vox--2020-07-20--Bryan Stevenson on how America can heal

Bryan Stevenson on how America can heal

What would it take for America to heal ?
To be the country it claims to be ?
This is the question that animates Bryan Stevenson ’ s career .
Stevenson is the founder and executive director of the Equal Justice Initiative , a clinical professor at the New York University School of Law , a MacArthur “ genius , ” and the author of the remarkable book Just Mercy — which was recently turned into a feature film where Stevenson was played by Michael B. Jordan .
I admire Stevenson tremendously .
He has lived a life dedicated to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of whom he has rescued from death row ) and justice for the society he lives in .
He ’ s one of the fairly few people I ’ ve found with a vision for how America could find justice on the far shore of its own history .
That vision is particularly needed now and so I asked him to return to The Ezra Klein Show to share it .
To my delight , he agreed .
This conversation is about truth and reconciliation in America — and about whether truth would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It ’ s about what the process of reckoning with our past sins and present wounds would look and feel and sound like .
It ’ s about what we can learn from countries like Germany and South Africa , that have walked further down this path than we have .
And it ’ s about the country and community that could lie on the other side of that confrontation .
An edited transcript from our conversation follows .
The full conversation can be heard on The Ezra Klein Show .
What is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with its own history ?
Knowing the actual history .
If you don ’ t know your history , you can ’ t really begin to understand what your obligations are , what your responsibilities are , what you should fear , what you should celebrate , what ’ s honorable and what ’ s not honorable .
The big problem we have in the United States is that we don ’ t actually know our history .
We don ’ t know about the centuries of racial injustice .
We don ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ You say “ native genocide ” and people have no idea what you ’ re talking about .
They think you ’ re saying something radical .
Once you know that history , you begin to think differently about who we are .
We got comfortable with creating a Constitution that talks about equality and justice for all , but didn ’ t apply to millions of indigenous people who were on this land .
And so until you understand that history , you can ’ t begin thinking about , well , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are your obligations now ?
What would it take to recover from that kind of violence , that kind of destruction that we did to millions of indigenous people ?
And , of course , that failure to acknowledge that history is what makes us vulnerable to the two-and-a-half centuries of slavery that follow .
We ’ ve invested a lot of time in creating false narratives about slavery , about enslavers , about the South , about the North , about emancipation , about abolitionists — many of whom didn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t believe in racial equality .
And the legacy of that is very different than the legacy we ’ ve been taught .
So for me , it begins with honesty .
If you ’ ve done something wrong to someone else and you genuinely don ’ t know what you ’ ve done wrong , you ’ re not going to be able to fully reconcile with that person .
You ’ re not going to be able to adequately apologize .
You ’ re not going to be able to say @ @ @ @ @ @ @ create a path toward recovery .
You have to know what you did .
And once you understand what you did , you can then begin to calibrate all the things that have to happen for you to try to make peace .
For you to recover .
To create fellowship again .
We have committed ourselves in this country to silence about our history , to ignorance about our history , to denying our history .
And that ’ s the first part of this relationship that has to be repaired .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ now to talk honestly about who we are and how we got here .
A word you used a few times there was “ we.
” But when we begin having this conversation about our history , the shared national identity that gets taken for granted in other contexts begins to dissolve very fast .
After 9/11 , or after winning World War II or during an election , people talk about Americans as a “ we ” no matter when their ancestors got here .
They tend to associate themselves with its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
But then you get into its misdeeds , its injustices , its sins , and the idea there is a “ we ” here becomes very difficult for people .
People say things like , “ Well , I wasn ’ t here .
I didn ’ t do any of that .
My grandparents came here from Ireland in 1942.
” How do you deal with the pronouns in this conversation ?
Who is talking ?
Who is listening ?
Who owes what to whom ?
I think you ’ re @ @ @ @ @ @ @ when it comes to mistakes , misconduct , abuse , to disassociate yourself from those things while running to embrace every aspect of achievement .
“ We won the most medals at the United States Olympics.
” Well , you didn ’ t win any medals , but we do invoke ownership .
So I believe it ’ s important for anyone who identifies as an American , as a citizen of this country , to not simply embrace all the things about American history that we think are glorious and wonderful , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ things about our history that are tragic and devastating .
What ’ s interesting for me , when I look at the experience of African Americans in particular , Black people have been so committed to this country , they ’ ve been so committed to the identity of an America that is committed to equality and justice .
In the 250 years of enslavement in which Black people endured being kidnapped , put in chains , brutalized , mistreated , abused , raped — there was daily humiliation and degradation , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ abuse and mistreatment finally ends in 1865 after the Civil War , after the ratification of the 13th Amendment .
And instead of seeking revenge or retribution or violence against those who had enslaved them , emancipated Black people said , “ We ’ re going to make peace here .
We ’ re going to make community here .
We ’ re going to commit to education .
We ’ re going to commit to voting .
We ’ re going to become ideal American citizens.
” When you think about all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that Black people suffered and they still were willing to live in harmony with those who had abused them , it says something remarkable about the power of “ we.
” They believed in an America and they got no credit for that .
What they got instead was more abuse .
There were over 2,000 lynchings between 1865 and 1877 .
One of the most violent periods in American history .
And yet , for 100 years , they still believed enough in the American idea that they would continue finding ways @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in World War I , World War II , and the Korean War .
And then when they got back from war , they ’ d be targeted for violence by white supremacists who feared their American military service might cause them to believe that they were an equal .
What Dr. King and Rosa Parks and others do in the 1950s and ’ 60s is so rooted in a commitment to the American identity .
To me , the model that African Americans have established with this country is that even when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ idea of an American identity .
It means that we absolutely have to be willing to acknowledge the things that are harmful , that are injurious in the American South .
The entire American South benefited from the institution of slavery — the entire United States did .
The rail lines that allowed those companies in the North to become industrialists , the industries that gave rise to all of that growth during the first half of the 20th century — all of it had its roots in this forced labor stolen from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that to really be honest .
There is no way of saying “ they did that.
” If we ’ re going to claim American citizenship and American identity , there has to be a willingness to say “ we ” just like there ’ s that willingness to say “ we ” when an American does something great .
In an interview you did at MOMA in 2015 , you had this line that I haven ’ t been able to stop thinking about since : “ We need to engage everyone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would take to cleanse ourselves of the legacy of slavery.
” When I first heard that I thought it was obvious .
And then I realized that almost every word in that sentence could take a lifetime to unpack .
We began with the first word in that sentence : “ we.
” But let me go to one of the next pieces of it , which is “ engage everyone.
” The conversations we have in this country , to the extent we have them at all , are polarized and fractured @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in a conversation about America ’ s foundational sins ?
I think it begins with an understanding of what actually happened .
The true evil of American slavery wasn ’ t involuntary servitude or the forced labor .
It wasn ’ t the bondage .
The real evil of slavery was the ideology that we created — that Black people are less deserving , less worthy , less human , less evolved .
If you understand that ’ s the true problem of slavery , then it becomes easier to understand how we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the passage of the 13th Amendment .
In 1865 , my view is that slavery doesn ’ t end — it just evolves .
Because we never deal with the fundamental character that made enslavement so horrific , which is this ideology of white supremacy .
Once you understand that , then you can continue to see that legacy play out in the disenfranchisement and exclusion of Black people from jobs in the North and West in the 1950s .
When banks don ’ t give Black people mortgage loans , they don @ @ @ @ @ @ @ move into the middle class .
You begin to see it in the ’ 70s and ’ 80s when we declared this war on drugs and we target Black communities .
You see it in the ways in which police violence manifests itself .
And once you understand that , you begin to understand that you are implicated in this story .
You are implicated in this moment that we live in where the smog created by our history of racial injustice is still in the air and we ’ re still breathing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our world view , just like it corrupted the world view of people before us .
So it does begin with that understanding .
What does that engagement actually look like ?
What is the structure in which people are pulled into this conversation so they can get to that understanding ?
I think it ’ s local .
It ’ s intimate .
It ’ s familial , it ’ s communal .
It ’ s statewide .
It ’ s nationwide .
I think every entity , every institution has to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I think it ’ s really important that people understand that if you ’ re genuinely engaged and recovering from human rights abuses , you have to commit to truth-telling first .
You can ’ t jump to reconciliation .
You can ’ t jump to reparation or restoration until you tell the truth .
Until you know the nature of the injuries , you can ’ t actually speak to the kind of remedies that are going to be necessary .
For me , that ’ s very immediate .
I believe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ own truth-telling process to document the ways in which they contributed to the history of racial inequality , the history of white supremacy .
If you were a college and university functioning in the first half of the 20th century , there are things you should acknowledge you did to sustain racial inequality .
Corporations , banks , insurance companies all played a critical role in allowing racial injustice and white supremacy to prevail throughout the 20th century .
You don ’ t have to go outside of your own institutions .
You @ @ @ @ @ @ @ You can tell your own story about the ways in which you are complicit .
For me , that ’ s got to be the way it works .
There are places in the American South that have to address things that were unique to this region .
We didn ’ t allow Black people to vote in many states in the American South for a century .
It took blood and violence and federal troops and congressional acts just to give people their right to vote .
And there was no shame @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The North wins the Civil War and the South wins the narrative war because not only do they not apologize , they actually double down and say what we did by enslaving people and forming this Confederacy was noble and glorious and honorable .
And when that ’ s your mindset , you don ’ t get to the right place .
That didn ’ t happen when lynching becomes less prominent in the 1950s .
It didn ’ t happen in the 1960s after the passage of the civil rights laws @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
So I want to say to the state of Alabama : Will you reckon with your history of enslavement , your history of lynching , your history of segregation ?
What are you going to say ?
What are you going to be reckoned with ?
In 1965 , we should have said : If you ’ re really sorry about all of this abuse and disenfranchisement , if you really want to do something to recover from a century of disenfranchisement , the state of Alabama ought to say , “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Black person when they turn 18 .
We no longer want the burden to be on Black people who have been discouraged and abused and turned away and humiliated and threatened for trying to vote .
We ’ re going to take that burden .
We ’ re going to register every Black person.
” We ’ re going to say to the University of Alabama , University of Georgia , and some of these schools that were adamantly opposed to integration , if those universities really want to reckon , then maybe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ We don ’ t think Black people who are residents of the state should have to pay tuition .
We think we should take that on as a way of recovering , responding to this history of exclusion.
” Banks could be thinking very differently about what they owe African Americans in this country when they reckon with the history of exclusion .
The military could be thinking about what it owes to Black veterans when it allowed banks and American institutions to turn veterans away because of the color of their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The government has that same responsibility .
But for me , it begins with the truth-telling , because when you start telling the truth , you recognize things .
For me , the question is : What is the truth of our institution as it relates to the history of racial inequality ?
It ’ s very , very concrete .
How do we frame an investigation into the truth of our history ?
What is the truth of our history ?
What is our institutions ’ role ?
What is our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ landscape to be created that is so shattered by racial injustice and white supremacy ?
Barbara Lee recently proposed a Truth , Racial Healing , and Transformation Commission .
Do you think that is a model that could work here , and how do you imagine it looking ?
And for those who don ’ t know , can you talk about the truth and reconciliation process more generally ?
There are countries that have engaged in a national effort of truth-telling .
We saw that in South Africa after the collapse of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there was very powerful .
The victims of apartheid had an opportunity to tell their stories .
The perpetrators were also required to speak to their role .
It was an important process .
We ’ ve seen it in Rwanda , where the victims of the genocide have been invited to give voice to their suffering , their loss .
The prisons were filled with perpetrators of that violence and there was a reckoning around it .
Obviously , in Germany , we ’ ve seen a dramatic transformation of that country @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have stones and symbols and memorials and monuments throughout cities like Berlin .
There ’ s a Holocaust memorial in the center of Berlin .
Every student in Germany as an elementary school student is required to go to the Holocaust memorials and learn that history .
Police officers are required to study that history .
And so it can be effective at the national level .
I ’ m very supportive of Representative Lee ’ s commission .
But I want to caution that the difference between South Africa and Rwanda and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there was a transfer of power in each of those countries .
Black South Africans took over South Africa once they had the vote — it ’ s a Black majority country .
In Rwanda , the victims of the genocide ultimately regained power through military intervention .
So in each case , the parameters of that truth-telling were shaped by people who had been victimized .
In Germany , the Nazis lost the war .
We wouldn ’ t see all of that iconography honoring victims of the Holocaust in Berlin had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of power , we had the opportunity to do some things that we don ’ t have in this country .
The people who were the perpetrators of so much of this bigotry and violence are still in power .
There was no transfer in power after the Civil War , after the era of lynching , even after the civil rights movement .
And because of that , it ’ s going to have to be much more atomized .
I think we should have a national truth-telling commission , but that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for banks and schools and corporations and industries and police departments and localities from engaging in their own truth-telling .
I think we have to try to get people to understand that when we confront this history , we don ’ t have to fear punishment .
I ’ m a lawyer .
I defend people who have done things that are terrible .
And I ’ m persuaded that each of us is more than the worst thing we ’ ve ever done .
Because of that , I want to talk @ @ @ @ @ @ @ native genocide and of lynching and segregation , not because I ’ m interested in punishing America .
I want to liberate us .
I really do believe there is something better waiting for us .
I think there ’ s something that feels more like freedom .
There ’ s something that feels more like equality .
There ’ s something that feels more like justice that we have yet to experience in this country .
And if we are committed to this idea of America , if we believe in this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to figure out how we ’ re going to get to that promise that we have been denied because we have been unwilling to acknowledge the past .
That ’ s the beauty that awaits us if we ’ re willing to take that step .
We opened this memorial that is dedicated to thousands of victims of racial terror lynchings .
And for me , it ’ s been so affirming to see people come into that space .
Black and white people , many of them are in tears .
Many @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the monuments that represent the communities where they are from , a need to see them sobbing .
But through that pain , there is beauty that emerges .
You begin to see the possibility of restoration .
But until we tell the truth , we deny ourselves the opportunity for beauty .
Justice can be beautiful .
Reconciliation can be beautiful .
Repair can be beautiful .
It ’ s powerful to actually experience redemption .
And we deny ourselves that when we insist on denying our broken past , our ugly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we insist on avoiding the truth .
And because there hasn ’ t been a military intervention , because we are not a Black majority in this country , because there isn ’ t hopefully some war that transitions power , we ’ re going to have to compel people , call people , push people to see the beauty that comes with truth-telling and personal relationship .
You can ’ t overcome abuse , you can ’ t overcome violence , you can ’ t overcome victimization if you ’ re unwilling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ suffered .
And that ’ s the only power we possess when it comes to pushing this country .
Nothing good has ever come from things that are easy .
To do hard things , you got ta confront them .
And so there ’ s no way forward at this moment in our history that doesn ’ t involve some discomfort and doesn ’ t involve some inconvenience .
And you just have to find the capacity and the courage to embrace that .
Every day at Vox , we aim to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you , and our audience around the world , with information that has the power to save lives .
Our mission has never been more vital than it is in this moment : to empower you through understanding .
Vox ’ s work is reaching more people than ever , but our distinctive brand of explanatory journalism takes resources — particularly during a pandemic and an economic downturn .
Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation , but it will enable our staff to continue to offer free articles , videos , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that this moment requires .
Please consider making a contribution to Vox today .

What would it take for America to heal? To be the country it claims to be?
This is the question that animates Bryan Stevenson’s career. Stevenson is the founder and executive director of the Equal Justice Initiative, a clinical professor at the New York University School of Law, a MacArthur “genius,” and the author of the remarkable book Just Mercy — which was recently turned into a feature film where Stevenson was played by Michael B. Jordan.
I admire Stevenson tremendously. He has lived a life dedicated to justice — justice for individuals (some of whom he has rescued from death row) and justice for the society he lives in. He’s one of the fairly few people I’ve found with a vision for how America could find justice on the far shore of its own history. That vision is particularly needed now and so I asked him to return to The Ezra Klein Show to share it. To my delight, he agreed.
This conversation is about truth and reconciliation in America — and about whether truth would actually lead to reconciliation in America. It’s about what the process of reckoning with our past sins and present wounds would look and feel and sound like. It’s about what we can learn from countries like Germany and South Africa, that have walked further down this path than we have. And it’s about the country and community that could lie on the other side of that confrontation.
An edited transcript from our conversation follows. The full conversation can be heard on The Ezra Klein Show.
Ezra Klein
What is a healthy relationship for society to have with its own history?
Bryan Stevenson
Knowing the actual history. If you don’t know your history, you can’t really begin to understand what your obligations are, what your responsibilities are, what you should fear, what you should celebrate, what’s honorable and what’s not honorable.
The big problem we have in the United States is that we don’t actually know our history. We don’t know about the centuries of racial injustice. We don’t know about the native genocide. You say “native genocide” and people have no idea what you’re talking about. They think you’re saying something radical.
Once you know that history, you begin to think differently about who we are. We got comfortable with creating a Constitution that talks about equality and justice for all, but didn’t apply to millions of Indigenous people who were on this land. And so until you understand that history, you can’t begin thinking about, well, what are your responsibilities now? What are your obligations now? What would it take to recover from that kind of violence, that kind of destruction that we did to millions of Indigenous people?
And, of course, that failure to acknowledge that history is what makes us vulnerable to the two-and-a-half centuries of slavery that follow. We’ve invested a lot of time in creating false narratives about slavery, about enslavers, about the South, about the North, about emancipation, about abolitionists — many of whom didn’t believe in slavery but also didn’t believe in racial equality. And the legacy of that is very different than the legacy we’ve been taught.
So for me, it begins with honesty. If you’ve done something wrong to someone else and you genuinely don’t know what you’ve done wrong, you’re not going to be able to fully reconcile with that person. You’re not going to be able to adequately apologize. You’re not going to be able to say the things you need to say to create a path toward recovery. You have to know what you did. And once you understand what you did, you can then begin to calibrate all the things that have to happen for you to try to make peace. For you to recover. To create fellowship again.
We have committed ourselves in this country to silence about our history, to ignorance about our history, to denying our history. And that’s the first part of this relationship that has to be repaired. We’ve got to be willing now to talk honestly about who we are and how we got here.
Ezra Klein
A word you used a few times there was “we.” But when we begin having this conversation about our history, the shared national identity that gets taken for granted in other contexts begins to dissolve very fast. After 9/11, or after winning World War II or during an election, people talk about Americans as a “we” no matter when their ancestors got here. They tend to associate themselves with its founding, its lineages, its victories.
But then you get into its misdeeds, its injustices, its sins, and the idea there is a “we” here becomes very difficult for people. People say things like, “Well, I wasn’t here. I didn’t do any of that. My grandparents came here from Ireland in 1942.”
How do you deal with the pronouns in this conversation? Who is talking? Who is listening? Who owes what to whom?
Bryan Stevenson
I think you’re exactly right. There is a tendency when it comes to mistakes, misconduct, abuse, to disassociate yourself from those things while running to embrace every aspect of achievement. “We won the most medals at the United States Olympics.” Well, you didn’t win any medals, but we do invoke ownership.
So I believe it’s important for anyone who identifies as an American, as a citizen of this country, to not simply embrace all the things about American history that we think are glorious and wonderful, but to also acknowledge and accept the things about our history that are tragic and devastating.
What’s interesting for me, when I look at the experience of African Americans in particular, Black people have been so committed to this country, they’ve been so committed to the identity of an America that is committed to equality and justice.
In the 250 years of enslavement in which Black people endured being kidnapped, put in chains, brutalized, mistreated, abused, raped — there was daily humiliation and degradation, the violence of slavery. That kind of abuse and mistreatment finally ends in 1865 after the Civil War, after the ratification of the 13th Amendment. And instead of seeking revenge or retribution or violence against those who had enslaved them, emancipated Black people said, “We’re going to make peace here. We’re going to make community here. We’re going to commit to education. We’re going to commit to voting. We’re going to become ideal American citizens.”
When you think about all of the brutality and violence and abuse that Black people suffered and they still were willing to live in harmony with those who had abused them, it says something remarkable about the power of “we.” They believed in an America and they got no credit for that. What they got instead was more abuse. There were over 2,000 lynchings between 1865 and 1877. One of the most violent periods in American history.
And yet, for 100 years, they still believed enough in the American idea that they would continue finding ways to contribute. You saw those contributions in World War I, World War II, and the Korean War. And then when they got back from war, they’d be targeted for violence by white supremacists who feared their American military service might cause them to believe that they were an equal. What Dr. King and Rosa Parks and others do in the 1950s and ’60s is so rooted in a commitment to the American identity.
To me, the model that African Americans have established with this country is that even when things are not good we invoke this idea of an American identity. It means that we absolutely have to be willing to acknowledge the things that are harmful, that are injurious in the American South. The entire American South benefited from the institution of slavery — the entire United States did. The rail lines that allowed those companies in the North to become industrialists, the industries that gave rise to all of that growth during the first half of the 20th century — all of it had its roots in this forced labor stolen from Black bodies.
We have to understand that to really be honest. There is no way of saying “they did that.” If we’re going to claim American citizenship and American identity, there has to be a willingness to say “we” just like there’s that willingness to say “we” when an American does something great.
Ezra Klein
In an interview you did at MOMA in 2015, you had this line that I haven’t been able to stop thinking about since: “We need to engage everyone in a meaningful conversation about what it would take to cleanse ourselves of the legacy of slavery.”
When I first heard that I thought it was obvious. And then I realized that almost every word in that sentence could take a lifetime to unpack. We began with the first word in that sentence: “we.” But let me go to one of the next pieces of it, which is “engage everyone.”
The conversations we have in this country, to the extent we have them at all, are polarized and fractured. So how do we engage everyone in a conversation about America’s foundational sins?
Bryan Stevenson
I think it begins with an understanding of what actually happened. The true evil of American slavery wasn’t involuntary servitude or the forced labor. It wasn’t the bondage. The real evil of slavery was the ideology that we created — that Black people are less deserving, less worthy, less human, less evolved.
If you understand that’s the true problem of slavery, then it becomes easier to understand how we don’t really end slavery with the passage of the 13th Amendment. In 1865, my view is that slavery doesn’t end — it just evolves. Because we never deal with the fundamental character that made enslavement so horrific, which is this ideology of white supremacy.
Once you understand that, then you can continue to see that legacy play out in the disenfranchisement and exclusion of Black people from jobs in the North and West in the 1950s. When banks don’t give Black people mortgage loans, they don’t help veterans who are Black move into the middle class. You begin to see it in the ’70s and ’80s when we declared this war on drugs and we target Black communities. You see it in the ways in which police violence manifests itself.
And once you understand that, you begin to understand that you are implicated in this story. You are implicated in this moment that we live in where the smog created by our history of racial injustice is still in the air and we’re still breathing it in and it’s corrupting our world view, just like it corrupted the world view of people before us. So it does begin with that understanding.
Ezra Klein
What does that engagement actually look like? What is the structure in which people are pulled into this conversation so they can get to that understanding?
Bryan Stevenson
I think it’s local. It’s intimate. It’s familial, it’s communal. It’s statewide. It’s nationwide. I think every entity, every institution has to commit to this process of truth-telling.
I think it’s really important that people understand that if you’re genuinely engaged and recovering from human rights abuses, you have to commit to truth-telling first. You can’t jump to reconciliation. You can’t jump to reparation or restoration until you tell the truth. Until you know the nature of the injuries, you can’t actually speak to the kind of remedies that are going to be necessary.
For me, that’s very immediate. I believe colleges and universities need to have their own truth-telling process to document the ways in which they contributed to the history of racial inequality, the history of white supremacy. If you were a college and university functioning in the first half of the 20th century, there are things you should acknowledge you did to sustain racial inequality. Corporations, banks, insurance companies all played a critical role in allowing racial injustice and white supremacy to prevail throughout the 20th century.
You don’t have to go outside of your own institutions. You can begin with your own truth-telling. You can tell your own story about the ways in which you are complicit. For me, that’s got to be the way it works.
There are places in the American South that have to address things that were unique to this region. We didn’t allow Black people to vote in many states in the American South for a century. It took blood and violence and federal troops and congressional acts just to give people their right to vote. And there was no shame about denying people their right to vote.
The North wins the Civil War and the South wins the narrative war because not only do they not apologize, they actually double down and say what we did by enslaving people and forming this Confederacy was noble and glorious and honorable. And when that’s your mindset, you don’t get to the right place. That didn’t happen when lynching becomes less prominent in the 1950s. It didn’t happen in the 1960s after the passage of the civil rights laws. It hasn’t happened yet.
So I want to say to the state of Alabama: Will you reckon with your history of enslavement, your history of lynching, your history of segregation? What are you going to say? What are you going to be reckoned with?
In 1965, we should have said: If you’re really sorry about all of this abuse and disenfranchisement, if you really want to do something to recover from a century of disenfranchisement, the state of Alabama ought to say, “We’re going to register every Black person when they turn 18. We no longer want the burden to be on Black people who have been discouraged and abused and turned away and humiliated and threatened for trying to vote. We’re going to take that burden. We’re going to register every Black person.”
We’re going to say to the University of Alabama, University of Georgia, and some of these schools that were adamantly opposed to integration, if those universities really want to reckon, then maybe they’re going to say, “We don’t think Black people who are residents of the state should have to pay tuition. We think we should take that on as a way of recovering, responding to this history of exclusion.”
Banks could be thinking very differently about what they owe African Americans in this country when they reckon with the history of exclusion. The military could be thinking about what it owes to Black veterans when it allowed banks and American institutions to turn veterans away because of the color of their skin. Companies have that same responsibility. The government has that same responsibility.
But for me, it begins with the truth-telling, because when you start telling the truth, you recognize things. For me, the question is: What is the truth of our institution as it relates to the history of racial inequality? It’s very, very concrete. How do we frame an investigation into the truth of our history? What is the truth of our history? What is our institutions’ role? What is our community’s role in allowing this landscape to be created that is so shattered by racial injustice and white supremacy?
Ezra Klein
Barbara Lee recently proposed a Truth, Racial Healing, and Transformation Commission. Do you think that is a model that could work here, and how do you imagine it looking? And for those who don’t know, can you talk about the truth and reconciliation process more generally?
Bryan Stevenson
There are countries that have engaged in a national effort of truth-telling. We saw that in South Africa after the collapse of apartheid. The truth and reconciliation process there was very powerful. The victims of apartheid had an opportunity to tell their stories. The perpetrators were also required to speak to their role. It was an important process.
We’ve seen it in Rwanda, where the victims of the genocide have been invited to give voice to their suffering, their loss. The prisons were filled with perpetrators of that violence and there was a reckoning around it.
Obviously, in Germany, we’ve seen a dramatic transformation of that country’s landscape so that you now have stones and symbols and memorials and monuments throughout cities like Berlin. There’s a Holocaust memorial in the center of Berlin. Every student in Germany as an elementary school student is required to go to the Holocaust memorials and learn that history. Police officers are required to study that history. And so it can be effective at the national level.
I’m very supportive of Representative Lee’s commission. But I want to caution that the difference between South Africa and Rwanda and Germany and the United States is that there was a transfer of power in each of those countries. Black South Africans took over South Africa once they had the vote — it’s a Black majority country. In Rwanda, the victims of the genocide ultimately regained power through military intervention. So in each case, the parameters of that truth-telling were shaped by people who had been victimized. In Germany, the Nazis lost the war. We wouldn’t see all of that iconography honoring victims of the Holocaust in Berlin had the Nazis prevailed.
With that transfer of power, we had the opportunity to do some things that we don’t have in this country. The people who were the perpetrators of so much of this bigotry and violence are still in power. There was no transfer in power after the Civil War, after the era of lynching, even after the civil rights movement. And because of that, it’s going to have to be much more atomized. I think we should have a national truth-telling commission, but that is not going to be an excuse for banks and schools and corporations and industries and police departments and localities from engaging in their own truth-telling.
I think we have to try to get people to understand that when we confront this history, we don’t have to fear punishment. I’m a lawyer. I defend people who have done things that are terrible. And I’m persuaded that each of us is more than the worst thing we’ve ever done.
Because of that, I want to talk about this history of enslavement and of native genocide and of lynching and segregation, not because I’m interested in punishing America. I want to liberate us. I really do believe there is something better waiting for us. I think there’s something that feels more like freedom. There’s something that feels more like equality. There’s something that feels more like justice that we have yet to experience in this country.
And if we are committed to this idea of America, if we believe in this idea of America, then we ought to figure out how we’re going to get to that promise that we have been denied because we have been unwilling to acknowledge the past. That’s the beauty that awaits us if we’re willing to take that step.
We opened this memorial that is dedicated to thousands of victims of racial terror lynchings. And for me, it’s been so affirming to see people come into that space. Black and white people, many of them are in tears. Many of them will wrap their arms around the monuments that represent the communities where they are from, a need to see them sobbing. But through that pain, there is beauty that emerges. You begin to see the possibility of restoration.
But until we tell the truth, we deny ourselves the opportunity for beauty. Justice can be beautiful. Reconciliation can be beautiful. Repair can be beautiful. It’s powerful to actually experience redemption. And we deny ourselves that when we insist on denying our broken past, our ugly past, our racist past, when we insist on avoiding the truth.
And because there hasn’t been a military intervention, because we are not a Black majority in this country, because there isn’t hopefully some war that transitions power, we’re going to have to compel people, call people, push people to see the beauty that comes with truth-telling and personal relationship.
You can’t overcome abuse, you can’t overcome violence, you can’t overcome victimization if you’re unwilling to reckon with all that you have suffered. And that’s the only power we possess when it comes to pushing this country. Nothing good has ever come from things that are easy. To do hard things, you gotta confront them. And so there’s no way forward at this moment in our history that doesn’t involve some discomfort and doesn’t involve some inconvenience. And you just have to find the capacity and the courage to embrace that.


vox--2020-07-20--The case for unschooling

The case for unschooling

It ’ s 10 am and each of my three school-aged children are spread out around the house .
One is on his laptop , headphones on , eyes focused intently on his screen .
One has transformed our dining room table into his own makeshift STEM studio complete with LEGOs , popsicle sticks , food coloring , and other seemingly unrelated things .
And the last one is on his tablet listening to an audiobook while he follows along with his physical copy .
It might technically be summer , but this is what life often looks like for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ don ’ t homeschool — in our household , several of our kids are unschooled .
Since March , I ’ ve watched as my friends scrambled to put together some sort of survival plan to make it through the school year as closures caused by the Covid-19 pandemic spread across the nation .
“ How are we going to do this ?
” was the question on everyone ’ s mind .
It ’ s been a tough few months , and just as we ’ ve taken a moment to catch @ @ @ @ @ @ @ closures in the fall , and there ’ s a new question on the horizon : “ What are we going to do about next year ?
” If you find yourself worrying over these questions , unschooling might be the answer you ’ re looking for .
Unschooling is a broad term that encompasses a range of labels , definitions , and practices , unique to each person or family .
But at its core , it ’ s the opportunity — and often for new unschoolers , the challenge — for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than adhere to the criteria and curricula predetermined by school boards or other entities .
Unlike the traditional homeschool model which often seeks to mimic the classroom or follow a defined curriculum usually with parents acting as teachers , with unschooling , children take the lead .
Adults , sometimes parents , but not always , typically offer support , assistance , and guidance when needed .
For the past three years , our family has been on a journey to reimagine the way we do “ school , ” a decision ignited @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who was in third grade at the time .
Each day he came home requesting to be homeschooled : He told us that at school he felt bored , and his project-based honors program was discontinued due to the lack of staff — one of many challenges at his under-resourced public school .
It was becoming increasingly clear that his desire for independence and space to explore the things he was interested in wasn ’ t possible in the traditional public school classroom .
At the time , we had a younger child @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and an older sibling who wanted to stay in his public school .
Ultimately , we agreed to pull him out , and so began our journey .
In the beginning , I was much like parents a few months ago trying to recreate school at home .
I was also working from home as a freelance writer , and as the worksheets , packets , and strict lesson plans increased , so did my anxiety and frustration .
As I attempted to take on the role of teacher , I found @ @ @ @ @ @ @ balance lesson plans with side-by-side instruction and meeting my own deadlines .
My son seemed to be struggling with sitting in front of a computer screen for hours and filling out endless worksheets even more than I was .
It wasn ’ t until I noticed more ease and enthusiasm happening in our scheduled “ free time ” — like his decision to write a short story one day — that I understood the way we were homeschooling wasn ’ t working for either of us .
Then I remembered something I discovered @ @ @ @ @ @ @ homeschooling options .
A concept as simple as it was radical : People can learn , without “ school.
” Allowing kids to shape their own education It can be helpful to think of unschooling not as an educational approach , but as the philosophy that learning is a natural process constantly taking place .
The term emerged in the ’ 70s , popularized by author and educator John Holt .
After working as a teacher in a conventional setting for several years , Holt realized the motivating factor for many of his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ learning , but a fear of failure and criticism .
He noted a marked difference between the natural creativity in preschool-age children and the lack of excitement and curiosity in elementary school students and beyond .
Over his lifetime , his writings on unschooling inspired many to reexamine the state of America ’ s public schools and our rigid expectations of children .
Today , unschooling is practiced by people across the world for all sorts of reasons , even within their own families .
For us , it ’ s an opportunity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ looks like naturally for our youngest son , age 7 .
For our middle child , age 11 , the driver is independence : the ability to choose which projects to pursue , books to read , and even languages to study .
And for our eldest , 15 , who was attending traditional school before the pandemic , our decision to unschool this coming fall will allow him space to deep dive into the subjects he ’ s most passionate about .
Our days typically look like a mix of scheduled activities @ @ @ @ @ @ @ needed , and a dedicated amount of time for exploration or personal projects .
We have some expectations , such as using technology to support a project or interest rather than endless scrolling , or setting goals that we regularly check-in on , agreed upon together as a family .
Not all unschoolers do this , but this is what works for us .
A tool we picked up from our unschool community is the use of contracts to outline those expectations and requests .
We use them for everything from resolving conflicts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ resources ( this can help with ensuring healthy use of the internet ) .
Daily there ’ s reading , their pick — for one that ’ s an audiobook , another a comic .
They may have a virtual class in the morning , something they may request on their own or something we noticed they were naturally drawn to .
They each have projects or interests they ’ re actively pursuing , so in the afternoon they could be doing that on their own or with our assistance .
For example @ @ @ @ @ @ @ four of his animated film , so you ’ d find him working on that , while our youngest is eager to read “ bigger books ” like his brothers , so more structured reading assistance could be happening then .
Before the pandemic , for two days a week they would attend Natural Creativity , a self-directed learning center featured in the documentary Unschooled , where facilitators would help support , guide , and assist them in their endeavors ( program costs are fairly reasonable , and there are financial aid options @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gave me two dedicated days to work without interruption .
Unschooling as a working parent can afford more freedom Will my kid actually learn anything if we let them do what they want ?
Will they fall behind their peers ?
And what happens in the subsequent years when they might want to return to school ?
These are all questions I ’ ve had myself and sometimes still think about .
Here ’ s what I know for sure : In practice , learning is happening all of the time , even @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and presented just right .
For example , my son mastered fractions simply by following his natural interest in cooking , where he learned early on how to double or halve ingredients when making his favorite brownies .
If you look for the learning , you ’ ll find it .
For working parents , any kind of homeschooling isn ’ t easy , but unschooling gives a different sort of freedom .
Think about it this way : With a defined curriculum , your role is teacher .
With self-directed learning , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , or as we ’ ve liked to view it , a sort of partnership .
Children take the lead , explore subjects that interest them , play , and read while you support with assistance , help connect ideas , or introduce new material that builds on those topics .
On the days where more support , structure , or scheduled interactions are needed , especially for younger children who may need more assistance , there are platforms like Outschool , which offers countless live online classes with teachers and other students @ @ @ @ @ @ @ class , an hour each day that occupies a busy first-grader with a story and a STEM project .
Self-directed centers like Natural Creativity continue to offer virtual community and weekly afternoon activities .
There are also co-ops where parents rotate during the week to lead a lesson or activity for a group of children - virtually or socially distanced , of course .
I ’ ll admit — the concept of unschooling can be a lot to digest , especially in comparison to what we ’ ve come to expect from traditional @ @ @ @ @ @ @ designed for efficiency , to educate large groups of students .
Homeschool is a different strategy altogether .
If you ’ re considering homeschooling in general , it ’ s important to read your state ’ s laws so you ’ re clear on what ’ s expected of you .
And while reporting requirements may vary from district to district , unschooling is a perfectly acceptable homeschool method in all 50 states .
Even in the most strict states ( mine is one of them ) , there aren ’ t benchmarks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can unschool and make the transition back to traditional school if your child ’ s needs and preferences change .
Meanwhile , for older unschoolers interested in college , it ’ s a great practice to get in touch with the admissions office of their desired schools to find out what their requirements for homeschooled students are .
You might be surprised to learn that in lieu of traditional transcripts and test scores , colleges welcome the creative learning experiences from unschoolers and homeschoolers of all backgrounds .
Just like traditional school , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unschoolers .
In fact , in the absence of the high stress and rigid structure of high school , many unschoolers are quite successful in college .
Not only have they ’ ve had ample practice in taking the lead in their education , they ’ re also used to the freedoms in college that students in traditional schools aren ’ t necessarily familiar with .
While unschoolers frequently do go on to college and grad school as well , they also pursue vocational schools and other special skills .
It ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ internships that align with their interests , start businesses , or pursue large-scale creative projects that assist them as they navigate life beyond school .
For example , there ’ s 19-year-old Karen Leong who owns a successful custom cake design business after discovering videos on YouTube when she was 11 .
Unschoolers often find careers they enjoy and that support them .
I ’ m not saying unschooling is right for every child , and I understand the hesitation that comes with such unstructured learning for your kids .
As for heading @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would simply encourage all parents to remember that even though it might be different than what we are used to , learning is still happening all around us .
Uncertainty is the theme for everyone right now .
But as we ’ re gathering research , looking over the data , and waiting to hear some sort of plan , perhaps you could consider a different approach to manage it .
Take the year into your own hands , let your children take the lead , and watch what happens when you learn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a freelance writer and brand strategist with a passion for storytelling .
By day she uses her words to bring brand visions to life and by night she pens essays on parenting , purpose , and other matters of the heart .
Find her managing a blended family of schoolers , unschoolers , and young people whose paths are yet to be discovered in Philadelphia .
Every day at Vox , we aim to answer your most important questions and provide you , and our audience around the world , with information that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Our mission has never been more vital than it is in this moment : to empower you through understanding .
Vox ’ s work is reaching more people than ever , but our distinctive brand of explanatory journalism takes resources — particularly during a pandemic and an economic downturn .
Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation , but it will enable our staff to continue to offer free articles , videos , and podcasts at the quality and volume that this moment requires .
Please consider making a contribution to Vox @ @

It’s 10 am and my three school-age children are spread out around the house. One is on his laptop, headphones on, eyes focused intently on his screen. One has transformed our dining room table into his own makeshift STEM studio complete with Legos, popsicle sticks, food coloring, and other seemingly unrelated things. And the last one is on his tablet listening to an audiobook while he follows along with his physical copy. It might technically be summer, but this is what life often looks like for us year-round. No, we don’t homeschool — in our household, several of our kids are unschooled.
Since March, I’ve watched as my friends scrambled to put together some sort of survival plan to make it through the school year as closures caused by the Covid-19 pandemic spread across the nation. “How are we going to do this?” was the question on everyone’s mind. It’s been a tough few months, and just as we’ve taken a moment to catch our breath, schools are now announcing closures in the fall, and there’s a new question on the horizon: “What are we going to do about next year?” If you find yourself worrying over these questions, unschooling might be the answer you’re looking for.
Unschooling is a broad term that encompasses a range of labels, definitions, and practices unique to each person or family. At its core, it’s the opportunity — and often for new unschoolers, the challenge — for children to explore their own interests rather than adhere to the criteria and curricula predetermined by school boards or other entities. Unlike the traditional homeschool model which often seeks to mimic the classroom or follow a defined curriculum usually with parents acting as teachers, in unschooling, children take the lead. Adults, sometimes (but not always) parents, typically offer support, assistance, and guidance when needed.
For the past three years, our family has been on a journey to reimagine the way we do “school,” a decision ignited by our independent and headstrong son, who was in third grade at the time. Each day, he came home requesting to be homeschooled: He told us that at school he felt bored, and his project-based honors program was discontinued due to the lack of staff — one of many challenges at his under-resourced public school. It was becoming increasingly clear that his desire for independence and space to explore the things he was interested in wasn’t possible in the traditional public school classroom. At the time, we had a younger child who wasn’t yet in school and an older sibling who wanted to stay in his public school. Ultimately, we agreed to pull him out of his public school, and so began our journey.
In the beginning, I was much like parents a few months ago, trying to recreate school at home. I was also working from home as a freelance writer, and as the worksheets, packets, and strict lesson plans increased, so did my anxiety and frustration. As I attempted to take on the role of teacher, I found myself approaching burnout as I struggled to balance lesson plans with side-by-side instruction and meeting my own deadlines. My son seemed to be struggling with sitting in front of a computer screen for hours and filling out endless worksheets even more than I was. It wasn’t until I noticed more ease and enthusiasm happening in our scheduled “free time” — like his decision to write a short story one day — that I understood the way we were homeschooling wasn’t working for either of us.
Then I remembered something I discovered back when I first began researching our homeschooling options, a concept as simple as it was radical: People can learn without “school.”
Allowing kids to shape their own education
It can be helpful to think of unschooling not as an educational approach but as the philosophy that learning is a natural process constantly taking place. The term emerged in the ’70s, popularized by author and educator John Holt. After working as a teacher in a conventional setting for several years, Holt realized the motivating factor for many of his students wasn’t a love of learning but a fear of failure and criticism. He noted a marked difference between the natural creativity in preschool-age children and the lack of excitement and curiosity in elementary school students and beyond. Over his lifetime, his writings on unschooling inspired many to reexamine the state of America’s public schools and our rigid expectations of children.
Today, unschooling is practiced by people across the world for all sorts of reasons, even within their own families. For us, it’s an opportunity to release expectations and observe what learning looks like naturally for our youngest son, age 7. For our middle child, age 11, the driver is independence: the ability to choose which projects to pursue, books to read, and even languages to study. And for our eldest, 15, who was attending traditional school before the pandemic, our decision to unschool this coming fall will allow him space to dive deep into the subjects he’s most passionate about.
Our days typically look like a mix of scheduled activities, some guidance or instructional assistance if needed, and a dedicated amount of time for exploration or personal projects. We have some expectations, such as using technology to support a project or interest rather than endless scrolling, or setting goals that we regularly check-in on, agreed upon together as a family. Not all unschoolers do this, but this is what works for us. A tool we picked up from our unschool community is the use of contracts to outline those expectations and requests. We use them for everything from resolving conflicts to requests to use certain tools and resources (this can help with ensuring healthy use of the internet).
There’s daily reading, their pick — for one that’s an audiobook, another a comic. They may have a virtual class in the morning, something they may request on their own or something we noticed they were naturally drawn to. They each have projects or interests they’re actively pursuing, so in the afternoon they could be doing that on their own or with our assistance. For example, our eldest is currently on scene four of his animated film, so you’d find him working on that, while our youngest is eager to read “bigger books” like his brothers, so more structured reading assistance could be happening then. Before the pandemic, for two days a week they would attend Natural Creativity, a self-directed learning center featured in the documentary Unschooled, where facilitators would help support, guide, and assist them in their endeavors (program costs are fairly reasonable, and there are financial aid options). An added bonus: This gave me two dedicated days to work without interruption.
Unschooling as a working parent can afford more freedom
Will my kid actually learn anything if we let them do what they want? Will they fall behind their peers? And what happens in the subsequent years when they might want to return to school? These are all questions I’ve had myself and sometimes still think about. Here’s what I know for sure: In practice, learning is happening all the time, even if it isn’t packaged up and presented just right. For example, my son mastered fractions simply by following his natural interest in cooking, where he learned early on how to double or halve ingredients when making his favorite brownies. If you look for the learning, you’ll find it.
For working parents, any kind of homeschooling isn’t easy, but unschooling gives a different sort of freedom. Think about it this way: With a defined curriculum, your role is teacher. With self-directed learning, that shifts to a more supportive role, or as we’ve liked to view it, a sort of partnership. Children take the lead, explore subjects that interest them, play, and read; you support with assistance, help connect ideas, or introduce new material that builds on those topics.
On the days where more support, structure, or scheduled interactions are needed, especially for younger children who may need more assistance, there are platforms like Outschool, which offers countless live online classes with teachers and other students. A current favorite is Storybook STEM class, an hour each day that occupies a busy first-grader with a story and a project in science, technology, engineering, or math. Self-directed centers like Natural Creativity continue to offer virtual community and weekly afternoon activities. There are also co-ops where parents rotate during the week to lead a lesson or activity for a group of children — virtually or socially distanced, of course.
I’ll admit, the concept of unschooling can be a lot to digest, especially in comparison to what we’ve come to expect from traditional school. But remember, school is designed for efficiency, to educate large groups of students. Homeschool is a different strategy altogether.
If you’re considering homeschooling in general, it’s important to read your state’s laws so you’re clear on what’s expected of you. And while reporting requirements may vary from district to district, unschooling is a perfectly acceptable homeschool method in all 50 states. Even in the most strict states (mine is one of them), there aren’t benchmarks students are required to reach. You can unschool and make the transition back to traditional school if your child’s needs and preferences change.
Meanwhile, for older unschoolers interested in college, it’s a great practice to get in touch with the admissions office of their desired schools to find out what their requirements for homeschooled students are. You might be surprised to learn that in lieu of traditional transcripts and test scores, colleges welcome the creative learning experiences from unschoolers and homeschoolers of all backgrounds.
Just like traditional school, college is one of many paths for unschoolers. In fact, in the absence of the high stress and rigid structure of high school, many unschoolers are quite successful in college. Not only have they had ample practice in taking the lead in their education, they’re also used to the freedoms in college that students in traditional schools aren’t necessarily familiar with. While unschoolers frequently do go on to college and grad school, they also pursue vocational schools and other special skills. It’s common for high school-aged unschoolers to explore internships that align with their interests, start businesses, or pursue large-scale creative projects that assist them as they navigate life beyond school. For example, there’s 19-year-old Karen Leong who owns a successful custom cake design business after discovering videos on YouTube when she was 11.
Unschoolers often find careers they enjoy and that support them. I’m not saying unschooling is right for every child, and I understand the hesitation that comes with such unstructured learning for your kids. As for heading back to school next year, I would simply encourage all parents to remember that even though it might be different from what we are used to, learning is still happening all around us. Uncertainty is the theme for everyone right now. But as we’re gathering research, looking over the data, and waiting to hear some sort of plan, perhaps you could consider a different approach to manage it. Take the year into your own hands, let your children take the lead, and watch what happens when you learn without school.
Tyshia Ingram is a freelance writer and brand strategist with a passion for storytelling. By day she uses her words to bring brand visions to life and by night she pens essays on parenting, purpose, and other matters of the heart. Find her managing a blended family of schoolers, unschoolers, and young people whose paths are yet to be discovered in Philadelphia.


How Biden is winning

Last week , Joe Biden held a 45-minute call with a small group of reporters , including myself .
The main subject of the conversation was Biden ’ s new plan , Build Back Better : a new , post-Covid framework for his proposals to build clean energy infrastructure , revitalize American manufacturing , make care work pay for those who do it and affordable for those who need it , and address racial inequalities .
My question was simple .
Democrats don ’ t have a path to 60 seats in the Senate .
So how will Biden keep @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the filibuster ?
Would he support filibuster reform , or elimination ?
Biden ’ s reply was his campaign in miniature , reflecting both the instincts that have made him successful and the caution that has frustrated many on the left .
“ I think it ’ s going to depend on how obstreperous they ” — meaning Republicans — “ become , and if they become that way , ” he replied .
“ I have not supported the elimination of the filibuster because it has been used as often to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ other way around .
But you ’ re going to have to take a look at it.
” That answer , which reflected a genuine shift in Biden ’ s rhetoric on the issue , made some headlines .
But it wasn ’ t the end of Biden ’ s argument .
“ I ’ ll say something outrageous , ” he continued .
“ I think I have a pretty good record of pulling together Democrats and Republicans.
” He went on to say that many Senate Republicans will feel “ a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ defeat and may be ready to work with Democrats on issues like infrastructure and racial inequality .
“ In my career , I have never expected a foreign leader or a member of Congress to appear in the second-edition Profiles in Courage , ” Biden said .
“ But I ’ m fairly good at understanding the limitations for a senator or leader and helping them navigate around to what they want to do from what they ’ re having political trouble doing .
I have been successful in helping my Republican friends @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I ’ m pushing over the top.
” Tucked into this argument is Biden ’ s view of the Republican Party : He sees it not as a monolith but as a coalition .
Some members of that coalition love Trump and will grieve his defeat .
They ’ re not going to work with Biden , and he doesn ’ t expect to work with them .
But some Senate Republicans dislike Trump , regret what their party has become , and are looking for redemption .
What they need is a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Democrat who doesn ’ t antagonize their voters and won ’ t rub their noses in their loss .
What they need , Biden thinks , is Biden .
But this isn ’ t just Biden ’ s theory of governing .
It ’ s also his theory of the campaign .
After the 2016 election , panicked , wounded Democrats settled on a diagnosis .
Trump , for all his mania , bigotry , and chaos , had given angry Americans something to vote for .
To stop him , Democrats would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ polarization with mobilization .
They would need to show as much anger , as much populism , as much wrecking ball energy as he did .
Biden is running — and , for now , winning — by defying that diagnosis .
He is executing a careful , quiet campaign focused less on thrilling his partisans than denying Trump the boogeyman he needs to reenergize his base .
It ’ s a campaign that frustrates liberal activists and pundits because it repeatedly , routinely denies them the excitement and collisions that structure modern @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for that reason , a campaign that is frustrating Trump and Fox News , which is why they keep trying to run against Bernie Sanders , Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez , and Ilhan Omar instead .
For Biden , this is part strategy , part personality .
“ You should not underestimate the reality that campaigns tend to reflect the candidate , ” says Anita Dunn , another senior Biden adviser .
“ Joe Biden has never been a polarizing figure .
He has spent his career trying to bring people together .
During the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that what the party needed was that warrior who would stand up to the Republicans no matter what , Biden consistently spoke to the importance of trying to work with the other side to get things done .
He was attacked for naiveté and living in the past .
But that ’ s what he believes.
” Biden doesn ’ t try to win Twitter with brutal burns , or dominate the news cycle with controversial statements ( though he occasionally does so with gaffes ) .
He ’ s not widely loved @ @ @ @ @ @ @ loathed than Trump .
Political scientist Michael Tesler notes that you can see the gap even among the two candidates ’ supporters : 80 percent of Biden supporters have a very unfavorable view of Trump , while only 53 percent of Trump supporters have a very unfavorable view of Biden .
What ’ s striking is how well it appears to be working .
As I write this , Biden is ahead by more than 9 points in the FiveThirtyEight national polling average .
The Economist ’ s election forecasting model gives him @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Electoral College .
He leads in polling averages of Florida , Ohio , Pennsylvania , Wisconsin , Michigan , Arizona , and North .
Carolina .
He ’ s neck-and-neck with Trump in Texas .
Texas !
As the New York Times ’ s Nate Cohn notes , even if polls prove as off in 2020 as they did in 2016 , these numbers still predict a large Biden victory .
The key to Biden ’ s success is simple : He ’ s slicing into Trump ’ s coalition , pulling back @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in 2016 .
The Biden campaign ’ s insight is that mobilization is often the flip side of polarization : When party activists are sharply divided by ideology and demography , what excites your side will be the very thing that unnerves the other side .
Studies of House elections show this dynamic in action : Ideologically extreme candidates perform worse than moderates because they drive up turnout on the other side .
Biden ’ s theory of wavering Trump voters is the same as his theory of wavering Republican senators : He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but need help getting over their political hang-ups about voting for a Democrat .
And so he is trying to give them that help .
He praises the old Republican Party , refuses to pick a side in American politics ’ hottest fights .
Biden has resisted calls to abolish private insurance , ban fracking , decriminalize immigration , and defund the police .
It ’ s cost him enthusiasm on the left , but it has denied Trump the clear foil he needs .
That ’ s left Trump confused , pathetically @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t hold and getting fact-checked live on Fox .
Biden is treating Trump voters not as a monolith but as a coalition — a coalition that can be broken .
A recent Pew poll asked Trump and Biden voters about the motivation behind their choice : Were they voting for their candidate , or against the other guy ?
Seventy-six percent of Trump voters said they were voting for Trump ; 24 percent said they were voting against Biden .
Among Biden voters , it was the reverse : Sixty-seven percent said they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 33 percent said they were voting for Biden .
In early July , Brad Parscale , Trump ’ s then-campaign manager , tried to spin this dynamic to Trump ’ s advantage : “ When it comes to the most important factor , enthusiasm , President Trump is dominating , ” he wrote .
“ The unprecedented enthusiasm behind the president ’ s reelection efforts stands in stark contrast to the flat , almost nonexistent enthusiasm for Biden.
” Two weeks later , Parscale was fired .
Strange as it is to say @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden is at least partly a choice the Biden campaign has made .
And perhaps they have made the right one .
Studies of political polarization over the past few decades largely converge on the same finding : Rising polarization isn ’ t driven by a deeper attachment to the party or politicians we support , but increased fear and loathing of the party and politicians we oppose .
That ’ s why ticket-splitting is falling even as more voters than ever self-identify as independents .
Those independents aren ’ t truly independent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stable in which party they vote for than even self-identified partisans were a generation ago .
They ’ re independents because they don ’ t like the party they vote for enough to identify with it .
They ’ re held in place by fear of the other party winning power .
Biden ’ s ability to neutralize negative polarization is grimly intertwined with his identity .
Biden is an older , white man from Pennsylvania , and that is helping him with the older , whiter voters who make up Trump ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In a comment both depressing and true , Biden said , “ I think there ’ s a lot of sexism in the way they went after Hillary .
I think it was unfair .
An awful lot of it .
Well , that ’ s not gon na happen with me.
” Trump ’ s approach to politics and lethal mismanagement of the coronavirus pandemic have also given Biden an advantage , in part by neutralizing Trump ’ s ability to distract the country with feuds and flotsam , and in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vote against Trump no matter what Biden does .
Biden can take base mobilization somewhat for granted because Trump will do much of the work for him .
“ Trump is great at energizing his base , ” says political scientist Alan Abramowitz .
“ But he ’ s equally good or even better at activating the Democratic base.
” That doesn ’ t mean Biden is taking base mobilization entirely for granted .
But he ’ s doing it through the patient work of coalitional politics , not through public , polarizing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ page Sanders-Biden task force recommendations moved the substance of Biden ’ s agenda significantly to the left without tying Biden to any of the lightning rod issues that animate cable news conflict .
“ On the big issues — the stuff voters will notice — he doesn ’ t want to be seen as particularly polarizing or divisive , ” says political scientist Seth Masket , who is completing a book on the lessons Democrats learned from 2016 .
“ But while your average voter won ’ t pay much attention to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ out to have a lot of meaning behind them , and the Democratic activists you want working for your campaign and staffing your organization notice them.
” All this has given Biden the opportunity to run the campaign he ’ s most comfortable with , and most suited to run .
A campaign that ’ s more about giving people who don ’ t agree with him on everything permission to vote for him rather than a campaign about mobilizing his own base .
It might not work in every year , against @ @ @ @ @ @ @ working this year , against this one .
Rep. Stephanie Murphy ( D-FL ) represents one of the few perfectly even congressional districts in the country : Florida ’ s Seventh , where Republicans and Democrats are evenly matched , and where Murphy took the seat from the Republicans in 2016 .
It ’ s the kind of district Democrats need to win if they want to take back Florida .
And when Murphy watches Biden , she tells me she sees a candidate who understands how to win districts like hers .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the district in 2018 by being someone in Congress who isn ’ t on cable news having had my head explode all the time , ” she says .
“ And I think Joe Biden understands that .
A steady hand is appreciated and valued against the chaos of the last few years.
” Every day at Vox , we aim to answer your most important questions and provide you , and our audience around the world , with information that has the power to save lives .
Our mission has never been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ moment : to empower you through understanding .
Vox ’ s work is reaching more people than ever , but our distinctive brand of explanatory journalism takes resources — particularly during a pandemic and an economic downturn .
Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation , but it will enable our staff to continue to offer free articles , videos , and podcasts at the quality and volume that this moment requires .
Please consider making a contribution to Vox today .

Last week, Joe Biden held a 45-minute call with a small group of reporters, including myself. The main subject of the conversation was Biden’s new plan, Build Back Better: a new, post-Covid framework for his proposals to build clean energy infrastructure, revitalize American manufacturing, make care work pay for those who do it and affordable for those who need it, and address racial inequalities.
My question was simple. Democrats don’t have a path to 60 seats in the Senate. So how will Biden keep his agenda from dying at the hands of the filibuster? Would he support filibuster reform, or elimination? Biden’s reply was his campaign in miniature, reflecting both the instincts that have made him successful and the caution that has frustrated many on the left.
“I think it’s going to depend on how obstreperous they” — meaning Republicans — “become, and if they become that way,” he replied. “I have not supported the elimination of the filibuster because it has been used as often to protect rights I care about as the other way around. But you’re going to have to take a look at it.”
That answer, which reflected a genuine shift in Biden’s rhetoric on the issue, made some headlines. But it wasn’t the end of Biden’s argument. “I’ll say something outrageous,” he continued. “I think I have a pretty good record of pulling together Democrats and Republicans.” He went on to say many Senate Republicans will feel “a bit liberated” by Trump’s defeat and may be ready to work with Democrats on issues like infrastructure and racial inequality.
“In my career, I have never expected a foreign leader or a member of Congress to appear in the second-edition Profiles in Courage,” Biden said. “But I’m fairly good at understanding the limitations for a senator or leader and helping them navigate around to what they want to do from what they’re having political trouble doing. I have been successful in helping my Republican friends find rationales to help me get what I’m pushing over the top.”
Tucked into this argument is Biden’s view of the Republican Party: He sees it not as a monolith but as a coalition. Some members of that coalition love Trump and will grieve his defeat. They’re not going to work with Biden, and he doesn’t expect to work with them. But some Senate Republicans dislike Trump, regret what their party has become, and are looking for redemption. What they need is a Democrat they can work with — a Democrat who doesn’t antagonize their voters and won’t rub their noses in their loss. What they need, Biden thinks, is Biden.
But this isn’t just Biden’s theory of governing. It’s also his theory of the campaign.
The Biden strategy
After the 2016 election, panicked, wounded Democrats settled on a diagnosis. Trump, for all his mania, bigotry, and chaos, had given angry Americans something to vote for. To stop him, Democrats would need to match force with counter-force, polarization with mobilization. They would need to show as much anger, as much populism, as much wrecking ball energy as he did.
Biden is running — and, for now, winning — by defying that diagnosis. He is executing a careful, quiet campaign focused less on thrilling his partisans than denying Trump the boogeyman he needs to reenergize his base. It’s a campaign that frustrates liberal activists and pundits because it repeatedly, routinely denies them the excitement and collisions that structure modern politics. It’s also, for that reason, a campaign that is frustrating Trump and Fox News, which is why they keep trying to run against Bernie Sanders, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and Ilhan Omar instead.
Joe Biden is Bernie Sanders, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and Ilhan Omar's Trojan Horse for their radical Socialist agenda.
Don't be fooled! pic.twitter.com/N1zkEFf0KV — Trump War Room - Text TRUMP to 88022 (@TrumpWarRoom) July 10, 2020
For Biden, this is part strategy, part personality. “You should not underestimate the reality that campaigns tend to reflect the candidate,” says Anita Dunn, another senior Biden adviser. “Joe Biden has never been a polarizing figure. He has spent his career trying to bring people together. During the Democratic primary season, when many argued that what the party needed was that warrior who would stand up to the Republicans no matter what, Biden consistently spoke to the importance of trying to work with the other side to get things done. He was attacked for naiveté and living in the past. But that’s what he believes.”
Biden doesn’t try to win Twitter with brutal burns, or dominate the news cycle with controversial statements (though he occasionally does so with gaffes). He’s not widely loved, but he’s significantly less loathed than Trump. Political scientist Michael Tesler notes you can see the gap even among the two candidates’ supporters: 80 percent of Biden supporters have a very unfavorable view of Trump, while only 53 percent of Trump supporters have a very unfavorable view of Biden.
What’s striking is how well it appears to be working. As I write this, Biden is ahead by more than 9 points in the FiveThirtyEight national polling average. The Economist’s election forecasting model gives him a 92 percent likelihood of winning the Electoral College. He leads in polling averages of Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan, Arizona, and North Carolina. He’s neck-and-neck with Trump in Texas. Texas! As the New York Times’s Nate Cohn notes, even if polls prove as off in 2020 as they did in 2016, these numbers still predict a large Biden victory.
The key to Biden’s success is simple: He’s slicing into Trump’s coalition, pulling back the older, whiter voters Democrats lost in 2016. The Biden campaign’s insight is that mobilization is often the flip side of polarization: When party activists are sharply divided by ideology and demography, what excites your side will be the very thing that unnerves the other side. Studies of House elections show this dynamic in action: Ideologically extreme candidates perform worse than moderates because they drive up turnout on the other side.
Biden’s theory of wavering Trump voters is the same as his theory of wavering Republican senators: He thinks they want to vote with him but need help getting over their political hang-ups about voting for a Democrat. And so he is trying to give them that help. He praises the old Republican Party, refuses to pick a side in American politics’ hottest fights. Biden has resisted calls to abolish private insurance, ban fracking, decriminalize immigration, and defund the police. It’s cost him enthusiasm on the left, but it has denied Trump the clear foil he needs. That’s left Trump confused, pathetically insisting Biden holds positions Biden doesn’t hold and getting fact-checked live on Fox.
Fox's Chris Wallace fact checks Trump and tells Trump that he's wrong to claim that Biden wants to defund the police. pic.twitter.com/arNNZb8K01 — Kyle Griffin (@kylegriffin1) July 17, 2020
Biden is treating Trump voters not as a monolith but as a coalition — a coalition that can be broken.
Neutralizing negative polarization
A recent Pew poll asked Trump and Biden voters about the motivation behind their choice: Were they voting for their candidate, or against the other guy? Seventy-six percent of Trump voters said they were voting for Trump; 24 percent said they were voting against Biden. Among Biden voters, it was the reverse: Sixty-seven percent said they were voting against Trump, while only 33 percent said they were voting for Biden.
In early July, Brad Parscale, Trump’s then-campaign manager, tried to spin this dynamic to Trump’s advantage: “When it comes to the most important factor, enthusiasm, President Trump is dominating,” he wrote. “The unprecedented enthusiasm behind the president’s reelection efforts stands in stark contrast to the flat, almost nonexistent enthusiasm for Biden.” Two weeks later, Parscale was fired.
Strange as it is to say, the low level of enthusiasm for Biden is at least partly a choice the Biden campaign has made. And perhaps they have made the right one. Studies of political polarization over the past few decades largely converge on the same finding: Rising polarization isn’t driven by a deeper attachment to the party or politicians we support, but increased fear and loathing of the party and politicians we oppose.
That’s why ticket-splitting is falling even as more voters than ever self-identify as independents. Those independents aren’t truly independent — studies show they’re more stable in which party they vote for than even self-identified partisans were a generation ago. They’re independents because they don’t like the party they vote for enough to identify with it. They’re held in place by fear of the other party winning power.
Biden’s ability to neutralize negative polarization is grimly intertwined with his identity. Biden is an older, white man from Pennsylvania, and that is helping him with the older, whiter voters who make up Trump’s base. And he knows it. In a comment both depressing and true, Biden said, “I think there’s a lot of sexism in the way they went after Hillary. I think it was unfair. An awful lot of it. Well, that’s not gonna happen with me.”
Trump’s approach to politics and lethal mismanagement of the coronavirus pandemic have also given Biden an advantage, in part by neutralizing Trump’s ability to distract the country with feuds and flotsam, and in part by ensuring Democrats are mobilized to vote against Trump no matter what Biden does. Biden can take base mobilization somewhat for granted because Trump will do much of the work for him. “Trump is great at energizing his base,” says political scientist Alan Abramowitz. “But he’s equally good or even better at activating the Democratic base.”
That doesn’t mean Biden is taking base mobilization entirely for granted. But he’s doing it through the patient work of coalitional politics, not through public, polarizing stands on symbolic issues. The 100-plus page Sanders-Biden task force recommendations moved the substance of Biden’s agenda significantly to the left without tying Biden to any of the lightning rod issues that animate cable news conflict.
“On the big issues — the stuff voters will notice — he doesn’t want to be seen as particularly polarizing or divisive,” says political scientist Seth Masket, who is completing a book on the lessons Democrats learned from 2016. “But while your average voter won’t pay much attention to the more technical policy concessions, they turn out to have a lot of meaning behind them, and the Democratic activists you want working for your campaign and staffing your organization notice them.”
All this has given Biden the opportunity to run the campaign he’s most comfortable with, and most suited to run. A campaign that’s more about giving people who don’t agree with him on everything permission to vote for him, rather than a campaign about mobilizing his own base. It might not work in every year, against every opponent, but it’s working this year, against this one.
Rep. Stephanie Murphy (D-FL) represents one of the few perfectly even congressional districts in the country: Florida’s Seventh, where Republicans and Democrats are evenly matched, and where Murphy took the seat from the Republicans in 2016. It’s the kind of district Democrats need to win if they want to take back Florida. And when Murphy watches Biden, she tells me she sees a candidate who understands how to win districts like hers.
“I won in 2016 and held the district in 2018 by being someone in Congress who isn’t on cable news having had my head explode all the time,” she says. “And I think Joe Biden understands that. A steady hand is appreciated and valued against the chaos of the last few years.”