get out of this thing? I don't know. I wonder. Look, when I was starting as a writer, as long as you were incredibly diligent, and worked really hard, you could cobble together at least a basic living by accepting every assignment and people paid you bits and bobs of money, but put together, you could make a living. Now, the only way to make money, unless you're lucky enough to be on staff of a few remaining media outlets that remain, is you have to become an impresario, you have become an entrepreneur of your own stuff. And again, sure, do lots of people manage that? Yeah, but not as many as could have worked in that other system, and look at the fate of most newspapers, all folding. Look at the universities. We can talk about woke and how woke destroyed, in my view anyway, a lot of the humanities. But there's also a level in which people didn't want to study these things. So we're looking at the last generation in a lot places of a lot of these humanities departments and not just the ones that are associated with, I don't know, white supremacy or the white male past or whatever, but just the humanities full stop. So I know if that sounds like, maybe it sounds like a capitalist, but maybe it also sounds like you know there was a time when the poets - you know very well, poets never made a living, poets taught in universities. That's the way American poets made their money, including pretty famous poets like Eric Wolcott or Joseph Brodsky or writers, Toni Morrison taught at Princeton all those years, Joyce Carol Oates still alive, she still does. Most of these people couldn't make a living of their work and so the university provided that living.Andrew Keen: You mentioned Barry Weiss earlier. She's making a fortune as an anti-woke journalist. And Free Press seems to be thriving. Yascha Mounk's Persuasion is doing pretty well. Andrew Sullivan, another good example, making a fortune off of Substack. It seems as if the people willing to take risks, Barry Weiss leaving the New York Times, Andrew Sullivan leaving everything he's ever joined - that's...David Rieff: Look, are there going to be people who thrive in this new environment? Sure. And Barry Weiss turns out to be this kind of genius entrepreneur. She deserves full credit for that. Although even Barry Weiss, the paradox for me of Barry Weiss is, a lot of her early activism was saying that she felt unsafe with these anti-Israeli teachers at Columbia. So in a sense, she was using some of the same language as the woke use, psychic safety, because she didn't mean Joseph Massad was gonna come out from the blackboard and shoot her in the eye. She meant that she was offended and used the language of safety to describe that. And so in that sense, again, as I was saying to you earlier, I think there are more similarities here. And Trump, I think this is a genuine counterrevolution that Trump is trying to mount. I'm not very interested in the fascism, non-fascism debate. I'm rather skeptical of it.Andrew Keen: As Danny Bessner is. Yeah, I thought Danny's piece about that was brilliant.David Rieff: We just did a show about it today, that piece about why that's all rubbish. I was tempted, I wrote to a friend that guy you may know David Bell teaches French history -Andrew Keen: He's coming on the show next week. Well, you see, it's just a little community of like-minded people.David Rieff: There you go. Well, I wrote to David.Andrew Keen: And you mentioned his father in the book, Daniel.David Rieff: Yeah, well, his father is sort of one of the tutelary idols of the book. I had his father and I read his father and I learned an enormous amount. I think that book about the cultural contradictions of capitalism is one of the great prescient books about our times. But I wrote to David, I said, I actually sent him the Bessner piece which he was quite ambivalent about. But I said well, I'm not really convinced by the fascism of Trump, maybe just because Hitler read books, unlike Donald Trump. But it's a genuine counterrevolution. And what element will change the landscape in terms of DI and woke and identitarianism is not clear. These people are incredibly ambitious. They really mean to change this country, transform it.Andrew Keen: But from the book, David, Trump's attempts to cleanse, if that's the right word, the university, I would have thought you'd have rather admired that, all these-David Rieff: I agree with some of it.Andrew Keen: All these idiots writing the same article for 30 years about something that no one has any interest in.David Rieff: I look, my problem with Trump is that I do support a lot of that. I think some of the stuff that Christopher Rufo, one of the leading ideologues of this administration has uncovered about university programs and all of this crap, I think it's great that they're not paying for it anymore. The trouble is - you asked me before, is it that important? Is culture important compared to destroying the NATO alliance, blowing up the global trade regime? No. I don't think. So yeah, I like a lot of what they're doing about the university, I don't like, and I am very fiercely opposed to this crackdown on speech. That seems to be grotesque and revolting, but are they canceling supporting transgender theater in Galway? Yeah, I think it's great that they're canceling all that stuff. And so I'm not, that's my problem with Trump, is that some of that stuff I'm quite unashamedly happy about, but it's not nearly worth all the damage he's doing to this country and the world.Andrew Keen: Being very generous with your time, David. Finally, in the book you describe woke as, and I thought this was a very sharp way of describing it, describe it as being apocalyptic but not pessimistic. What did you mean by that? And then what is the opposite of woke? Would it be not apocalyptic, but cheerful?David Rieff: Well, I think genuine pessimists are cheerful, I would put myself among those. The model is Samuel Beckett, who just thinks things are so horrible that why not be cheerful about them, and even express one's pessimism in a relatively cheerful way. You remember the famous story that Thomas McCarthy used to tell about walking in the Luxembourg Gardens with Beckett and McCarthy says to him, great day, it's such a beautiful day, Sam. Beckett says, yeah, beautiful day. McCarthy says, makes you glad to be alive. And Beckett said, oh, I wouldn't go that far. And so, the genuine pessimist is quite cheerful. But coming back to woke, it's apocalyptic in the sense that everything is always at stake. But somehow it's also got this reformist idea that cultural revolution will cleanse away the sins of the supremacist patriarchal past and we'll head for the sunny uplands. I think I'm much too much of a pessimist to think that's possible in any regime, let alone this rather primitive cultural revolution called woke.Andrew Keen: But what would the opposite be?David Rieff: The opposite would be probably some sense that the best we're going to do is make our peace with the trash nature of existence, that life is finite in contrast with the wellness people who probably have a tendency towards the apocalyptic because death is an insult to them. So everything is staving off the bad news and that's where you get this idea that you can, like a lot of revolutions, you can change the nature of people. Look, the communist, Che Guevara talked about the new man. Well, I wonder if he thought it was so new when he was in Bolivia. I think these are - people need utopias, this is one of them, MAGA is another utopia by the way, and people don't seem to be able to do without them and that's - I wish it were otherwise but it isn't.Andrew Keen: I'm guessing the woke people would be offended by the idea of death, are they?David Rieff: Well, I think the woke people, in this synchronicity, people and a lot of people, they're insulted - how can this happen to me, wonderful me? And this is those jokes in the old days when the British could still be savage before they had to have, you know, Henry the Fifth be played by a black actor - why me? Well, why not you? That's just so alien to and it's probably alien to the American idea. You're supposed to - it's supposed to work out and the truth is it doesn't work out. But La Rochefoucauld says somewhere no one can stare for too long at death or the sun and maybe I'm asking too much.Andrew Keen: Maybe only Americans can find death unacceptable to use one of your words.David Rieff: Yes, perhaps.Andrew Keen: Well, David Rieff, congratulations on the new book. Fascinating, troubling, controversial as always. Desire and Fate. I know you're writing a book about Oppenheimer, very different kind of subject. We'll get you back on the show to talk Oppenheimer, where I guess there's not going to be a lot of Lumpen-Rousseauism.David Rieff: Very little, very little love and Rousseau in the quantum mechanics world, but thanks for having me.Keen On America is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit keenon.substack.com/subscribe

Coming up on this week's edition of The Spark Weekly. Braver Angels ran a local workshop this past November, just before the holidays. This workshop helps participants understand the different roles family members play in family conversations and what can be done to prevent family divisions over politics. also on the program... We’ll be focusing on the Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, which is embarking on its ten-year historic preservation plan. We’ll also ask about the recent move by the PA State Archive into a new building, and have you ever wondered how to apply for a blue and gold historic marker?Support WITF: https://www.witf.org/support/give-now/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Wilk Wilkinson is a Christian conservative and host of the 'Derate The Hate' podcast. Through his podcast and volunteer leadership with Braver Angels inspires others to embrace a cross-partisan organization dedicated to political depolarization in America." braverangels.orgSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The organization Braver Angels joined us to share practical tools for navigating political conversations at the family dinner table without letting them divide us. In November, a local PA Braver Angels workshop helped participants understand the difference roles family members play in family conversations and what can be done to prevent family divisions over politics.Support WITF: https://www.witf.org/support/give-now/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this episode, host Corey Nathan welcomes back Monica Guzmán, Senior Fellow for Public Practice at Braver Angels, host of A Braver Way podcast, CEO of Reclaim Curiosity, and author of I Never Thought of It That Way: How to Have Fearlessly Curious Conversations in Dangerously Divided Times. Monica's mission is to help bridge America's political divides through fearless curiosity. With deep reflections on the 2024 election, evolving friendships across ideological lines, and her renewed commitment to bridge building, Monica shares how we can stay grounded and connected—especially when it feels impossible. What We Discuss: How Moni processes political polarization and stays grounded—even when the world feels divided Practical strategies for engaging with people across ideological lines without compromising your values Why shared outrage across political lines can be a gateway to unity The role of empathy, humility, and curiosity in depolarizing conversations How journalists and moderators can better navigate falsehoods without censoring legitimate concerns Episode Highlights: [00:03:00] – Mónica explains how her emotional radar helps her know when to seek out conversations with people who see politics differently. [00:08:00] – Unexpected agreement: conservatives and liberals are both frustrated with Congressional dysfunction and executive overreach. [00:14:00] – Moni shares how talking with people who had different experiences during COVID reshaped her understanding and empathy. [00:21:00] – Corey and Mónica discuss boundaries in bridge building—when is it time to walk away from a relationship? [00:29:00] – Moderating contentious conversations: “police the structure, not the content.” [00:36:00] – The relationship between activism and dialogue—and why one without the other can be reckless or ineffective. [00:46:00] – Tips for recognizing quality journalism and avoiding emotionally manipulative content. [00:56:00] – Mónica's closing advice: engagement is not endorsement. Curiosity and conversation don't mean you're compromising your values. Featured Quotes: “I've been persuaded over and over again that positions against mine are not ludicrous.” – Mónica Guzmán “Engagement is not endorsement. Having a conversation doesn't mean you're capitulating.” – Mónica Guzmán “Find your edge—and push it. That's all you need to do to build a bridge.” – Mónica Guzmán “I don't want a decision or a position to get in the way of our relationship. I want to understand it better.” – Corey Nathan Resources Mentioned: I Never Thought of It That Way by Monica Guzmán - moniguzman.com/book Braver Angels - braverangels.org

Enjoying the show? Subscribe to hear the rest of How Do We Fix It? episodes!

I don't do this work in optimism. I do it in hope”, Braver Angels President David Blankenhorn tells our podcast. “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. Last summer, 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. The work continues every day all across America.We are releasing this repeat episode of our 2024 interview with David, recorded at Braver Angels offices in New York. This June he will transition from his role as Braver Angels President. Episode 416 includes more of our conversation and David's thoughts.This episode is the latest in our series of reports on the people, projects and ideas of Braver Angels. For the past ten years, How Do We Fix It? has featured lively and creative cross-partisan interviews with a broad range of authors, journalists and public thinkers. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Have a comment? Send us a text! (We read all of them but can't reply). Email us: Will@faithfulpoliticspodcast.comIn recent years, American Christianity has undergone a profound transformation—and it's reshaping the foundations of our democracy. In this episode, we talk with Jonathan Rauch, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and author of Cross Purposes: Christianity's Broken Bargain with Democracy. A self-described atheist, Jew, and gay man, Rauch argues that liberal democracy has long depended on the moral framework Christianity provides—and that its collapse is fueling political dysfunction, extremism, and civic decay. Together with hosts Will Wright and Pastor Josh Burtram, Rauch explores the historical role of faith in sustaining democratic virtue, the dangers of Christian nationalism, and what it would take for the church to renew itself for the 21st century.Guest Bio:Jonathan Rauch is a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and a contributing writer at The Atlantic. He is the author of several books, including The Constitution of Knowledge and Cross Purposes: Christianity's Broken Bargain with Democracy. Rauch specializes in civil discourse, political philosophy, and the health of liberal democracy.Resources & Links:

For the video of this episode, go to https://brucechalmer.com/wilk-wilkinson/. We've had many wonderful guests, and like parents with their children, I don't want to compare them. But I do think this is one of our most important episodes. Our guest, Wilk Wilkinson, is a Christian conservative who has taken on the mission of helping this country heal from what he terms toxic polarity. Through his own “Derate the Hate” podcast, as well as his work as a volunteer with Braver Angels and the Prohuman Foundation, Wilk fosters respectful conversation among people across the political spectrum. Wilk's website is https://deratethehate.com/ Do you have ideas for topics or guests for our podcast? Go to https://ctin7.com and send us a message. And you can also sign up for Dr. Chalmer's newsletter right from our homepage. Our sponsor is The Blue Tent: Erotic Tales from the Bible by Laria Zylber. Find out more at https://lariazylber.com. Bruce's latest book, Betrayal and Forgiveness: How to Navigate the Turmoil and Learn to Trust Again is now available! More information at https://brucechalmer.com/betrayal-and-forgiveness/. And here's the link to leave a review: https://www.amazon.com/review/create-review?&asin=B0D4B6KL79

Nina Turner, former Ohio State Senator, and co-host of the radio program “Truth Time,” and the national spokesperson for Braver Angels, John Wood Jr., talk about trending political topics.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/tavis-smiley--6286410/support.

Enjoying the show? Subscribe to hear the rest of How Do We Fix It? episodes!

Coming up on this week's edition of the spark weekly. Avian Flu has been impacting Pennsylvania’s farms for nearly two years now. The virus has had a major impact on poultry farmers across the state. Our Braver Angels segment for the month of March was about the Braver Angels National Community Debate – National Debate Series: Trump’s First 100 days. This free national debate offers participants from across the ideological spectrum will have an opportunity to speak and ask their questions. There will also be opportunities for participants to share their experiences in the past 100 days as well. Support WITF: https://www.witf.org/support/give-now/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Mónica Guzmán is author of I Never Thought of it That Way: How to Have Fearlessly Curious Conversations in Dangerously Divided Times; founder and CEO of Reclaim Curiosity; Senior Fellow for Public Practice at Braver Angels; and host of A Braver Way podcast. In this week's conversation, Yascha Mounk and Mónica Guzmán discuss how to build trust across political divides and the joy of heated debates. Please do listen and spread the word about The Good Fight. If you have not yet signed up for our podcast, please do so now by following this link on your phone. Email: podcast@persuasion.community  Website: http://www.persuasion.community Podcast production by Mickey Freeland, and Leonora Barclay Connect with us! Spotify | Apple | Google Twitter: @Yascha_Mounk & @joinpersuasion Youtube: Yascha Mounk LinkedIn: Persuasion Community Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Our Braver Angels segment for the month of March was about the Braver Angels National Community Debate – National Debate Series: Trump’s First 100 days. This free national debate offers participants from across the ideological spectrum will have an opportunity to speak and ask their questions. There will also be opportunities for participants to share their experiences in the past 100 days as well. John Wood Jr, National Ambassador for Braver Angels provided insight into the new initiative. Listen to the podcast to hear the conversation. Support WITF: https://www.witf.org/support/give-now/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Welcome to In Reality, the podcast about Truth, Disinformation and the Media with Eric Schurenberg, a long-time journalist and media exec, now the founder of the Alliance for Trust in Media.  In Reality is dedicated to the proposition that there is such a thing as objective truth and that the pursuit of it is a noble effort, one that over the centuries has increased human well being. Some objectively verifiable claims are the source of division in the US right now: the 2020 Presidential election was, in fact, legitimate. The covid pandemic was real, not a hoax. But that doesn't mean everyone accepts those facts. And if we are going to thrive as a democracy, if we are going to rebuild trust in the institutions crucial to that form of government, including media, we need to be able to get past differences. Not just on facts, but also on the matters of opinion, or faith, or moral judgment that divide us. That's where today's guest comes in.Monica Guzman is the senior fellow for public practice at Braver Angels, an organization devoted to sparking civil conversations across the political divide, also author of a book Eric enjoyed: I Never Thought of it That Way. How to Have Fearless Conversations in Dangerously Divided Times. They talk about the search for commonality even in our most divisive issues and the power of curiosity. Website - free episode transcriptswww.in-reality.fmProduced by Tom Platts at Sound Sapiensoundsapien.comAlliance for Trust in Mediaalliancefortrust.com

Hometown Radio 02/24/25 3:30p: Spotlight on the group "Braver Angels"

(Use first three paragraphs for page one)#426 Braver Angels. Learning & Listening Across Political Divides: Wilk WilkinsonWhat do you think of people who you totally disagree with about politics? Can you listen to their point of view and have a constructive conversation? Do you dismiss the other side as evil or deplorable?In this episode we hear from Wilk Wilkinson, a Christian conservative who voted for Donald Trump. He has working class roots and grew up poor. A decade ago Wilk was enraged at liberals, but today he's working closely with both reds and blues at Braver Angels to turn down the volume on loathing and distrust.“There's no reason why I can't have civil conversations with people on the blue side”, says Wilk. “We cannot get stuck in this idea that just because politically we don't see eye-to-eye we are enemies.”Wilk's podcast is “Derate the Hate.” He's had “guests from all over the spectrum and talked about gratitude, forgiveness, and personal accountability” with authors, journalists, life coaches, and psychologists.“I've taken away incredible things from people who I disagree with vehemently on politics and most other things”, Wilk told us. “We've all got our blind spots, but not one of us is not worth talking to.”Wilk works in the trucking industry in central Minnesota. He describes himself as a devoted husband, a loving father, and a steadfast Christian conservative. He came from humble beginnings and as a child lived in small towns across the upper Midwest. Wilk started working at the age of 10 and hasn't stopped.Through his podcast and personal experiences, Wilk shares candidly about the power of personal accountability, gratitude, and civility. He firmly believes that our reactions to life's challenges define us more than the challenges themselves. In his view, civility entails recognizing the humanity in everyone, regardless of our differences, our differing opinions, and/or backgrounds.Wilk says his journey from adversity to success in his career, marriage, and parenting exemplifies the transformative power of perseverance and self-improvement. His podcast and work as a volunteer leader with Braver Angels, offer hope, guidance, practical tips and tools for positive change. Wilk was recently named to the Board of Advisors at the Prohuman Foundation. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Send Wilk a text with your feedback!Raising Informed Citizens: The Power of Civic Education and EngagementToday, we're tackling yet another topic that couldn't be more relevant—civic education and the role we all play in shaping the next generation of informed citizens. Politics today is often framed as a battlefield, where division and outrage seem to dominate the conversation. But what if we approached it differently? What if we saw civic engagement not as a fight, but as a shared responsibility—one that starts at home?My guest today is Lindsey Cormack, an associate professor of Political Science and Director of the Diplomacy Lab at Stevens Institute of Technology. She's the author of How to Raise a Citizen (And Why It's Up to You to Do It), a book that explores the vital role parents play in helping their children understand our government, engage in politics constructively, and become active participants in democracy. Lindsey's work also includes maintaining DC Inbox, a digital archive of congressional e-newsletters, giving her unique insight into how politics is communicated to the public.In this conversation, we'll discuss why civic education has been deprioritized, how media algorithms shape our perceptions, and why understanding different political perspectives is crucial for a healthy democracy. Most importantly, we'll explore how parents and communities can work together to create a more informed and engaged electorate for the future.TakeawaysCivic education is essential for youth to understand their role in democracy.Parents play a crucial role in teaching their children about politics.The current education system often deprioritizes civics education.Political engagement should be framed positively, not negatively.Toxic polarization hinders constructive political discourse.Media algorithms often reinforce divisive narratives.Understanding both sides of the political spectrum is vital for informed citizenship.Civic engagement is a shared responsibility among parents and communities.Encouraging children to participate in politics can lead to a more informed electorate.The American political system, despite its flaws, is worth understanding and preserving.Learn more about and What have you done today to make your life a better life? What have you done today to make the world a better place? The world is a better place if we are better people. That begins with each of us as individuals. Be kind to one another. Be grateful for everything you've got. Make each and every day the day that you want it to be! Please follow The Derate The Hate podcast on: Facebook, Instagram, Twitter(X) , YouTube Subscribe to us wherever you enjoy your audio or directly from our site. Please leave us a rating and feedback on Apple podcasts or other platforms. Not on social media? You can share your thoughts or request Wilk for a speaking engagement on our site's contact page: DerateTheHate.com/Contact If you would like to support the show, you're welcome to DONATE or shop Amazon by going through our Support Us page and I'll earn through qualifying purchases at no extra cost to you. I look forward to hearing from you!

Coming up on The Spark Weekly: Our Braver Angels segment for the Month of February was about the Braver Angels stye debates. Karen Ward, Debate Chair and Past Bloomsburg Alliance Red Co-Chair and Past PA Red State Coordinator, and Terry Webb, Co-founder of the Braver Angels Alliance in Lancaster, and coordinator of their first debate in 2021, gave insight into the debates. They also shared how the BA debates are different from political debates we watch on TV and from competitive debates that a high school or college team tries to win. but upfront... Each service plaza along the Pennsylvania Turnpike now contains a mural depicting landscapes and attractions in their areas. The murals were created by local high school students under a program called Art Sparks, a joint effort of the Pennsylvania Council on the Arts and the Turnpike Commission.Support WITF: https://www.witf.org/support/give-now/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In the five years since the COVID pandemic began, trust in public health institutions and vaccines has plummeted. According to a new opinion poll, just over half of the public now says they trust the Food and Drug Administration to make the right recommendations on health issues at least “a fair amount,” down from nearly two-thirds (65%) in June 2023. About 1 in 4 Republicans parents now say they've akipped or delayed some children's vaccines."Why Should I Trust You?" is a new podcast about why so many Americans have lost trust in science and public health. We hear from two of the show's co-hosts, journalists Brinda Adhikari and Tom Johnson. They speak about what they've learned from a remarkably broad range of skeptics, scientists and doctors who have different opinions about vaccines and public policy on healthcare. "How Do We Fix It?" reports on the people, projects and ideas of Braver Angels, America's volunteer-led cross-partisan movement working to bring people together across rigid lines of partisan division. Braver Angels' Truth and Trust Project was featured on episode 414 of "How Do We Fix It?". This work aims to bridge divides among people with different views on official responses to the pandemic. Braver Angels helped Brinda and Tom as they launched their podcast.Tom Johnson is an award winning producer with experience in documentary series, digital, cable and network news. Brinda Adhikari is the former executive producer of The Problem with John Stewart.This episode also looks at the changing public comments from Robert F Kennedy Jr., who may be the most powerful voice in US public health today. As we release this episode he's set to become President Trump's Health and Human Services Secretary. Kennedy's Senate nomination hearings have been highly contentious. To critics he's a destructive vaccine skeptic and spreader of conspiracy theories. Many Trump supporters see Kennedy as a hero and a fighter, willing to take on a broken healthcare system. We also learn more about the remarkable contrast between the high level of distrust over the introduction of vaccines against COVID, and what happened during the 1950's after the polio vaccine was introduced. Then there was a huge amount of acceptance. Some thought the vaccine was almost a gift from God. The vaccine reduced fear and increased trust of doctors and public health officials. Thank you to Braver Angels for help with making this episode. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Our Braver Angels segment for the Month of February was about the Braver Angels stye debates. Karen Ward, Debate Chair and Past Bloomsburg Alliance Red Co-Chair and Past PA Red State Coordinator, and Terry Webb, Co-founder of the Braver Angels Alliance in Lancaster, and coordinator of their first debate in 2021, gave insight into the debates. They also shared how the BA debates are different from political debates we watch on TV and from competitive debates that a high school or college team tries to win. Support WITF: https://www.witf.org/support/give-now/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Send Wilk a text with your feedback!Radical Moderation: Breaking Free from Binary ThinkingMy guest this week is Lauren Hall, a professor of political science, an author, and a thought leader whose work challenges the rigid, binary ways we often think about personal, social, and political issues. She's written extensively on the medicalization of birth and death, the politics of family, and the crucial need for what she calls radical moderation—a framework that moves beyond “us versus them” thinking and embraces the full complexity of human experience.Lauren's approach introduces a four-dimensional way of understanding our world—one that demands humility, curiosity, and a recognition that real solutions exist beyond the false choices we're so often given. In a time when civil discourse feels like a lost art, her work reminds us of the power of pluralism, gratitude, and the willingness to engage with perspectives outside of our own echo chambers.Beyond her academic work, Lauren is yet another of my fellow advisors for the ProHuman Foundation, a group committed to fostering open and honest conversations about the issues that shape our lives. In this episode, we'll explore the dangers of negativity bias, the importance of lived experience, and how practicing radical moderation can help us bridge the divides that seem to grow wider every day.TakeawaysRadical moderation challenges binary thinking in society.Understanding different dimensions of experience is crucial.Lived experiences shape our perspectives and judgments.Negativity bias affects how we perceive the world.Gratitude can enhance our understanding of others.Trade-offs are inherent in every decision we make.Complexity in social issues requires humility and curiosity.Pluralism acknowledges the diversity of human experiences.Engaging in civil discourse can bridge divides.We share a common humanity despite our differences.Learn more about and connect with Lauren K. Hall by checking out the full show notes for this episode at DerateTheHate.com.What have you done today to make your life a better life? What have you done today to make the world a better place? The world is a better place if we are better people. That begins with each of us as individuals. Be kind to one another. Be grateful for everything you've got. Make each and every day the day that you want it to be! Please follow The Derate The Hate podcast on: Facebook, Instagram, Twitter(X) , YouTube Subscribe to us wherever you enjoy your audio or directly from our site. Please leave us a rating and feedback on Apple podcasts or other platforms. Not on social media? You can share your thoughts or request Wilk for a speaking engagement on our site's contact page: DerateTheHate.com/Contact If you would like to support the show, you're welcome to DONATE or shop Amazon by going through our Support Us page and I'll earn through qualifying purchases at no extra cost to you. I look forward to hearing from you!

This episode's guest is Mónica Guzmán, the author of I Never Thought of It That Way – a book with very practical advice on how to have productive conversations in a polarized political environment via authentic curiosity about where people's beliefs, opinions, attitudes, and values come from. It's also about how to learn from those with whom we disagree by establishing the sort of dynamic in which they will eagerly learn from us as well.- How Minds Change- Show Notes- Newsletter- David McRaney's BlueSky- David McRaney's Twitter- YANSS Twitter- Mónica Guzmán's Website- Mónica Guzmán's Twitter - I Never Thought of it That Way- Braver Angels- My Article on Intellectual Humility

In this episode, we welcome back Jonathan Rauch, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and a contributing writer at The Atlantic. Jon joined us to discuss his new book, Cross Purposes: Christianity's Broken Bargain with Democracy. We dive deep into the intersection of faith, democracy, and civic engagement (that's our jam!), exploring how American Christianity has shifted in recent years and what that means for the future of our democracy. We also discuss the aftermath of the 2024 election, the rise of political tribalism, and the role of faith in shaping a more just and stable society. What We Discuss How Jonathan Rauch's perspective on faith and democracy evolved over time (including what Jon refers to as the dumbest thing he ever wrote). Why he believes Christianity has played a crucial role in supporting democracy—and where it has gone wrong. The key differences between “thin Christianity” and “thick Christianity.” How the LDS Church offers a model for civic engagement based on negotiation and peacemaking. Why the loss of institutional trust is fueling political and social instability. The role of Braver Angels and other organizations in bridging political divides. Episode Highlights ⏳ [00:02:00] – Jonathan Rauch discusses his background, his past books, and his upcoming release, Cross Purposes. ⏳ [00:07:00] – Reflecting on the 2024 election and why it was surprisingly “ordinary” despite extreme circumstances. ⏳ [00:13:00] – How Trump's second administration is reshaping democracy and institutions. ⏳ [00:22:00] – Rauch's personal journey: From skepticism about religion to recognizing its role in democracy. ⏳ [00:35:00] – The rise of “thin Christianity” and how churches are struggling with political identity. ⏳ [00:44:00] – How the LDS Church provides an example of “thick Christianity” and civic engagement. ⏳ [00:57:00] – Rauch's concerns about post-liberalism and authoritarian tendencies in American politics. ⏳ [01:10:00] – The importance of doubt, curiosity, and engaging across differences. ⏳ [01:17:00] – Final thoughts: How to be better citizens and people of faith in a pluralistic society. Featured Quotes

Reena Bernards, LCMFT, is a licensed Marriage and Family Therapist, in private practice in Maryland and Washington D.C. She is certified as an Emotionally Focused Therapist (EFT) and works with individuals, couples, and families using a trauma-informed and attachment lens. She supervises therapists and helps therapists be prepared to become certified in EFT. She also works as an inter-group dialogue consultant and trainer. She created the Common Ground workshop for Braver Angels, which brings together conservatives and liberals for constructive dialogue. Check out Reena's website here:https://www.reenabernards.com/https://braverangels.org/https://braverangels.org/a-red-and-a-blue-walk-into-a-workshop-can-they-find-common-ground-on-a-controversial-issue/Braver Angels Evaluation Report 2024https://drive.google.com/file/d/1OL-VaaQ8w1M_bx01dUEjO0PpX1KBIOgB/view"When Political Polarization Enters the Family: A Consultation Group for Therapists"https://metromft.wildapricot.org/event-5987896--Become a supporter on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/therobinsmithshowGet in touch: robinsmithshow@gmail.comCall the hotline: +1 (301) 458-0883Got a question? We'd love to hear from you!

How Do We Fix It? raises questions about solutions to divisive topics of politics and public policy: Decidedly secular matters. In this episode we look at how religious groups and institutions can help bring people together across divides. Braver Faith is our focus. The Right Rev. Mark Beckwith is our guest.Braver Faith is one the newest and most vibrant groups within Braver Angels— America's largest cross-partisan, volunteer-led movement that works to push back against rigid polarization. Led by faith leaders from many different religious backgrounds and beliefs, Braver Faith is a civic organization that develops educational tools to build bridges between people who are divided over politics.Mark Beckwith speaks with us about the group's goals and principles. "So many people that I talk to within Braver Angels tell me their commitment emerges from their particular faith", he tells us.Ordained in the Episcopal Church in 1979, Mark Beckwith has served parishes in Connecticut, New Jersey and Massachusetts. Elected Bishop of Newark, New Jersey, he served in that capacity for 12 years before retiring in 2018. Bishop Beckwith is a liaison for Bishops United Against Gun Violence, and is the co-founder of Faith Leaders for Ending Gun Violence, a national ecumenical group of diverse leaders. He is the author of "Seeing the Unseen: Beyond Prejudices, Paradigms and Party Lines."Braver Faith organized an online gathering the evening before President Trump's inaugural January 20. Here's a link. Three speakers shared their thoughts about how faith can play a role in building bridges. Prayers from a range of faith traditions were offered. We include short extracts in this podcast. "How Do We Fix It?" publishes frequently. We report on the projects, people, and ideas of Braver Angels.Host: Richard Davies.Producer and sound designer: Miranda Shafer. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Send Wilk a text with your feedback!Christianity's Role in a Virtuous and Prosperous DemocracyI'm thrilled to welcome back a guest who is both a brilliant thinker and someone I deeply respect, even though we often disagree politically—Jonathan Rauch.Jonathan is a senior fellow in the Governance Studies program at the Brookings Institution, a contributing writer for The Atlantic, and the author of several thought-provoking books, including Kindly Inquisitors and The Constitution of Knowledge. Some of you might remember when he joined me back in January 2023 to talk about The Constitution of Knowledge and our shared work with Braver Angels, bridging divides and fostering healthier conversations in our polarized world.Today, Jonathan is here to discuss his latest book, Cross Purposes: Christianity's Broken Bargain with Democracy. This powerful new work delves into the complex and often fraught relationship between Christianity and democracy in America. Jonathan reflects on his own journey as an atheist from skepticism to a deeper appreciation for the role of Christianity in fostering a virtuous society—something our founders understood as essential for a thriving democracy.We'll talk about why fear, outrage, and grievance have become so toxic in our political and civic life, how a more Christ-like approach can help heal societal divides, and what it means to reconnect Christianity with its core tenets. Jonathan challenges us to think about the vital role of 'thick' Christianity—faith that provides meaning, virtue, and community—in building a stronger, more inclusive democracy.As always, our conversation touches on the work of Braver Angels, the importance of depolarization, and the need for both secular and religious communities to come together with understanding. So, get ready for another insightful conversation with Jonathan Rauch, right here on Derate the Hate. Learn more about and connect with Jonathan Rauch by checking out the full show notes for this episode at www.DerateTheHate.com.What have you done today to make your life a better life? What have you done today to make the world a better place? The world is a better place if we are better people. That begins with each of us as individuals. Be kind to one another. Be grateful for everything you've got. Make each and every day the day that you want it to be! Please follow The Derate The Hate podcast on: Facebook, Instagram, Twitter(X) , YouTube Subscribe to us wherever you enjoy your audio or directly from our site. Please leave us a rating and feedback on Apple podcasts or other platforms. Not on social media? You can share your thoughts or request Wilk for a speaking engagement on our site's contact page: DerateTheHate.com/Contact If you would like to support the show, you're welcome to DONATE or shop Amazon by going through our Support Us page and I'll earn through qualifying purchases at no extra cost to you. I look forward to hearing from you!

At first glance, Martin Luther King, Jr., and Russell Kirk do not have all that much in common. Yet it is striking that King and Kirk converged on certain first principles that rightfully mark King himself as part of a broader tradition of philosophical conservatism in America — one from which today's left and right could both stand to learn.Guest John Wood, Jr., joins us to discuss how both King and Kirk's philosophical conservatism transcended ideology. John Wood, Jr., is national ambassador for Braver Angels, a columnist for USA Today, and a former Republican nominee for Congress.This podcast discusses themes from John's essay in the Fall 2024 issue of National Affairs, “Martin Luther King's Transcendent Conservatism.”

Today we're going to see if one American family can flip the usual, tortured and tedious script for arguing about politics and do something more interesting. Jenn and Todd Brandel sit down with their dad, Bruce, to see if they can come to a better understanding about what has shaped their different political views. Mónica Guzmán, senior fellow for public practice at Braver Angels and author of I Never Thought Of It That Way: How To Have Fearlessly Curious Conversations in Dangerously Divided Times, is back to provide some insightful post-game analysis. In this second episode of our special two-part series, she breaks down what went well, what got a little messy, and what we can all apply to our own conversations with loved ones.  Listen to the first part of our series: “How To Talk Politics With Your Dad (Without Yelling) Pt 1” If you liked this episode, you might also like: “How To Rescue Someone From a Conspiracy Theory.” Do you have a question without an answer? Send us a note at howto@slate.com or leave us a voicemail at 646-495-4001 and we might have you on the show. Want more How To!? Subscribe to Slate Plus to unlock exclusive bonus episodes. Plus, you'll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. Subscribe now on Apple Podcasts by clicking “Try Free” at the top of the How To! show page. Or, visit slate.com/howtoplus to get access wherever you listen. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Today we're going to see if one American family can flip the usual, tortured and tedious script for arguing about politics and do something more interesting. Jenn and Todd Brandel sit down with their dad, Bruce, to see if they can come to a better understanding about what has shaped their different political views. Mónica Guzmán, senior fellow for public practice at Braver Angels and author of I Never Thought Of It That Way: How To Have Fearlessly Curious Conversations in Dangerously Divided Times, is back to provide some insightful post-game analysis. In this second episode of our special two-part series, she breaks down what went well, what got a little messy, and what we can all apply to our own conversations with loved ones.  Listen to the first part of our series: “How To Talk Politics With Your Dad (Without Yelling) Pt 1” If you liked this episode, you might also like: “How To Rescue Someone From a Conspiracy Theory.” Do you have a question without an answer? Send us a note at howto@slate.com or leave us a voicemail at 646-495-4001 and we might have you on the show. Want more How To!? Subscribe to Slate Plus to unlock exclusive bonus episodes. Plus, you'll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. Subscribe now on Apple Podcasts by clicking “Try Free” at the top of the How To! show page. Or, visit slate.com/howtoplus to get access wherever you listen. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Today we're going to see if one American family can flip the usual, tortured and tedious script for arguing about politics and do something more interesting. Jenn and Todd Brandel sit down with their dad, Bruce, to see if they can come to a better understanding about what has shaped their different political views. Mónica Guzmán, senior fellow for public practice at Braver Angels and author of I Never Thought Of It That Way: How To Have Fearlessly Curious Conversations in Dangerously Divided Times, is back to provide some insightful post-game analysis. In this second episode of our special two-part series, she breaks down what went well, what got a little messy, and what we can all apply to our own conversations with loved ones.  Listen to the first part of our series: “How To Talk Politics With Your Dad (Without Yelling) Pt 1” If you liked this episode, you might also like: “How To Rescue Someone From a Conspiracy Theory.” Do you have a question without an answer? Send us a note at howto@slate.com or leave us a voicemail at 646-495-4001 and we might have you on the show. Want more How To!? Subscribe to Slate Plus to unlock exclusive bonus episodes. Plus, you'll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. Subscribe now on Apple Podcasts by clicking “Try Free” at the top of the How To! show page. Or, visit slate.com/howtoplus to get access wherever you listen. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Today we're going to see if one American family can flip the usual, tortured and tedious script for arguing about politics and do something more interesting. Jenn and Todd Brandel sit down with their dad, Bruce, to see if they can come to a better understanding about what has shaped their different political views. Mónica Guzmán, senior fellow for public practice at Braver Angels and author of I Never Thought Of It That Way: How To Have Fearlessly Curious Conversations in Dangerously Divided Times, is back to provide some insightful post-game analysis. In this second episode of our special two-part series, she breaks down what went well, what got a little messy, and what we can all apply to our own conversations with loved ones.  Listen to the first part of our series: “How To Talk Politics With Your Dad (Without Yelling) Pt 1” If you liked this episode, you might also like: “How To Rescue Someone From a Conspiracy Theory.” Do you have a question without an answer? Send us a note at howto@slate.com or leave us a voicemail at 646-495-4001 and we might have you on the show. Want more How To!? Subscribe to Slate Plus to unlock exclusive bonus episodes. Plus, you'll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. Subscribe now on Apple Podcasts by clicking “Try Free” at the top of the How To! show page. Or, visit slate.com/howtoplus to get access wherever you listen. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Jenn and Todd Brandel have a close, loving relationship with their father, Bruce. But one thing makes their blood boil: his political chain emails. The messages are often forwarded commentary written in a provocative tone, and are an unwelcome reminder of just how far apart the family is politically. On this episode of How To!, we're joined by Mónica Guzmán, senior fellow for public practice at Braver Angels and author of I Never Thought Of It That Way: How To Have Fearlessly Curious Conversations in Dangerously Divided Times. In the first of a special two-part episode on talking politics with our parents, Mónica teaches Jenn and Todd how to aim for understanding with their dad, not agreement. Next week, Jenn, Todd, and their dad Bruce will put these tips into practice—on mic—around the kitchen table, as Mónica provides post-game analysis. We'll dive into what worked, what got a little messy, and how to keep making progress. If you liked this episode, check out: “How To Embrace Your Anti-Vax Family This Holiday Season” and “How To Talk Politics Without Wrecking Relationships.” Do you have a question without an answer? Send us a note at howto@slate.com or leave us a voicemail at 646-495-4001 and we might have you on the show. Want more How To!? Subscribe to Slate Plus to unlock exclusive bonus episodes. Plus, you'll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. Subscribe now on Apple Podcasts by clicking “Try Free” at the top of the How To! show page. Or, visit slate.com/howtoplus to get access wherever you listen. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Jenn and Todd Brandel have a close, loving relationship with their father, Bruce. But one thing makes their blood boil: his political chain emails. The messages are often forwarded commentary written in a provocative tone, and are an unwelcome reminder of just how far apart the family is politically. On this episode of How To!, we're joined by Mónica Guzmán, senior fellow for public practice at Braver Angels and author of I Never Thought Of It That Way: How To Have Fearlessly Curious Conversations in Dangerously Divided Times. In the first of a special two-part episode on talking politics with our parents, Mónica teaches Jenn and Todd how to aim for understanding with their dad, not agreement. Next week, Jenn, Todd, and their dad Bruce will put these tips into practice—on mic—around the kitchen table, as Mónica provides post-game analysis. We'll dive into what worked, what got a little messy, and how to keep making progress. If you liked this episode, check out: “How To Embrace Your Anti-Vax Family This Holiday Season” and “How To Talk Politics Without Wrecking Relationships.” Do you have a question without an answer? Send us a note at howto@slate.com or leave us a voicemail at 646-495-4001 and we might have you on the show. Want more How To!? Subscribe to Slate Plus to unlock exclusive bonus episodes. Plus, you'll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. Subscribe now on Apple Podcasts by clicking “Try Free” at the top of the How To! show page. Or, visit slate.com/howtoplus to get access wherever you listen. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Jenn and Todd Brandel have a close, loving relationship with their father, Bruce. But one thing makes their blood boil: his political chain emails. The messages are often forwarded commentary written in a provocative tone, and are an unwelcome reminder of just how far apart the family is politically. On this episode of How To!, we're joined by Mónica Guzmán, senior fellow for public practice at Braver Angels and author of I Never Thought Of It That Way: How To Have Fearlessly Curious Conversations in Dangerously Divided Times. In the first of a special two-part episode on talking politics with our parents, Mónica teaches Jenn and Todd how to aim for understanding with their dad, not agreement. Next week, Jenn, Todd, and their dad Bruce will put these tips into practice—on mic—around the kitchen table, as Mónica provides post-game analysis. We'll dive into what worked, what got a little messy, and how to keep making progress. If you liked this episode, check out: “How To Embrace Your Anti-Vax Family This Holiday Season” and “How To Talk Politics Without Wrecking Relationships.” Do you have a question without an answer? Send us a note at howto@slate.com or leave us a voicemail at 646-495-4001 and we might have you on the show. Want more How To!? Subscribe to Slate Plus to unlock exclusive bonus episodes. Plus, you'll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. Subscribe now on Apple Podcasts by clicking “Try Free” at the top of the How To! show page. Or, visit slate.com/howtoplus to get access wherever you listen. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Jenn and Todd Brandel have a close, loving relationship with their father, Bruce. But one thing makes their blood boil: his political chain emails. The messages are often forwarded commentary written in a provocative tone, and are an unwelcome reminder of just how far apart the family is politically. On this episode of How To!, we're joined by Mónica Guzmán, senior fellow for public practice at Braver Angels and author of I Never Thought Of It That Way: How To Have Fearlessly Curious Conversations in Dangerously Divided Times. In the first of a special two-part episode on talking politics with our parents, Mónica teaches Jenn and Todd how to aim for understanding with their dad, not agreement. Next week, Jenn, Todd, and their dad Bruce will put these tips into practice—on mic—around the kitchen table, as Mónica provides post-game analysis. We'll dive into what worked, what got a little messy, and how to keep making progress. If you liked this episode, check out: “How To Embrace Your Anti-Vax Family This Holiday Season” and “How To Talk Politics Without Wrecking Relationships.” Do you have a question without an answer? Send us a note at howto@slate.com or leave us a voicemail at 646-495-4001 and we might have you on the show. Want more How To!? Subscribe to Slate Plus to unlock exclusive bonus episodes. Plus, you'll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. Subscribe now on Apple Podcasts by clicking “Try Free” at the top of the How To! show page. Or, visit slate.com/howtoplus to get access wherever you listen. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In a world where everything feels like a war zone—Instagram comment sections, dinner tables, even just interpersonal relationships—how are we ever supposed to find peace? Advent's version of peace isn't about magically fixing everything or pretending that chaos doesn't exist. The peace of advent is a deep, steady sense of calm even when the world feels like it's spinning off its axis. It's the kind of peace that can stand strong in the middle of the storm.  This kind of peace comes from Jesus. I don't know about you, but I need that non-manmade peace more than anything right now.  Listen for a few tips on how to step into peace this week.  . . . . . Check out Braver Angels here: braverangels.org . . . . . Have a secretly extraordinary life? Apply to be a guest on my podcast in 2025 here: https://forms.gle/Z13WGj63oEfgmtjJ9 . . . . . Order your copy of my new book Reconnected HERE: ReconnectedBook.com  Let's keep in touch! Sign up for my newsletter to be the first to hear ALL my updates. https://app.e2ma.net/app2/audience/signup/1987227/1965424/ Interested in advertising with us? Reach out here. Book me to speak HERE: https://www.carloswhittaker.com/events  . . . . . QUINCE: Go to Quince.com/CARLOS for free shipping on your order and 365-day returns. LUMEN: Go to Lumen.me/Carlos and get 15% off your Lumen! SHOPIFY: Go to shopify.com/CARLOS to take your business to the next level today. AURA FRAMES: Exclusive $35-off Carver Mat at AuraFrames.com. Use code CARLOS at checkout to save! AIR DOCTOR: Head to AirDoctorPro.com and use promo code HUMANHOPE and, depending on the model, you'll receive UP TO 39% off or UP TO $300 off! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices