Let's Find Common Ground - Depolarizing America: Bridge Builders: Bringing People Together. Nathan Bomey

Episode Date: September 16, 2021

Common Ground Committee is part of a robust and growing national movement of bridge builders, who are working to reduce incivility and toxic polarization in America today. We look in-depth at this diverse, vital coalition.  Who's involved and how are they tackling racial, cultural, and political schisms that threaten American democracy? Our guest, Nathan Bomey, is a reporter for USA Today, and author of the new book, "Bridge Builders: Bringing People Together in a Polarized Age." In this interview, we hear stories about people from many walks of life who are building the structure of a new, more united America. "Despite its transformational qualities, bridge building often attracts considerable resistance," says Bomey. "In many cases, that's because bridges promise to disrupt the status quo for people who previously benefited from or preferred social isolation." This episode looks at a constructive way forward.

Who are the bridge builders? How is this growing movement pushing back against toxic polarization in civility and the cultural and political barriers that separate us as a nation? That's the subject of this episode. This is Let's Find Common Ground. I'm Richard Davies. And I'm Ashley Miltite. We look at a diverse and vital coalition

and how they're tackling racial, cultural, and political schisms. Our guest, Nathan Bohme, is a reporter for USA Today, an author of the new book, Bridge Builders, bringing people together in a polarized age. In this interview, we hear about people from many walks of life who are building the structure of a new, more united America.

Thanks for joining us on Let's Find Common Ground. Thank you so much for having me. So let's start with your book, which is called Bridge Builders. Who are Bridge Builders? I mean, I think Bridge Builders are people who are trying to bring people together despite their differences, whether it's politics, race, religion, class, or culture. They may approach it from a different perspective or a different strategy, but their qualities

are similar. They acknowledge the past. They don't label people. They embrace conflict. They understand that sometimes conversations not enough to get people on the same page. But I think it's really interesting that their qualities are similar because although the areas they may work in may be completely different, we see that bridge builders actually do have a lot of common in.

I think that's encouraging and it suggests that there's a lot we can learn from them. Ashley and I are both journalists, Nathan, and in your new book Bridge Builders. There are lots of good stories about people involved in the bridge building movement. Do you get a sense that the movement is growing? Yeah, I think it is. It's incredible to see how much conversation is going on about this. I have to say, when I started this project in late 2018. I never anticipated that we get to a point in this country where so many people would want to have a conversation about this.

You know, it certainly goes beyond politics. You know, I think that there's cultural divides and racial divides, of course. And so, you know, I think that the hunger for something different is there. If you look at 67% of Americans, according to the More and Common Project, are part of what we call an exhausted majority. People who are just so sick of all the arguing and all the division and want something different. I mean, you can't get 67% of Americans

to agree on pretty much anything. And yet, 67% say they're exhausted and they want something different. People really do want to see politicians and other people starting to cooperate wherever possible. Well, talking of politics. I mean, can you give a couple of examples of bridge building in action in Congress

or state legislatures? Yeah, and in the federal level, I think we are often subject to this caricature that federal legislators never work together. They are absolutely nothing that they can coordinate on. I mean, if you think you look back to 2020, I mean, I think they actually did work pretty well in the early going in the pandemic in terms of getting economic relief out there. But I think more recently, look at a group like the problem solvers caucus, which is a

couple dozen lawmakers in Congress, half Republicans, half Democrats, who really believe firmly that they can find common ground. Ironically, on bridges, for example, which is kind of funny. Infrastructure, you know, is actually, we need to build bridges to build bridges. You mentioned infrastructure, and that is a really good example of moderates or at least people who want to work together from both the Democratic and Republican sides in Congress coming together on this infrastructure bill that was a compromise between what the Biden administration wants and what most Republicans were prepared to give.

Yeah, we've gotten to a point in this country where the idea of compromise is due to a negative thing, that it is compromising to compromise. But the reality is that compromise is actually a principle. It's built into our system. But when I talk to bridge builders about how they approach it, they just see it from a completely different perspective. They don't see it as compromising. They see it as a value. I am not going to take half of the pie from you and you're not going to take half of the pie from me. We're going to build a bigger pie together.

And although we may not get everything we want, if we build together, we can actually achieve progress for both of us because our two-party system, whether we like it or not, is built on the premise that we have to work together to progress. We actually interviewed a couple of members of the problem-solver's caucus some months ago now for this show, and they did see it as getting something done.

Yeah, I think that's right. Bridge builders are not going to live in sort of the hot take culture where they believe you can argue people onto Your side they're gonna stay off of cable news zingers and this idea that maybe if you call someone on social media You can somehow achieve something. I mean, I think a lot of ways they're they are practical They're not polyannish, you know, they're not overly optimistic or unrealistic about the challenges You know, they they not overly optimistic or unrealistic about the challenges, you know, they understand that there is ignorance, but they are also optimistic in the sense that they believe people can change because they've seen people change.

You mentioned media, Nathan. Is the media part of the problem? Yeah, I think it is. And I think I, as a journalist, couldn't write a book like this without training the lens on myself personally and as an industry. You know, I will defend all day long journalism from false accusations of fake news. You know, that is, it's harmful to us as an industry. It's harmful to our democracy and it's usually not fair.

But I also think we can't escape this conversation about how we may have contributed or may continue to contribute to our national divides. It starts with things like, you know, where the headlines get a little bit more sensational, where the news judgment trends just a little bit more toward what people want to see, not what they need to see. It's a huge issue.

When Google is your editor, when Google trends is your editor, you've got a problem because you're following what people are searching for and not sort of telling people what they need to know about the world around them. Now, I think journalists, we are obsessed with conflict. I understand that. We're always going to cover conflict we need to do that. But the question is, how do you frame it? I'm encouraged to say there is a movement in journalism more towards solutions oriented reporting in stories where we say, okay, we're going to cover the conflict, we're going to frame it around what is the solution. And I think that Americans are really hungry for that. And if you look at the readership

data, they actually do follow those stories. I mean, that is encouraging to see. I'm glad you mentioned solutions journalism. There is a group that I've often worked with in the past called solutions journalism network, which is really shine to light on this question, as has all sides, which is a member of the bridge alliance. What about social media, it does seem that the conflict entrepreneurs really profit from trying to keep us apart and trying to sensationalize division. Yeah, no, there's no doubt. It is one of the most significant issues of our time. I was intent for this book on doing a chapter on someone who was using social media to bring people together. There's gotta be someone.

And I was able to do that, although it was the most difficult subject I had to find. It took me the longest. But I finally found this great group called the Everyday Projects, led by a couple journalists who just started posting photos when they were on an assignment in Africa of daily life of someone getting a cup of coffee, taking the elevator,

getting their car repaired, and these photos ricocheted around the world on Instagram, and people on the other side of the world realizing that, you know what, I actually have shared humanity here. I get a cup of coffee every morning, I get my car fix, I go up the elevator, and that was so encouraging to see that these mundane pictures of authentic life, real life, can actually drop people together and give you a shared respect for your shared humanity. And, you know, the problem is in social media, it's the highlight reel. It's not the mundane. It's the sensational. It's something that makes you outraged or extremely happy or something extreme. But I think what they have shown is that you actually,

your assumptions may be wrong. It may not always be that sensational that people want to see. We're going to mention some of those groups and sites on our website, just in case some of those names and concepts went by a little too fast. And also though, that story in the book about that project was so interesting, but ultimately there's that problem of the algorithm, right?

The algorithm surfaces the conflict, doesn't it? And that's what's so depressing for those of us who were involved in this movement to build bridges and define common ground is sometimes because of that kind of thing, it can feel like pushing a boulder up a hill. It can feel like how do you get people to notice this work? Yeah, I think that we have to acknowledge the gravity of the challenge, which is when you're working

against a structure that is designed to profit off of tearing people apart, this is a huge challenge. We can hold out for hope that the profit-making companies decide to change their mind and not to elevate things that people want to see because of our human tendency to gravitate toward that sort of content, or we can look at it from a grassroots perspective and maybe it starts with education and how do we teach young people and how to engage with social media? When the printing press was first introduced it took decades for people to adjust for society to adjust the fact that suddenly

Information was available so widely and I think we haven't had much time as a society to adjust to the fact the internet has completely Underminer or overturned. how we usually interact with the formation. Most people are not really well equipped to validate and authenticate information on their own. Like we don't really equip people with that in school. We teach them things. We don't say, here's how you authenticate information. You wrote in your book, a chapter called

from caricature to nuance. And how some people in West Virginia in your book, a chapter called, from caricature to nuance. And how some people in West Virginia have tried to reestablish trust between the media and the people who live in the state. Could you tell us more? Yeah, this is so critical because I believe really passionately in the importance of local journalism, you know, as I work at USA today now, but my career started when I was 17 years old for the local newspaper in my hometown in Michigan. I'm sitting at, you know, low-diet township board of trustee is really small rural areas, you know, with my little yellow notebook. And I'm covering things like gravel, quarry, mining, regulations, and I have no idea what's going on. I don't know why the editor trusted me to do this.

But the point is that I was there, you know, and I did it over the course of five years, and I ended up establishing these relationships with people in the community who at least knew who I was, and maybe could trust what I was reporting. And I think the problem is that in so many cases throughout America, those reporters aren't there anymore. I actually called the supervisor for the township that I used to cover many years ago and asked her, and she said, yeah, there's nobody covering there anymore. I actually called the supervisor for the township that I used to cover many years ago and asked her,

and she said, yeah, there's nobody covering us anymore. And I think, how can we expect people to trust a journalist if they don't know one? Which is why I think a group like 100 Days in Appalachia is doing such great work because they are on the ground, local grassroots journalism, non-profit funded, and they're saying, we're going to tell people's stories authentically in Appalachia. People who have been caricatured by the national media, my colleagues, you know, it's embarrassing, I think, a lot of the coverage that happened after the 2016 election, where national media swooped into these communities in Appalachia and profiled these people who are these people, who have voted for Donald Trump, and it illustrated how important it is for us to establish those relationships with local journalists and

rely on those relationships to begin rebuilding those bonds of trust that have been torn apart on recent years. Yeah, I love that chapter because the stories really struck me that people, journalists, national journalists were coming into the state saying, can you get me a minor who voted for Trump? They went in looking for a specific character for their story and how demoralizing that was just so many people. When I talked to the people there in Appalachia who were doing this work, they said, we know we have challenges, we know we have problems, but we also have diversity. We have LGBTQ members of that community in Appalachia. We have Muslims here.

We're not just what you might assume us to be. I think, for example, in 2018, when there was a teacher strike in West Virginia, the media was shocked at how could this happen. I thought only liberal members of unions would strike. It's like, no, that illustrates why we don't understand people of these cultures. It just illustrates how important it is to choose nuance over character. Nathan Bohmi of USA Today is our guest on Let's Find Common Ground. I'm Ashley.

And I'm Richard. This interview is about a movement of bridge builders and common ground committee plays a leading role with its public events, blogs, Facebook conversations, and this podcast. Find out more about what we do at commongroundcommity.org. Sign up for the weekly newsletter and follow us on Twitter where we share links to interesting articles and events. Common Ground Committee is also a member of Bridge Alliance, a community of more than a hundred organizations across the country. Now more from our interview with Nathan Bummy. You've made the case for nuance. So how do people like us get people on board with this work of finding common ground

when we have this social media landscape the way it is? I mean, I think that people are more willing to engage on this than you might think. Again, when you look at the numbers in terms of the percentage of people who believe, for example, that the second issue like immigration, Republicans are more likely to believe that Democrats are more pro-immigration than they are, and Democrats believe Republicans are more anti-immigration than they are. Maybe we aren't as divided on the issues as we think we are. The problem is we're tribalized. We're caught in these tents, not willing to move out of our camps.

And I think there are ways, though, to begin building relationships between people who aren't like each other, whether they look differently, think differently, pray differently, vote differently. And we can do that, actually, without a more national scale, without waiting for it to happen on a grassroots basis. on a more national scale without leading for it to happen on a grassroots basis. I have another question about the media, the wider media. So I know people, white people, in my circle, who at the moment feel that there are so many stories in certain media with a racial justice angle. There are just so many that they're beginning sort of mentally to tune out. They feel like this is just too much. And as a result, they don't want to take any action.

They just want to switch off. I think that's a sort of unacknowledged problem. What do you think? Should the media be building bridges or not? Well, I think that we do have a role to play. And I think that historically we have viewed ourselves as not having a role to play. And I think that historically, we have viewed ourselves as not having a role to play. And I think that that's actually part of the problem. And oftentimes, we end up looking like

unemotional, uninterested observers at the very best. And then the worst, actively working against bringing people together, which is an even bigger problem, of course. And so, but when it comes to the kind of coverage you're talking about, I think that it's important to be telling stories about diversity and these challenges because, you know, for so long, the people, white people like me have, have controlled the media, have controlled those stories and oftentimes ignore those stories. So we have to be telling those stories. But I think the way in which we do it is key. And I think it comes back to solutions.

You want to write about the problem, but you can't dwell on the problem without getting to a solution and saying, here's what we can do. Bridgielder's do not shame or humiliate. And that's a big distinction between accountability and shame. Accountability versus shaming people. Can you give me an example of that from your repulsion? Well, I think that the woman named Latasha Morrison is a really great example. She's the head of a group called Be the Bridge. She has tens of thousands of members in her group that are basically people tend to be Christians throughout the country who are

interested in this issue of racial and religious reconciliation, but she's a black woman, a minister. She goes to mostly white churches, white evangelical congregations throughout the country. And she's speaking to these churches that the media have told us are not receptive to conversations about race and what has happened in America in the past. And she's having very difficult conversations about what has happened in the past for how Christian churches have contributed in some cases toward oppression of black people. But she says, she draws a distinction between shame and what she calls lament, which, as you know, is the root word for lamentations, the book of the Bible, that she's connecting

with Christians by saying, we can lament what has happened without shaming you for what has happened. And I think, you know, it's like a lot of all times a response that you might get would be, well, I wasn't around when slavery happened and then Jim Crow happened. Why am I responsible, you know? And I think that's an understandable response. But what she's trying to explain is that no, you're still benefiting from that legacy. Let me explain why without saying I'm going to shame you. There are many examples around the country of where bridge building can work to

increase understanding and and make progress. You worked as a reporter in Detroit. That city has a majority African-American population. It went through a huge and very wrenching bankruptcy in 2013. This problem was part of what led to a lot of tension between the city and the suburbs of Detroit. Can you explain what happened? And there's also a case of two men who tried to bridge the gap. Yeah.

Essentially what happened was a white Republican from LeVonia, which is often called the most white large city in America, basically worked with a black Democrat from Detroit, often considered one of the most black large cities in America America to help bring about a legislative resolution to the bankruptcy and what has now been called the Grand Vargan, which is essentially how they resolve the Detroit bankruptcy. It was the essence of compromise. What happened? What was involved?

Essentially, they basically said, we're going to try to raise some outside funds, but we're going to match it with state money to then reduce the pension cuts that the retirees were facing. They were facing massive pension cuts, ended up getting it down to a much more manageable level, less than 5% for most, less than 1% for some, and also preserve the Detroit Institute of Arts, which was facing liquidation because the city owned it, because they realized that even if we don't get everything that we want, we're better off together if Detroit is better off. Detroit is central to Michigan's vitality. And although a lot of Republicans have historically not believed that,

they ended up convincing most of Republicans in the legislature to vote for that package. And then at the same time, they then most Democrats to vote for the package. It just was a fascinating compromise, but I think it illustrates the fact that you can't always look at compromises as a bad thing. Really oftentimes, there are alternative solutions. When you realize that if we work together, we can grow this pie instead of just splitting it in half.

You write about national service and encouraging, say that we should encourage a national service movement. Talk about why. Yeah. Yeah, I think this is one of the really cool ways that we can, on a national scale, begin to build bridges. And this is actually, again, a pretty bipartisan thing, this idea that we should invest in public service. Under President Obama, Republicans and Democrats authorize the tripling of the number of public service positions in this country, like AmeriCorps, for example, where you're going out and

you're serving the community. Because a lot of times Republicans and Democrats maybe have different reasons for it, but they like public service in general. The reason why is because public service is a dynamic way in which people can actually begin to gain understanding of each other. When you're serving alongside someone, when you're shoulder to shoulder with someone, it's much easier to gain an appreciation for who they are than it is when you're more face to face in a confrontational posture where I'm going to tell you how it is.

And if you're shoulder to shoulder, you're more showing people how it is. You know, English class, you tell you, show, don't tell, right? And I think public service is a way in which that we can do that. And you gain appreciation for the person you're serving. We hear these phrases, national service, public service spoken about from time to time. Can you give us an example of a public service project that brought people of different backgrounds together? Yeah, this is not part of America or part of the government funded position, but a

fascinating example would be this group called the Iraqi and American Reconciliation Project, which I write about in the book, started with some peacemakers in Minnesota who were interested in trying to send a different message to the people of Iraq than what has historically been sent because of all the military action that's happened there. And they visited Iraq and believe it was 2012, Najaf Iraq, and they just actually went in to do a couple things to help Install water filters because the water system had been really fundamentally destroyed and then just to print plant tree saplings They just that's all they were there to do just plant some trees and again Significant attention and the community because people were like wait a minute though the Americans came to plant trees Not drop bombs and it it created such an amazing impression

is not drop bombs. And it created such an amazing impression among the people of that community, so much so that one of the people who they engaged with has now moved to the United States is the chair of the Iraqi and American Consolation Project and is building these international bridges realizing that you know what, actually public service can be a starting point. We've talked about the media, we've talked about politics, we've talked about voluntary grassroots efforts. What's the role that high schools and colleges can play in bridge building? Yeah, I do think education is often a good place to start because it's like, if you and I can agree that maybe adults are a lost cost, I think we can agree that probably our young people are not.

They are still forming the world view, and the way they engage with others is still kind of forming. And so I think that school is a place we can start. And I think it can start with something as simple as doing class projects with people from different districts. You know, we now live in this zoom-oriented schoolwork world in which people are doing work with kids and teachers who aren't in the same place. Why can't we have students from one district work with students from another district?

We live in a society, you know, unfortunately, in which often times kids go to school with people who look just like them. But why can't we say, you know, hey, why don't you do this project with someone from this other area who may be different off financially, have a different background in terms of race, ethnicity, and at college, I think you can do it the same thing. In freshman dorms, why are we letting freshmen pick

their dorm roommates before they go in? This is a huge problem actually. People don't think about this, but freshmen end up finding freshmen just like them. In fact, the Washington Post basically said, the rich white kids find the rich white kids. Well, that's not helping anybody. So, there's some universities that have actually started to intentionally room students with people from different zip codes, for example, and just try to get people mixed in and say, this is a place where you need to learn.

The world is a lot different than you may have learned in high school and you need to encounter people who aren't like you because those relationships are what will make you into a better system. One final question, are you optimistic that people can change? Because many are deeply skeptical about this. What's the evidence for change from someone you spoke with?

Take it from the Reverend Dr. Alvin Edwards, who is at the Charlottesville clergy collective. This is a man who's dealing with the aftermath of 2017, what happened in Charlottesville, the legacy of Jim Crow, the legacy of slavery. I said, you've been living with these things, you know, in some cases for your whole life. I said, how do you maintain faith that people can change? And he said, I have to believe that people can change because if I don't, then that's a belief that I can't change and I can't accept that. Listen, we've seen people in this country change before. It happens all the time. Look at an issue like gay marriage, for example, 2005, only 30% of Americans supported gay marriage rights now and 2020,

according to the GALP 70%. I think that if you look over time progress happens. It can be really difficult to see when you're face-to-face with the painting, but when you step out, you can see there's a broader mural that's being sketched. Nathan, thank you so much for coming on. Thank you so much.

It's so great to be with you. I really appreciate it. Nathan Bowmy on Let's Find Common Ground. During our interview, Nathan mentioned several bridge-building groups and individuals. They include the everyday projects, a site that uses photography to challenge the stereotypes that distort our understanding of the world. Be the Bridge is a Christian group led by Latasha Morrison that seeks to empower anti-racist bridgebuilders. A third group is the Iraqi and American Reconciliation Project. That encourages communication, understanding and support

between Americans and Iraqis in response to decades of sanctions, war and occupation. We have links to all three groups at our website. I'm Richard Davies. And I'm Ashley Muntite. Thanks for listening. you