Two New Civic Awakening Works Released from Eric Liu

Posted on May 17, 2019 by Keiva Hummel

If you are looking for some fantastic D&D content to enjoy this weekend, we encourage you to check out the new works from Eric Liu on awakening our civic power. He released his new TED talk, “How to revive your belief in democracy”, in which he offers a framework for democratic participation. As well as, his new book, “Become America: Civic Sermons on Love, Responsibility, and Democracy” which compiles the civic sermons he gave at the first 19 Civic Saturday events, hosted throughout the country last year by Citizen University. You can read the announcement in the Citizen University newsletter shared below, sign up for the CU newsletter here, and please share these two exciting resources with your networks!

Citizen University Updates: New TED talk and new book!

I’m excited to be bringing two works into the world this week! Both flow from our mission at Citizen University to spark a great civic awakening in our country. And I’m writing to ask for your help getting both these works into wide circulation.

The first is my brand-new TED Talk on what I call “civic religion” — a framework of belief and practice for sustaining democracy. I’ve got to admit, I wasn’t sure how people at the TED conference last month would receive a talk using a religious metaphor. But it turns out that at TED, as everywhere and especially in the U.S. today, people are yearning for a frame of shared purpose and civic spirit. For an invitation to do more and be more. The response in the room was electric. And I hope it can be so in the wider world now. You can watch the video below and will you please share and post the talk today?

The second work is my new book called BECOME AMERICA which contains the civic sermons I wrote and delivered at the first nineteen Civic Saturdays our team organized around the United States. These essays challenge us to rehumanize our politics and rekindle a spirit of love and hope in civic life. Become America will prompt you to contemplate our ongoing story as Americans and energize you to help rebuild a country you’re proud to call home. I’ll be holding a special event for the book in DC on May 18. Will you order the book today or join us at one of our book events?

Both the TED Talk and BECOME AMERICA are rooted in history but also products of this moment — a moment of peril and possibility in democratic life. This is a time for us all to ask what we believe, and what it takes to live up to our ideals. It is also a time to ask for help from friends — and to make new friends by asking for help.

I’m so grateful for your support, and gratified that we get to share in such purposeful work. – Eric

You can receive these announcements in your inbox and sign up for the Citizen University newsletter by clicking here.

some notes on receiving tenure

Posted on May 15, 2019 by Peter

This week, the Tufts Trustees voted to grant me tenure and make me a full professor. I am very grateful to them, the Political Science Department (which is my tenure home), the Tisch College of Civic Life (which will remain my main base) and its dean, Alan Solomont, and the other people–known and anonymous to me–who were involved in advancing and reviewing my case.

I have been working full-time in universities (Maryland and then Tufts) since 1993. However, I don’t believe I should have held tenure until now. Tenure means job security for teaching. It’s a way of protecting instructors’ intellectual freedom. Until now, I have never held a teaching position. More years than not, I’ve taught at least one credit-bearing college course, but not as part of my paid employment. Instead, my salary has come from external sources (philanthropy, contracts, and–in the early years–a state appropriation). These funds have supported me and my colleagues to serve external constituencies with research and organizing. That kind of work must be contingent on funding and performance or it would turn into a sinecure.

So really the big change in my life is that I will be teaching virtually full time, starting in 2019-20. One motivation is our new Civic Studies major at Tufts, which is a major commitment of mine. This major is also part of a more general strategy of making the study of civic life a core academic focus at Tufts, which is another personal commitment for me and a key strategy for Tisch College. At the same time, I am looking forward to the role of a teacher/individual scholar, because that should allow me to explore certain topics more deeply than I have so far–mainly, topics in political theory.

My career is unfolding in backwards order. My degree is in a humanities field, philosophy. Humanists usually start by teaching alone and doing single-authored research: in short, reading, writing, and presenting. Some of them gradually begin leading departments, serving on committees, planning conferences, conducting collaborative and interdisciplinary research projects, and interacting with publics.

I started in an externally-funded center within a state school of public policy, where our work was applied, interdisciplinary, collaborative, and done in public. From an early age, I was heavily involved in working with other people. I was rarely in a classroom but almost constantly on the phone or email, communicating with peers. My most significant publications were co-authored; the Civic Mission of Schools report lists 60 authors.

I will not give up that kind of work but I do plan to spend more time teaching and conducting individual research. If this backwards order makes any sense intellectually, the advantages will be: 1) Breadth–I never sought tenure in a discipline that would have expected me to demonstrate deep specialization, but I had to learn a bit about a lot of things, and 2) Experience in how knowledge, power, money, networks, and organizations relate to each other in the 21st century. I’m hoping to make that second topic a focus of my research.

The immediate plan is to keep doing the collaborative work that I’m doing now (so don’t be alarmed if you are a collaborator) while developing several new courses in 2019-20. I have completed a book manuscript that is under review, so if that goes reasonably smoothly, I will feel free to focus a lot of attention on curriculum and pedagogy during the next academic year. I also have a sabbatical coming up, and I plan to spend that time learning network science and continuing to collect network data of different kinds, toward one or two books on networks and political/moral thinking.

It’s very rare for someone to switch to the tenure track after 26 years in the business. It’s like lifting a heavy locomotive and putting it down on different rails. Tufts has been tremendously supportive, flexible, welcoming, and creative in making this possible in my case. I feel a deep sense of gratitude and loyalty to this institution and my colleagues and students.

D&D Online Events Feat NCL, MetroQuest, NIFI & more!

Posted on May 15, 2019 by Keiva Hummel

This week’s roundup features webinars from NCDD member orgs National Civic League, MetroQuest, National Issues Forums Institute (NIFI), and Living Room Conversations, as well as, from the International Association of Facilitators, NonprofitVOTE, and Global Partnership for the Prevention of Armed Conflict (GPPAC).

NCDD’s online D&D event roundup is a weekly compilation of the upcoming events happening in the digital world related to dialogue, deliberation, civic tech, engagement work, and more! Do you have a webinar or other digital event coming up that you’d like to share with the NCDD network? Please let us know in the comments section below or by emailing me at keiva[at]ncdd[dot]org, because we’d love to add it to the list!

Upcoming Online D&D Events: Nat’l Civic League, Living Room Conversations, MetroQuest, NIFI, IAF, NonprofitVOTE, GPPAC

Online Living Room Conversation: Power of Empathy

Wednesday, May 15th
7:30 pm Pacific, 4:30 pm Eastern

Empathy goes beyond concern or sympathy. Empathy is stepping into the shoes of another with the intention to better understand and feel what they are experiencing. The power of empathy can bridge our “us vs. them” perceptions and lead to new solutions, improved relationships, better strategies for social change, reduction in loneliness, and realization of our shared human needs and oneness. This conversation is about sharing experiences giving, receiving, and observing empathy.

REGISTER: www.livingroomconversations.org/event/online-living-room-conversation-power-of-empathy/

International Association of Facilitators webinar – Reflecting Towards our Future

Thursday, May 16th
6:30 am Pacific, 9:30 am Eastern

Led by Lawrence Philbrook. In this webinar, we will explore a way to examine options and look for trends to help open the image of “futures” thinking. My own work with futures started many years ago with using scenarios in our facilitation work. ICA Taiwan and our colleagues across Asia based our research on Schwartz, P. (1996), The Art of the Long View and Peter Senge’s 5th Discipline to explore the work on the use by Shell Oil and others to help managers and leaders place themselves into several future options to prepare for whatever happens.

REGISTER: www.iaf-world.org/site/events/reflecting-towards-our-future-webinar-lawrence-philbrook-cpfctf

Living Room Conversations Training (free): The Nuts & Bolts of Living Room Conversations

Thursday, May 16th
2 pm Pacific, 5 pm Eastern

Join us for 60 minutes online to learn about Living Room Conversations. We’ll cover what a Living Room Conversation is, why we have them, and everything you need to know to get started hosting and/or participating in Living Room Conversations. This training is not required for participating in our conversations – we simply offer it for people who want to learn more about the Living Room Conversations practice.

Space is limited to 12 people so that we can offer a more interactive experience. Please only RSVP if you are 100% certain that you can attend. This training will take place using Zoom video conferencing. A link to join the conversation will be sent to participants by the Wednesday before this training.

REGISTER: www.livingroomconversations.org/event/training-free-the-nuts-bolts-of-living-room-conversations-9/

Online Living Room Conversation: Money in Politics

Saturday, May 18th
12 pm Pacific, 3 pm Eastern

Is there a problem with money influencing our elections and then influencing the actions of elected officials? And if so, are there solutions that we can all agree upon? Increasing numbers express concern at the influence of big money in elections, especially since the supreme court’s Citizens United ruling in 2010, which allowed corporations to spend unlimited amounts of money on our elections. From another perspective, money was always heavily involved in elections — and the voice of everyone in America (including leaders of corporations) should not be restricted in the free marketplace of ideas. What do you think? Watch our high-profile conversation on Politics & Money with Robert Reich and Debbie Dooley here! Check out the conversation guide.

REGISTER: www.livingroomconversations.org/event/online-living-room-conversation-money-in-politics-2/

CGA Forum on “A House Divided: What Would We Have to Give Up to Get the Political System We Want?”

Saturday, May 18th
3 pm Pacific, 6 pm Eastern

Join us after the 2019 A Public Voice broadcast for a Common Ground for Action forum on “A House Divided: What Would We Have to Give Up to Get the Political System We Want?” We’ll be talking about how to fix our broken political system in three different options: (1) Reduce dangerous, toxic talk: The problem is that the way we talk is poisoning public life. The “outrage industry” rewards people for saying and doing the most extreme things; (2) Make fairer rules for politics and follow them: The problem is that wealthy, powerful special interests game the political system, making it impossible to find compromise; (3) Take control and make decisions closer to home: The problem is that our most important decisions are being made too far away from home. Find the issue guide here.

REGISTER: www.nifi.org/en/events/2019-public-voice-cga-forum-house-dividedwhat-would-we-have-give-get-political-system-we-1

NonprofitVOTE webinar: Better Voter Engagement Strategies for People with Disabilities

Tuesday, May 21st
11 am Pacific, 2 pm Eastern

People with disabilities face unique challenges in registering to vote and casting a ballot. Nonprofits can support voters with disabilities through advocacy, awareness, and making their efforts more accessible. Join us for this one hour webinar with Michelle Bishop, Disability Advocacy Specialist for Voting Rights at National Disability Rights Network. We’ll cover why accessibility matters, the myriad of challenges voters with disabilities encounter, and how nonprofits can help.

REGISTER HERE

SPECIAL Online Living Room Conversation: Race and Ethnicity Conversation Series

Tuesday, May 21st
11 am Pacific, 2 pm Eastern

Check Out this four-minute video from a previous Race & Ethnicity Conversation Series to get a taste of this conversation! In this series of three in-depth conversations, participants explore the complexities of the concepts of Race, Ethnicity, and their impacts on people from all walks of life. We will cover new questions from the three Race & Ethnicity conversation guides found here.

REGISTER: www.livingroomconversations.org/event/special-online-living-room-conversation-race-and-ethnicity-conversation-series/

MetroQuest webinar – Cleaning Up Toxic Public Discourse for Meaningful Engagement

Wednesday, May 22nd
11 am Pacific | 12 pm Mountain | 1 pm Central | 2 pm Eastern (1 hour)
Educational Credit Available (APA AICP CM)
Complimentary (FREE)

Are you facing increasing contention in your public engagement processes? You’re not alone. Planners and public engagement practitioners across the country increasingly find themselves on the front lines of highly polarized debates and misinformation campaigns. There’s a fix! You’re invited to this special webinar with James Hoggan – a world leading authority on the topic. James will share what’s causing increased polarization and offer ways to detoxify public engagement. A renowned author and speaker, James literally wrote the book on it.

REGISTER: http://go.metroquest.com/james-hoggan-on-cleaning-up-toxic-public-discourse-for-meaningful-engagement.html

National Civic League AAC Promising Practices Webinar – Equitable and Collaborative Economic Development

Thursday, May 23rd
10 am Pacific, 1 pm Eastern

Join the National Civic League to learn about two communities that are being mindful about collaboration and equity in their economic development projects. Ubax Gardheere, Equity Strategies Manager at the City of Seattle’s Office of Planning & Community Development will speak about Seattle’s approach to equitable development. Kevin Mitchell, Town Engineer in the Town of Mount Pleasant’s Planning and Engineering Department will talk about the town’s collaborative Shem Creek Revitalization project which ensured that the waterfront was accessible to all residents.

REGISTER: www.nationalcivicleague.org/resource-center/promising-practices/

Online Living Room Conversation: Peace Building in the United States

Thursday, May 23rd
12:30 pm Pacific, 3:30 pm Eastern

The US has in many ways always been a divided society, but what is causing fierce political, social and ethnic divides in the United States today? Hate crimes and hate groups are increasingly visible, and political leaders are using ethnic identity, socio-economic identity — and an “us v. them” mentality — to create fear and increase polarization. How did we get here and what are the peacebuilding solutions for a country that has long been considered the world’s most stable democracy? Check out the conversation guide.

REGISTER: www.livingroomconversations.org/event/online-living-room-conversation-peace-building-in-the-united-states-2/

Global Partnership for the Prevention of Armed Conflict (GPPAC) webinar – Peace Education: Experiences on 13 years of “Peace School”, Mexico

Thursday, May 23rd
7 am Pacific, 10 am Eastern

In this webinar, peace education expert Diana Lepe Sanchez will share lessons learned from the project Escuela de Paz (Peace School). As part of the project, workshops were given for activists and human rights defenders from all over Mexico on a method for conflict analysis and conflict transformation.

REGISTER: www.gppac.net/peace-education-webinar-series

on hedgehogs and foxes

Posted on May 14, 2019 by Peter

“A fox knows many things, but a hedgehog knows one important thing” — Archilochus

This proverb is in the news lately because Philip Tetlock has shown that foxes (flexible and curious generalists) are much better at predicting events than hedgehogs (specialists who hold deep expertise). See David Epstein’s Atlantic article on Tetlock, and see Axios for a current competition funded by the US intelligence agencies to test his theories.

Tetlock draws from Isaiah Berlin’s 1953 essay, which is light but offers some insights, I think, about specific authors. Berlin argues that Tolstoy was psychologically a fox but believed–for theological/ideological reasons–that we should all be hedgehogs. Our one big idea should be the Imitation of Christ. This tension was at the heart of Tolstoy’s books and life. I also endorse Peter Hacker’s view that Wittgenstein was temperamentally a hedgehog who forced himself self-consciously to become foxlike in his late work.

If you take the proverb literally, it seems more impressive to be a fox. The fox uses its brain to hunt and escape, whereas the hedgehog just instinctively rolls up to take advantage of its best physical asset, its spines. But the metaphor is loose. Human hedgehogs are among our deepest, most original thinkers. They are the ones with the discipline to construct whole, coherent worldviews. They don’t merely employ a strategy but create it.

In contrast–and I write this as very much a fox–foxes can be ad hoc and derivative, eclectic in a bad way. A fox can employ the available ideas that seem to fit the situation without generating any new frameworks for others to use. A fox can be a jack of all trades, master of none. We foxes need hedgehogs to develop new ways of thinking, from which we borrow superficially and pragmatically.

But it is interesting that the hedgehogs are so consistently wrong about what will happen next. They are more likely to suffer from confirmation bias. They can make any data fit their theory. And they are worse than foxes at recognizing exceptions, tradeoffs, and zones of uncertainty. They lack phronesis, practical wisdom.

I therefore think it’s a problem that hedgehogs have an advantage in the competition for attention. If you are associated with one big idea and you keep hammering away at it, you have a “brand.” People turn to you to say that one thing, even if they don’t agree with it, and so your fame rises. You must compete with the other people who say the same thing, but if you’re first or more effective at communicating it, you can own the space.

So as not to offend anyone alive, I’ll use the case of my late colleague Ben Barber, who was early to revive the idea of “strong democracy.” (More democratic engagement is always better; the good life is lived in public; liberalism is too individualistic; etc.) He wrote several best-sellers, and I attribute his success in part to his capturing a particular brand. For courses, debates, conferences, etc., you may need someone to say, “More democracy!” Barber cornered that market.

Temperamentally, I am with the foxes. As soon as I write an argument for anything, I immediately become fascinated by the arguments against it. I have a limited attention span and jack-of-all-trades tendencies. I frequently disappoint practitioners and advocates, who know that I have written in favor of campaign finance reform, public deliberation, service, or civic education and want me to say it again to a new audience with more conviction. In fact, I am almost always on the verge of apostasy and retraction.

I really do admire the hedgehogs. But I’ll say a few things in favor of foxes.

First, the moral world is immensely complex, because it emerges from myriad human interactions and takes the form of communities, cultures, and institutions that overlap, interrelate, and become loaded with historical resonances. Thus an adequate moral theory is almost certainly partial, inconsistent, and ad hoc.

Second, acting like a fox keeps you mentally alive. It may be a self-indulgent concern, but I fear ceasing to think. Even the greatest hedgehogs, it seems to me, have stopped their quest for knowledge. They already know, and know that they know, and are done.

I’ll also say one thing against foxes. At least in folkore, a fox is a solitary hunter. What if you also like people and feel loyalty to groups of peers who share goals and missions? Then you cannot simply act like a fox.

To switch metaphors, Keats admired the “quality” that forms a “Man of Achievement especially in Literature and which Shakespeare possessed so enormously—I mean Negative Capability, that is when man is capable of being in uncertainties, Mysteries, doubts, without any irritable reaching after fact and reason.” I also admire Negative Capability, but it is a virtue of the poet, not the ally. Negative Capability is good for writing fiction that explores many different perspectives; it is not so helpful for co-writing a mission statement for an organization and then following through.

So I would like to be a fox who is helpful in a pack. The question is to what degree that’s possible.

National Civic League Publishes New Edition of Civic Index

Posted on May 14, 2019 by Keiva Hummel

One of the nation’s oldest civic engagement organizations, The National Civic League – also an NCDD member org, recently released the fourth edition of The Civic Index, a set of guidelines developed over the last 30 years to measure the civic capital of a community. Civic capital measures, “the formal and informal relationships, networks and capacities that communities use to make decisions collaboratively and solve problems” and The Civic Index offers the framework for assessing these factors and relationships to determine a community’s civic strength. You can download a free version of the NCL Civic Index by clicking here. Read more in the announcement below and find the original version on the NCL site here.

The League’s Civic Index: Measuring Your Community’s Capacity to Solve Problems and Thrive

What makes some communities better able than others to solve the tough social, political, economic or physical challenges they face? This was a question the National Civic League set out to answer over 30 years ago. On-the-ground research revealed a set of factors that we call civic capital — the formal and informal relationships, networks and capacities that communities use to make decisions collaboratively and solve problems.

Somewhat like social capital, but not to be confused with financial capital, civic capital can be found in all sorts of communities, not just the most affluent, educated or advantaged. While myriad other factors contribute to community progress, civic capital is the core factor identified by the National Civic League as the primary explanation for long-term community success.

At the National Civic League, we know of many communities with an abundant supply of civic capital. The All-America City program has recognized over 500 of these communities during the past 69 years. All have varying degrees of civic engagement, collaboration and leadership, and have been able to tackle tough issues in a sustainable manner–by bringing everyone to the table and creating equity.

Earlier this year the National Civic League released the fourth edition of the Civic Index, a self-assessment tool consisting of a set of questions that provide a framework for discussing and measuring a community’s civic capital. Since it was first developed in 1986, many communities have used the Civic Index to better understand their civic strengths and to identify gaps or areas in need of further attention, soliciting community input to create a baseline measure of their civic capital and monitor progress over time as they work to enhance their internal capacity.

The Seven Components of Civic Capital

The Civic Index describes the seven components of civic capital, provides examples of each, lists the 32 questions that are used to gauge each component and provides ideas on how to use the index. Here’s a synopsis of these seven components.

Engaged Residents: Residents play an active role in making decisions and civic affairs.
Inclusive Community Leadership: The community actively cultivates and supports leaders from diverse backgrounds and with diverse perspectives
Collaborative Institutions: Communities with good civic capital have regular collaboration among the government, business, nonprofit and other sectors, as well as structures in place that facilitate such collaboration.
Embracing Diversity and Equity: Communities with healthy civic capital recognize and celebrate their diversity. They strive for equity in services, support and engagement.
Authentic Communication: Healthy communities need credible, civic-minded sources of information presented in a way that residents can use.
Culture of Engagement: Involvement by residents, businesses, nonprofits and other stakeholders in every aspect of civic affairs should be part of local culture—an expectation, not an afterthought.
Shared Vision and Values: Communities with shared values and civic pride have a common foundation for addressing public matters.

Summary

Nearly a hundred years ago, Justice Louis Brandeis, a one-time member of the League’s executive committee, called states “laboratories of democracy.” That mantle has now been passed to the local level, as cities, counties, towns and other local communities create innovations and regional or national networks to tackle such issues as climate change, health, education and economic prosperity.

At the same time, local governments cannot solve problems on their own. As Bruce Katz points out in The New Localism, community problem-solving depends on “multi-sectoral relationships,” with government often serving as a convener or catalyst. What happens next depends on the civic capacity of the particular locality. It is the communities with civic capital — the full engagement and collaboration of its residents, businesses, nonprofits and other stakeholders–that have the resources and persistence to successfully address difficult issues and build a sustainable future.

For a free copy of the National Civic League’s Civic Index, please visit www.nationalcivicleague.org/resource-center.

You can find the original version of this announcement on the National Civic League site at www.nationalcivicleague.org/the-leagues-civic-index-measuring-your-communitys-capacity-to-solve-problems-and-thrive/.

A Place to Call Home: The Future of Housing Affordability in New York City

Posted on May 14, 2019 by Public Agenda Newsfeed

an expressivist critique of our criminal justice system

Posted on May 13, 2019 by Peter

(Disclaimer: this post is the result of reading some work by Tommie Shelby and Erin Kelly but not yet wrestling with either author’s views sufficiently or examining the larger literature on expressivism in law. If you were a peer-reviewer, you should reject this post.)

A society has a right and an obligation to express what is just through the criminal law. One reason is that public statements about what is permitted and forbidden can influence behavior for the better. But sometimes laws are not effective means of shaping behavior. Even then, it is important for a community to express justice as accurately and completely as it can, and the criminal law is a valuable vehicle of expression.

Public expressions of justice must often be accompanied by penalties. Otherwise, laws can reasonably be interpreted as mere lip-service. If, for example, the law says that everyone must pay taxes, but oligarchs routinely get away with tax evasion, then the law is saying that oligarchs don’t have to pay taxes. The failure to punish them conveys a view of justice that is unfair.

Many things are wrong but should still be legal. Awful but constitutionally protected speech is an example. The scope of the law should be limited both because of the fallibility of any government and because individual liberty is a great value. (We’re not free if we’re only allowed to do good things.) Nevertheless, there remains a large domain of actions that are bad enough that the state should express their wrongness by prohibiting them and enforcing the prohibition with penalties.

Even a partially unjust regime can and must express justice through the criminal law. Its failures do not invalidate laws that it enacts and enforces, if those laws are just. An exception may be a pervasively evil regime. For instance, a Nazi law court could render the correct decision in a case of rape or murder, but the very existence of that court is so offensive as to render all of its verdict moot. The victims of even real crimes cannot get justice from Nazi judges. But that reasoning does not apply to courts in societies, like ours, that harbor a great deal of injustice.

Public statements about justice must be deliberated. This is not because deliberation equals justice (a proceduralist view). Justice is justice. Rather, we must deliberate because hearing and responding to alternative views is our best method of discovering what justice demands. Also, the legitimacy of a public (as opposed to an individual’s) statement of justice depends on whether each of us had a chance to influence it with our voice.

Our legal system violates the expressivist principles summarized so far. The features that violate this theory are: racialized mass incarceration, rampant plea-bargaining, degrading punishments (prison uniforms, refusal to provide education, tolerance for sexual violence, stripping prisoners of civil rights), frequent imprisonment of people with mental illness, and a tendency to hide the whole system away from public view.

Mass incarceration of people who are racial minorities and/or poor and/or mentally ill clearly expresses a view that is incompatible with justice–that those people are not equal. We wouldn’t have the same system if most of the prisoners were middle-class and white.

Racialized mass incarceration also blocks a satisfactory national discussion of justice. In some communities, incarceration is common, and in others, it is virtually absent; but since they are separated by race and class and have unequal amounts of political power, they are very unlikely to deliberate together.

Replacing jury trials with plea-bargains removes any public deliberation about particular cases and prevents each verdict from saying anything at all. The outcome of a case is a function of the perceived likelihood of conviction, the defendant’s tolerance of risk, the prosecutor’s interest in conviction, and the cost of a trial, not anyone’s view of what is deserved.

Hiding the whole system away excuses the public from deliberating about particular cases and about policy. You can easily turn a blind eye to the criminal justice system even though our prisons house a population as big as a state.

I would not go so far as to claim that an expressivist theory of criminal law is completely adequate. We can imagine a system that does a good job of expressing justice but fails other tests, such as the utilitarian criterion of doing the most good for the greatest number. For instance, maybe it would be better to cancel trials that don’t affect behavior and use the money saved for prevention. I’m sufficiently pluralist (or wishy-washy) to suspect that utilitarianism, contractarianism, classical liberalism, Foucault, and other views all offer valid insights.

But I would submit that an expressivist theory explains some of what is so badly wrong with our system.

Frontiers of Democracy Conference 2019 Draft Agenda

Posted on May 10, 2019 by Peter

This is a working draft (as of May 8, 2019), likely to change in detail. Tickets are still available but are running out.

Thursday, June 20

4:00-5:30 registration
Heavy hors d’oeuvres served

5:30 opening plenary

Welcoming comments by organizers.

“Short-takes” talks (10 minutes each, no Q&A)

Maya Pace, Lead for America, “Start Where You Live”
Jamila Michener, Cornell University, author of Fragmented Democracy: Medicaid, Federalism and Unequal Politics, on “Health Equity and Democracy”
Wendy Willis, Deliberative Democracy Consortium and author of These Are Strange Times, My Dear: Field Notes from the Republic
Andi Crawford, the Director of Empowerment and Citizen Engagement for the City of Lansing, MI, “Love Your Block in #LOVELansing”

Discussions at curated tables of eight

Friday, June 21

8:00-9:00 breakfast served

900-10:30 am: Plenary Session: “Working at the Frontiers of Democracy”

Questions:
1. What sense of duty, purpose or mission guides your life?
2. What issues at the “frontiers of democracy” interest and concern you most right now?
3. What do you not know enough about and hope to learn more about?
4. What issues and questions are you hoping that this conference will address?
5. What do you imagine that you will do after this conference if it goes well for you?

These questions will be discussed first by a panel at the head of the room and then by all participants, seated at assigned tables of eight. The panel:

Hajer al-Faham, a PhD candidate in political science at the University of Pennsylvania
Veronica del Carril, a youth program leader/arts educator from Argentina
Manuela Uribe Henao, Colombian working on public health interventions in El Salvador
Marianne Kwakwa, a PhD candidate in political science at Notre Dame
Jennet Kirkpatrick, political theorist at the University of Arizona, author of the books Uncivil Disobedience and The Virtue of Exit
Jamie Lee, Communication and Information Specialist, UNESCO/Cambodia, working on genocide memorials
Debilyn Molineaux, co-founder, The Bridge Alliance

10:30-10:45 break

10:45-12:15 concurrent sessions. Choose among:

“Spectacle, Movement, Deliberation: Theoretical Perspectives on Democracy,” Samuel Schmitt, Aidan Kestigian, Vasiliki Rapti
“Maintaining Meaningful Classroom Dialogue Even on Controversial Subjects,” Michael Fischer and Katina Fontes
“BetaBlocks: Democratizing Manifestation of Technology in the Public Realm,” John Harlow and Eric Gordon
“Renewing Democracy Through Renewal of Infrastructure,” Tom Flanagan, Craig Lindell, Wendi Goldsmith, Douglas Bruce, Carmen Sirianni
“Love your Block,” Michael Hammett, Mary Bogle, Mauricio Garcia, and Andi Crawford
“Fixing American Democracy from the Outside In – Storming the Hill,” with Represent.Us, American Promise, and Small Planet Institute, the Consensus Building Institute.

12:15-1:15 lunch
1:15-2:30 plenary activity: “How to be Helpful: Building Relationships for Social Impact” Led by Adam Seth Levine of research4impact. “How do you build successful working relationships with people who have diverse forms of expertise?”

2:30:2:45 break

2:45-4:15 Concurrent sessions. Choose among

1. “Amplify Impact, Build Bridges, and Connect Communities through Civil Discourse,” Cheryl Graeve, Robert Boatright, and Timothy J. Shaffer
2. “Democratizing Research for Environmental Justice and Health,” Chad Raphael, Doug Brugge, Amy Laura Cahn, Neenah Estella-Luna, Kenneth Geiser, and Charlotte Ryann
3. “How Interactive Simulations and Film Presentations Enhance Classroom Dialogue on Controversial Issues,” Joshua Littenberg-Tobias, GR. Marvez, and Jonathan Goodman Levitt
4. “Gaming and Civic Tech,” Libby Falck and Dmytro Potekhin
5. “Fixing American Democracy From the Inside Out – What’s Hot on the Hill!,” Jeff Edelstein and others
6. “Governance and Restorative Justice: The Role of Civic Groups in Problem-Solving in Schools and Drug Policy,” Nicole Kaufman, Sharyn Lowenstein, Dani O’Brien

4:15-4:30 break

4:30-6:00 Plenary Session led by Sam Novey and Clarissa Unger, “Recognizing Local Leadership to Build Better Strategies for Civic Renewal.”

(Time at tables for introductions and discussions)

Saturday, June 22

8-9 Breakfast

9 am-10:15: A choice between two sessions:

1. Panel: “Political Participation in the City and the Ballot Box.” with Tanya Gibbs, Benjamin Hernandez, Jonathan Collins, Tammy Esteves

2. “The Social Contract of America” (Interactive workshop) planned by Debilyn Molineaux

10:15-11:30

Plenary Discussion

Questions:
1. What do you plan to do as a result of the conference?
2. Did your understanding of the frontiers of democracy shift?
3. What did you learn from someone in a different domain?
4. What are we committed to doing together?

These will be addressed first by a panel seated at the front of the room, and then by participants at assigned tables of eight. The panel is

Nakeefa Garay, urban studies PhD Student, Rutgers Newark
Elizabeth Jabar, artist, Colby College
Liza Kostanyan, NGO leader, Armenia
Sterling Speirn, CEO, National Conference on Citizenship
Amber Wichowsky, political scientist, Marquette

11:30 What are we committed to doing together?

Report outs from tables, discussion.
Discussion of a follow up report

Ethics and Benefits of Digital Tech in Engagement

Posted on May 10, 2019 by Keiva Hummel

As technology rapidly continues to grow, organizations are working to understand the many impacts of tech on the shape and future of our democracy. NCDD member organization Public Agenda explores these impacts in their new report, Rewiring Democracy: Subconscious Technologies, Conscious Engagement and the Future of Politics. In the article below, they share some of their findings on the complicated nature of tech, ethical use of geo-location, and the capacity for deeper community engagement. You can read the article below and find the original version on the Public Agenda blog here.

Geo-locating Protest: The Changing Role of Tech in Social Movements – Part 1

New from Public Agenda, Rewiring Democracy: Subconscious Technologies, Conscious Engagement and the Future of Politics, explores how the latest technological trends may reshape our democracy, our politics, and our daily lives. In a series of blog posts, we are sharing some of the stories from the paper to illustrate some of the impacts on journalism, political advocacy, city planning, and other fields.

In this latest installment of the Rewiring Democracy blog series, we explore technology’s role in mobilizing movements, while highlighting an example of how micro-targeting and messaging is being used in troubling ways.

GEO-LOCATING PROTEST: THE REVOLUTION COMES TO YOUR DOORSTEP

In 2016, women in several cities began receiving pop-up ads on their smartphones whenever they went near or inside a clinic providing abortions. The ads, which had been sent by anti-choice/ pro-life organizers, offered advice to women who were contemplating abortion. These particular women had been targeted because they had previously looked for Planned Parenthood information online. This practice was ruled an illegal infringement of personal health care data by the attorney general of Massachusetts, but it is one of a number of examples that signal a new phase in the use of technology by activists.

From the Arab Spring to the Tea Party to Black Lives Matter to #MeToo, protesters, organizers, and mobilizers of all political stripes and ideologies have been using the internet to connect and coordinate their movements. Their values and goals are obviously very different, but they all face new tactical opportunities for reaching supporters and achieving their political objectives. One major opportunity arises from the way in which the internet has become increasingly tied to geographic location. In addition to the geographic information system (GIS) capacity of smartphones, the number of people who have joined hyperlocal online spaces has risen exponentially. By connecting to people where they are and where they live, activists, officials and other leaders can advance their causes in ways that are more direct and “in your face” – and in ways that leverage political power because they fit the geography of political jurisdictions.

MOVEMENT CONSCIOUSNESS

There are multiple factors that affect whether people are willing to join a protest or movement, but across many different societies and situations, the psychological reasons often seem to be the most influential. The mere fact that people are oppressed or discriminated against doesn’t necessarily mean that they will mobilize, rebel, or just speak up. They are more likely to act when they begin to feel that they are not alone, that their voices will be heard, and that their cause can achieve critical mass.

Some existing, widely-used digital technologies have helped organizers build a broader movement consciousness:

Photo-sharing, which is a core component of almost every major social media platform, allows people to see their movement in action. For example, many of the students who participated in “Text, Talk, Act” during the National Dialogue on Mental Health tweeted photos of their groups. By uploading, sharing, and tagging pictures and videos, people can provide visual evidence that they are part of something larger than themselves.
Participatory mapping, one of the first uses of geo-locating capacities of our devices, enabled people to see themselves in relation to a physical space. Protesters during the Arab Spring, Occupy Wall Street, and the anti-austerity demonstrations in Spain were able to map their locations, producing visual proof that they could peacefully dominate the streets and plazas of their cities.
Posting and commenting through social media, in itself, has allowed people to contribute to or even dominate the narrative on a particular issue or cause. Recognizing this new threat, many governments and corporations have created “troll farms” and other sophisticated operations to try to retake control of the narrative, amplify their own messages, and even to target, harass, and intimidate protesters.
Instant polling, which can be accomplished through a wide array of tools, apps, and platforms, can also be used to gauge support for particular actions and to show that large numbers of people stand behind a given cause or movement.

Organizers are using these and other tools to compel people to consciously step forward and join causes and movements. Protesters used social media posts to rapidly gather and heckle Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen about immigration policies as they dined in public restaurants. Increasingly, organizers have the capacity to use subconscious technologies, like the anti-abortion/pro-life protesters in Massachusetts, to target potential recruits and people they are trying to influence.

By bringing the revolution(s) to our doorstep, the capacity to make protest and mobilization hyperlocal and geo-locatable has the potential to make political conflict more extreme and more personal. It raises new questions about the rules of the game, the role of tech corporations in the public square, and whether these new conditions also present possibilities for bridge-building and compromise.

As notions of space and place change, can technology create new opportunities for people to connect and work together? We’ll explore this as well as who owns the public square in “Geo-locating Protest: Tech’s Role in Advancing Movements” Part 2 in the next installment of this blog series on Rewiring Democracy.

You can find the original version of this article on the Public Agenda blog at www.publicagenda.org/blogs/geolocating-protests-and-techs-role-in-advancing-movements-part-i.

Legislation in Florida That Could Impact Social Studies

Posted on May 9, 2019 by stevemasy

Friends and colleagues,

The Florida Legislature has had busy session! This post is intended to just loop you in on where legislation that could impact social studies stands after the most recent session. Please note that we here at FJCC/LFI take no political position on any of this. This is intended to be informative, with some consideration of potential impact. We encourage you to visit the state Senate’s Bill Tracker for more information.

HB 741–anti-Semitism is to be treated in the same manner as racial discrimination. It also defines anti-Semitism and includes criticizing Israeli actions without context or unreasonably within that definition. This is something to keep in mind as we think about instruction on the Holocaust or racism and discrimination in general, as well as when discussing current events with our kids.

HB 7071-removes the financial literacy standards from economics and creates a separate fin lit hs elective. It is unclear what the impact of this will be. On the one hand, it creates an actual financial literacy course for the first time, and all districts and high schools must offer it. However, that course is intended to be an elective; with the financial literacy removed from the mandatory economics course, how many students will actualy be getting financial literacy? Just something to think about; it’s a good first step on a necessary path, but what else can we do?

HB 807– requires a comprehensive review and potential revision of K-12 civic education benchmarks and related resources. The legislation identifies the Florida Joint Center for Citizenship, iCivics, the Bill of Rights Institute, the Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History, ConSource, and Hillsdale College as the lead review organizations, with other stakeholders and organizations able to contribute. At this point, we don’t know how they will implement this, but it is VERY likely to affect civics in Florida. Ironically, Florida is recognized nationally for its strong civic education approach. It requires a review of both instructional resources and the test item specifications, so will be significant!

SB7030- implements the recommendations of the MSD high school public safety commission and allows districts to authorize select teachers to have access to firearms on campus. It is, not surprisingly, pretty divisive legislation.

SB 1342 makes it easier for kids to take part in dual enrollment, lowering the GPA to 2.5 and prohibits limitations on student participation. The goal here is to address college costs and provide a greater degree of choice for parents and students.

Executive Order 19-32 requires a review and revision of math and ELA standards to remove any and all vestiges of ‘common core’ and orders new attention on preparing kids with ‘American civics’, among other things. The Florida Council for the Social Studies, as well as the Florida Joint Center for Citizenship, are some of the stakeholder organizations asked to provide feedback on the revised standards. You can take part in the review process as well by registering on the EdCredible platform.

So that’s where things stand as of May of 2019. Things could of course change again. But certainly social studies in this state will be significantly impacted by some of the legislation awaiting a signature!

Civic Studies

An intellectual community of researchers and practitioners dedicated to building the emerging field of civic studies

Monthly Archives: May 2019