SPEAKER_01: TED Audio Collective. You're listening to TED Talks Daily.I'm your host, Elise Hu.A conversation today about how to address polarization and something at its root from two people of very different and sometimes opposing backgrounds.Law professor Samar Ali and public affairs strategist Clint Brewer talk with TED's curator Chloe Shasha Brooks about their prescription to address deepening divides in America and around the globe after the break. Support for TED Talks Daily comes from Capital One Bank.With no fees or minimums, banking with Capital One is the easiest decision in the history of decisions.Even easier than deciding to listen to another episode of your favorite podcast.And with no overdraft fees, is it even a decision?That's banking reimagined.
What's in your wallet?Terms apply.See CapitalOne.com slash bank.Capital One N.A.Member FDIC. Thank you so much for having me. Choose from over 40 themes.Buy all the stocks in a theme as is or customize to better fit your investing goals.All in a few clicks.Schwab investing themes is not intended to be investment advice or a recommendation of any stock or investment strategy.
Learn more at schwab.com slash thematic investing.
SPEAKER_02: Welcome to the Canva guided meditation for stress at work.Impending deadline?Generate Canva presentations in seconds.So Brainstorm got too big?Summarize with AI in a click.Writer's block?Release with Canva Magic Write.Stress less and save time at canva.com.Designed for work.
SPEAKER_04: So we are here to talk about the growing crisis of polarization and the decline of pluralism, both in the United States and around the world, and what we might be able to do about it collectively to address it.So your friendship and working relationship are actually a very cool model for this.You two come from very different backgrounds, and you met 10 years ago when you were both working for the governor of Tennessee.That time, as colleagues, kicked off your frenemyship, your words, not mine, stemming from the reality that many of your beliefs are not shared.You've had periods of time when your arguments led to no contact between you for months, and other times when you've supported each other on a daily basis.But despite all these ups and downs, you've consistently come back together, not only in your friendship, but also as working collaborators, to figure out a way to build a more pluralistic society and reduce societal polarization. So let's start with some context on your backgrounds.Samad, would you like to start?
SPEAKER_03: Yes, thank you, Chloe, and hello, everyone.I grew up in a small southern town called Waverly, Tennessee, which is, I kid you not, the real-life version of Schitt's Creek. And it puts the country in country, and it's a rural town in Tennessee.And my nickname growing up was Babette, which is the female version of the word Baba.
SPEAKER_00: Which is your new permanent nickname.
SPEAKER_03: Thanks, Clint.Growing up in this small southern town as a practicing Muslim American daughter of Palestinian and Syrian immigrant doctors is really what made me decide to become a peacemaker. Now, many people think that my identity is a walking contradiction and in some instances, a controversy.But I found peace with it and from within.And this is key as a peacemaker.You have to first start with finding peace within.And I had a lot of practice on this because from the age of three years old, I was going back and forth from America's heartland to the world's holy land.And one of the things I remember thinking all the time was, what would it take to for there to be peace between Israelis and Palestinians.And to my surprise, that same question is now being asked here in the United States.
What will it take for us to have peace here in America?Thank you so much.And how about you, Clint?
SPEAKER_00: Yeah, so I grew up in and around a city called Knoxville, Tennessee.It's in East Tennessee.It's in the foothills just in Appalachia, right outside the Great Smoky Mountains National Park.And my dad was a small-town bank president, and I lived kind of a dual life, a little dual existence. I would come home to a very small place where we lived, where we went to church.But then during the week, Monday through Friday, I would commute into Knoxville, into the city, and go to a prep school there.And at an early age, because of that school, I learned that I loved to write.And I spent my formative years writing for the student newspaper, writing for the literary magazine.And that turned into going to the University of Tennessee and studying journalism, and then a 15-year career as a journalist. And so what I really am in essence is a communicator.
I'm somebody who, you know, loves to write for people and talk to a lot of different kinds of people.I own a public affairs firm in Nashville and practice there.You know, really for me, communication is something that can bridge divides between people.And that's what I try to do in my life and with our work.
SPEAKER_04: All right, well, so thank you both for that, but let's hear a little bit more about this frenemyship.What's the deal?
SPEAKER_03: All right, well, look at us.I mean, there's a lot of assumptions that people make about us, and also personality-wise, we're pretty hard-headed.We have strong personalities.We both think we're right all the time.I am.He's working on it.And we've had different lived experiences.We come about life sometimes differently, I would say.And also, he's Republican, and I am not.
SPEAKER_00: Yeah.And, you know, I mean, we're both very type A personalities.We come from different political circles.We have different perspectives on how to solve things.And, you know, it leads to disagreements sometimes.
SPEAKER_03: Yeah.I mean, we've stopped talking at times, even as Chloe mentioned as well.But we've come back together.We're going to talk a little bit more about that. Thank you.
SPEAKER_04: So, okay, let's dive a bit deeper into this crisis of communication you both touched on.So how is this an obstacle to democracy?
SPEAKER_03: Well, the crisis of communication that we're talking about here is contributing to polarization.Let me define polarization for a moment.It means being divided and being placed into vehemently two opposing groups. And think, for example, urban-rural.Think rich-poor.The United States thinks Democrats and Republicans.Pew Research, for example, is showing us that over the past 30 years, people who identify with different parties and have opposing view have very negative emotions and feelings about the person that belongs to another party.It has doubled. since 1994, so for over the past 30 years.And this is contributing to a trust deficit, a trust deficit between neighbors, we're all feeling it, between neighbors, between family and friends, between citizens and democracy, and between citizens and government as well.
And that is in part happening because of an authorizing environment for hate and violence.And for example, we are seeing that 30% of Americans right now are okay with violence in some circumstances as they find it justifiable.And also, people feel that our institutions and that our systems and even our government is riddled with corruption and hypocrisy.Yes, I just said the quiet part out loud. So what is happening here and what is contributing to this demonization of each other that is tearing us apart and hurting our democracy?I'm going to take you through that.We call it the scare script.Everyone close your eyes for just a moment. And imagine someone in your community, either in your neighborhood or your workplace or your school, that person who has been demonized or who has demonized you.
And I want you to hold that person's image in your mind as I take you through the scare script and how this works. Because you can open your eyes or keep them closed.It's up to you.Now, I don't want to demonize anyone that's real, so I'm going to use plaid people for the purposes of demonstration today.So, plaid people, here we go.This is how this works.This is how the slippery slope and the downward spiral that turns into hate and violence works.It's the demonization process. It starts with labeling plaid people.I don't like plaid people.
Plaid people are bad.This pulses existing or creates animosity.Plaid people, they're really making me upset.And that animosity turns to blame.I'm blaming plaid people for the traffic.They're taking away our jobs.Plaid people, they're sucking our way of life away from us. Now, that leads to fear.I fear plaid people.They're coming after us.
They're taking everything away.I'm scared.That leads to anger.My life was better off before plaid people were in it.They're taking away everything that I hold precious, and that makes our community what it is supposed to be and what we've always known it to be.We need to protect ourselves from plaid people.Next, I hate plaid people. They're destroying our society.And in some instances, that leads to violence.I need to take out plaid people before they take me out.
Now, think about how that process works online.It speeds up, and with the techniques of artificial intelligence, of disinformation, of how the algorithms are working, it's speeding up into a frenzy, and it fuels the hate industrial complex, which feeds off of this as it works to destroy our democratic norms and principles. That is what is happening.And who benefits from it?Conflict profiteers benefit from it because they think that our democracy is for sale.And they love that framing of us versus them.It works so well for them because it programs people into believing that the us versus them frame about themselves, which uses the oldest trick in the book, divide and conquer. And it is here where we have to remember almost nobody is immune.Almost everyone is a target.Don't take the bait.
SPEAKER_04: Thank you for that, Samar.So this hate industrial complex is alive and well.What can we do to challenge it?And how do we build a more pluralistic pro-democracy society?
SPEAKER_03: Well, I think we have to remember what Todd Rose tells us about collective illusion.And that is that people in group think, the group that they self-identify with, they fear retribution if they question what the group is thinking. And they also assume that the group is thinking sometimes what the group might not be thinking.But the assumption is, my group thinks this way, therefore I must think this way.Otherwise, I'm going to be outcasted from the group.This leads to two things.One is people stop questioning each other and the group that they self-identify with.And two, people stop talking to each other.
SPEAKER_00: Yeah, and I mean, you know, there are some folks who probably are surprised that we're up here together.There's folks back home that are surprised that we work together all the time.And, you know, that could lead to folks distrusting us.It could lead to us.And it has.And it has.It leads to folks, you know, casting us out of certain circles.It can lead to a lot of things.But, you know, at the end of the day, we find ways to work around that.
SPEAKER_03: That's right.We're better for it.Even though we don't see eye to eye, Clint helps strengthen what I'm thinking.And it's because there are differences that I think we find joy also in crossing boundaries.And it makes us better.That is pluralism.
SPEAKER_04: I love that that is how you define pluralism.I think it's such a good example. You know, one thing people might say in response to this idea about pluralistic society is that it's an unrealistic expectation, that it's a utopian vision we can never truly achieve.So, Clint, I'd love to hear your opinion.Do you feel that that's too visionary?
SPEAKER_00: Well, I'm a former journalist, so I'm not often asked to be optimistic.It's not really comes with territory.But here's what I see, okay?So, you know, there's been this concept for a long time in American politics about the big middle. It's a pretty simple concept, and that is that most of us don't live on the extremes of politics.Most of us are not to the far left, to the far right.Most of us have pretty shared values and a pretty common set of things that we all care about.So if you accept that to be true, sort of fast forward and think about what is the current zeitgeist in this country.It's really rejecting institutions, which in a lot of ways is just rejecting authority. So think about all the things that Americans have rejected in the last, what, 10 years.
We've rejected free speech.We've rejected science.We've rejected government.We've rejected media.We've rejected a lot of things.And so what would happen if that willingness to challenge institutions For example, turned an eye towards the monolithic tech companies that sort of control everything that we read and that send us through algorithms all the content that comes to our phones and our tablets.We started asking questions about that.What would happen if we started demanding of all of our leaders, a little more common sense, a little more pragmatism?
What if we demanded more pragmatism and more focus from them instead of lapping up the red meat and listening to all the hot talk?I think there's potential in that.Globally, it's a different picture, I think, but people across the world have a lot of the same challenges that we have. And so what does that take?It takes people really rejecting conflict entrepreneurs and asking more of their political systems and their economic systems.
SPEAKER_04: So, OK, so if we want to live in this pluralistic world, how do we get there?What are each of your visions?
SPEAKER_00: Well, I'd say this.I've always noticed that folks who talk a lot about depolarization, when I really drill down with them, they don't always practice it in their personal life.So the first thing I would say is to fight confirmation bias in your own lives. We, again, are sent content all day long that we already agree with because it's sending it to us because it wants us to agree with it and read it.
SPEAKER_03: Algorithms.
SPEAKER_00: Algorithms.So go outside your comfort zone and read things that you know are going to make you mad.Just go ahead and read it.Understand whatever the other side of your argument is.Go seek that information out.Focus on it.At least try to understand it.I'd say that'd be the first thing.Then take that a step further. Do you know anybody that you really dislike and disagree with and do you spend any time with that person?
Probably not.So in your personal lives, your work lives, your neighborhood, wherever, go find somebody that you probably disagree with a lot and ask them to dinner.Go have a drink with them or a cup of coffee and spend some time getting to know them.It's really easy to be polarized if it remains in the abstract and the other side of whatever side you're on is not humanized.So if you put a human face to it, it certainly helps.I'd say the final thing is in your community, whatever that is, to really demand more of your leaders right down to the local level.Nationalizing local issues is never a winner. All it does is cause rancor and ineffectiveness.So if you've got a local leader who is not representing your community well and focused on things that really aren't going to help your community, call them out on it.
Then go back to that person you disagree with all the time and had lunch with and find something that you can work on together and put your differences aside and make it happen.This is some practical advice.
SPEAKER_04: Yeah, it really gives me a lot of hope.How about you, Samar?
SPEAKER_03: Yeah, I see, you know, we the people are one of the reasons why we're so divided.And the irony here is that it's gonna be we the people that gets us out of this mess and we're not getting out of here otherwise.And so I think we need to get into the democracy gym and start practicing a couple of these things that Clint just said.I wanna underscore... about community, about having courageous conversations, about listening to each other.And I want to add just a couple of points, just three of them, if I may.One is we need to ask the question, whose responsibility is it?So in asking that question, we restore agency and we move from feeling powerless to being powerful.And Clinton and I just practiced this and are practicing this, for example, around the Covenant shooting that we just experienced and figuring out we have a complex problem here with mass shootings.We all do in this country.
How do we join hands together to try to solve that problem?The second thing is that we need to move away from a scarcity mindset and embrace a growth mindset.We need to stop playing these zero-sum games and start working towards win-win.And one of the ways that we do that is we think about, you know, if I let Clint in, I don't need to be scared that he's going to take everything.I need to meet that fear with hope.And if we work together, we can expand the pie, we can create more opportunity, we can work better together. and live in a better society.And the third thing is we need to build trust.We practice patience with each other, mercy and accountability.Trust me every single day.
And I would just also suggest to post a positive video that inspires your community, that also helps build trust within your community on a weekly basis and see if you're gonna be confusing the algorithms. And if you see something like, for example, if I were to watch on YouTube a disinformation video about Clint being a member of a heavy metal band that also is tying into a Star Wars cult that's taking over the galaxy, let me pick up the phone.
SPEAKER_00: That was the 80s, and we're not going to talk about that.
SPEAKER_03: As a peacemaker, people tell me all the time, war is inevitable.That's just what humans do.Humans are violent.Humans fight. But if war is inevitable, peace is inevitable too.And it is peace that we need to prepare for now.I welcome you.I invite you to join me on this journey.I have a feeling we won't regret it.
SPEAKER_04: Samad Klint, thank you so much for growing this pie together.And thank you for your time here on stage.Thanks for joining us.
