Affirming democracy and mitigating violence in a time of insurrection
In the days following the violent insurrection at the U.S. Capitol and the mounting concerns for additional violence to break out leading up to the inauguration, I checked in with Rachel Brown, Dr. Nichole Argo, and Samantha Owens from Over Zero to discuss what civil society groups and funders can do to mitigate the possibility of political violence in the immediate-term as well as near- and longer-term scenarios. Over Zero’s work seeks to prevent and reduce the risk of political violence, particularly by drawing on interdisciplinary and cross-sectoral research, from neuroscience to communication to peacebuilding, in order to support leaders from different sectors and backgrounds to actively build peace.
PACE: We are hearing that mitigation of immediate threats of political violence related to the inauguration is in the hands of law enforcement and intelligence officials right now. Are there actions civil society and civic groups can be taking to support mitigation in the next 10 days?
Over Zero: Security will necessarily play a critical role. But this is also the time to (re)set positive norms, e.g., naming and turning away from the harmful behaviors that brought us to this moment. Harmful behaviors that should be named include the spreading of conspiracy and misinformation — an act in which some political leaders participated — with the intent to undermine a free and fair election; dangerous rhetoric (e.g., that which espouses hate or attacks people on the basis of identity); years of shifting norms and democratic backsliding; and more. It’s important that messaging in this moment goes beyond condemning recent, specific acts of violence; it needs to tie these acts to a bigger picture, identifying them as the inevitable consequence of the sustained stoking division, fear, and distrust in democratic institutions by leaders in recent years.
PACE: What about funders? What can they do right now?
OZ: Funders have an opportunity to use their civic leadership and social capital. Many funders have branch operations or are connected to networks that provide political funding — they can use these operations to take a stand. For example, Marriott International, Blue Cross Blue Shield, and Commerce Bancshares all announced that they will indefinitely suspend donations to representatives who objected to certifying the election results; others, including JP Morgan, Chase, and Citibank, have suspended their political giving and will undertake reviews; and still others (including Bank of America, Ford Motor Co. and AT&T) have said they will consider recent events when making decisions on future political donations. We believe such actions — and the public announcement of them — are powerful in three ways. First, they introduce a critical source of accountability for politicians and businesses that have participated in violating established democratic norms and worked to erode faith in our electoral process. Second, they help incentivize leaders to speak up for democracy, including representatives who may have acquiesced or stayed quiet until now. These actions may even provide leaders who are feeling pressured by more extreme elements a practical (not just ideological) justification for defending democracy. Lastly, by taking this stand, funders and businesses are helping to reinstate a positive norm — that when leaders use dangerous rhetoric, deliberately sow conspiracy, or attempt to undermine democracy, they violate core tenets of democratic leadership and these are actions that cannot be dismissed or written off.
Generally, we think the voice of business matters a great deal right now. Thus, where funders have social capital to influence business leaders or take direct action through other, related initiatives that they’re involved in, it can be an important pressure point.
Funders can also set positive norms and galvanize their networks by making public statements and commitments supporting the long-term work that is ahead of us as a nation and in our local communities if we wish to build long-term resilience to political violence. This includes letting science lead the way in responding to COVID-19, listening to diverse and excluded voices, investing in targeted communities, repairing our social fabric, and more.
PACE: I’m hearing you say messages are important right now; who are the messengers that can have particular leverage right now?
OZ: It’s an important moment to reach groups on the political right who are seeking a constructive way forward, but that requires messengers who are poised to reach them (such as business leaders, Chambers of Commerce, faith leaders, other types of influencers — we even saw Arnold Schwarzenegger in this important video — and more). These leaders can use their voices and positions to set an example and be role models for others in navigating this moment.
Indeed, we all have a role to play in leveraging our voices to reach the audiences we have access to — to help them process, make sense of what is happening, move towards positive action, or move away from harm.
On the civic groups side, we can seek to sustain a voice for accountability beyond simply condemning this most recent act of violence, or boxing it into the unhelpful category of “terrorism”. We can ask groups to set expectations for both immediate and long-term action.
PACE: What are the components of accountability messages that are important to convey?
OZ: It is important to trace accountability beyond those who have actively participated or may yet participate in violence — it also rests with those who laid the groundwork for it by working to undermine faith in democracy, spreading misinformation, and inciting towards violence. We also need to acknowledge that the white supremacy behind Wednesday’s insurrection will require tailored redress beyond immediate accountability and security or counterterrorism tools. For instance, we will need to prepare communities for the deep work of addressing our history of racist terror and violence (this may include truth processes, which allow for a collective processing of history and trauma, as well as reparations). Important to note is also that the U.S. does, in fact, have a history of coup attempts (one of which was successful) at the state and local level. Armed insurrections against elected governments spiked, in particular, in the American South throughout Reconstruction and the “Redemption Period,” with insurgent groups such as the Red Shirts and White League facing little to no accountability after armed attacks. The relative impunity faced by these actors — and the ways in which that impunity emboldened (and continues to embolden) similar actors — is something we should also take note of.
Lastly, and in parallel — and especially amidst a pandemic, an economic downturn, and social unrest — we must find ways to constructively address uncertainty about our nation’s future. In the absence of affirming, proactive efforts to do this, divisive, fear-mongering actors and groups will continue to step in.
PACE: Is there a way to make sure these messages transcend politics in our hyper-polarized climate?
OZ: This is a moment to call people — no matter what political party they belong to — to stand up for democracy. Civic groups can join together to make public statements that target different networks; the media attention they garner will shape broader societal narratives, creating space for more people to come on board.
Civic groups can also work to reach leaders (business leaders, political leaders, faith leaders) to thank them if they’re leading in a way that’s helpful, express their disappointment and concern if they’re leading in a way that is harmful, and to encourage them to connect to other networks to issue joint statements that generate coverage and build this broader story.
One other thing we’ve been thinking about regarding faith leaders specifically (especially those who may be able to reach audiences simultaneously being reached with misinformation and calls to violence) is complementing their public-facing statements and actions with more regular touchpoints to their congregants. For instance, this might involve: suggesting helpful exercises and actions; providing resources on how to cope with difficult emotions relating to the election or our nation’s challenges; or supporting counseling staff to reach out to potentially at-risk members with counseling in this high-risk moment.
