 Welcome. Thank you so much for joining the New America Fellows program and the political reform program for this discussion of Ted Johnson's when the stars begin to fall overcoming racism and renewing the promise of America. I'm Sarah Baleen, the senior program associate for the Fellows program and for more than 20 years, New America has supported hundreds of fellows who have gone on to publish books, produce documentary films and other deeply reported projects, and we're so grateful to be able to host this event today and welcome Ted for such a timely and necessary conversation about race and America. Before we start just a few housekeeping notes, if you do have questions during the event, please submit them through the Q&A function at the bottom of your screen. We'll pass them on to our moderator. And if you need close captioning, please click the CC button on the bottom menu bar. We also encourage you to sign up for our newsletter and our events list so you can learn more about our work as well as receive invitations to future fellows programming events. You can find that information on our website. And most importantly, copies of when the stars begin to fall are available for purchase through our bookselling partner, Solid State Books. You can find a link to buy the book on the event page. Now, let me introduce you to today's speakers. Ted Johnson is a senior fellow and director of the Fellows program at the Brennan Center for Justice at the NYU School of Law, where he undertakes research on race, politics, and American identity. Prior to joining the Brennan Center, he was a national fellow at New America and a commander in the United States Navy, reserved for 20 years in a variety of positions, including as a White House fellow in the first Obama administration, and as a speechwriter to the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Emery Slaughter is joining us as the moderator today. Emery is the CEO of New America. She's also the Bert G. Kerstetter 66th University Professor Emerita of Politics and International Affairs at Princeton University. From 2009 to 2011, she served as director of policy planning for the United States Department of State, the first woman to hold that position. Upon leaving the State Department, she received the Secretary's Distinguished Service Award for her work, leading the Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review, as well as Meritorious Service Awards from USAID and the Supreme Allied Commander for Europe. We're so pleased to have you both here with us today. Thank you for joining us, and I'll turn the conversation over to Anne-Marie. Sarah, thank you and welcome to all of you. I am really excited to be having this conversation. I have been waiting for this book to come out for months. I had the privilege of seeing a fairly early draft and loved it and have already been citing it really several times in print before this book, the book had come out. So it just gives me great pleasure to see it in print and to be able to have this conversation with Ted. So Ted, I think we, let's begin by, I'm just going to ask you to talk a little bit about the book, and sort of give you a chance to frame it the way you want to frame it, and then we will jump into a conversation and then we'll turn it over to all of your questions. If you have a question as we're talking, just put it in the Q&A. Excellent. Thank you so much, Anne-Marie. And thanks to New America, not just for this event, but for helping me conceive this book in the first place. I was just retiring from the military, had just finished a doctorate, and was looking at a mid-career transformation to think more deeply about race and politics. And all I had was an idea and a dissertation, but the New America Fellows Program helped me take that stuff and turn it into a book proposal and get it in front of agents, which has allowed this moment to come to be. So without the New America Fellows Program, I don't know that this project would exist. So thank you for that investment and the resources you provided me to do so. So the book, look, it's I call it a three-legged stool of three-legged stools. It's a bunch of puzzle pieces taken from my personal and family narrative, from political science and philosophy and sociology, and smashing them all together to paint a picture where bits of it may feel familiar to us. But the picture as a whole is something I hope feels fresh and new and offer some ideas to debate and hopefully we can implement. So I'll sort of tackle the big themes of the book. The first is that racism is an existential threat to America. And I make this declaration. And I say to America and not to the United States because I want to distinguish between the geopolitical entity we know as the United States, which is governed by its interests and not by, you know, a moral compass or an absolute sense of right and wrong, but national interests. And then America, which I think is the idea on which the nation was founded and the principles, the promise of America, which is that we are all created equal, and that we have unalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. And I think the project of our country is making the United States, the nation state live up to America, the ideals, and we've not yet closed the gap. But this is the project that's before us and has been for generations and will be for generations to come. So racism is a threat to the American idea to the promise of America because it undermines the things we say we hold true and the things we value like equality and like liberty. The second bit of this is that national solidarity is the way to mitigate or overcome the effects of racism. I don't know that we'll ever get rid of racism completely. I actually think we will not. But I think we can reduce the impact that racism has on our lives and on our country, if we proactively tackle the challenges it raises. And national solidarity is this is another one of those concepts that that borrows from lots of academic scholarship and things about civic solidarity and political solidarity and social solidarity. I define national solidarity as the bond of affection between citizens who are holding the state accountable for being in breach of the social contract and not being in breach because it's not provided material gains or delivered on material demands to the people, but because it is not delivered on the moral claims that the people have on the state, that is to ensure in quality to ensure that our constitutional rights are not infringed upon. So we are it's national solidarity is when people bond together over a cause that is moral and just and hold the state accountable for being in breach of the social contract. The third leg of this tool is that black America provides a model for this national solidarity. Not that black America exclusively holds the key to the future, but that the history of black people in this country provides lessons highlights attributes of how to construct a solidarity out of nothing out of out of bad experiences and out of a desire for more and then compel the nation to be better than it is in hopes that we can close that gap between the United States and America between who we say we are who we profess to be and then how we actually behave and what our actions actually say about who we are. There are so much I want to talk about there's so many fabulous ideas. I'm going to pull I'm going to ask you to pull the lens back just a bit and then I want to come back directly to solidarity because I do think I think that's a very important and original contribution to the national debate so I'm going to come back to it but I have to start by when the stars begin to fall it's such a poetic title, where does it come from and why did you choose it. Yeah, so it comes from it's a song from an old Negro spiritual, you know the songs that enslaved black people used to sing during slavery, I came I came across it first in David Du Bois's book the soul of black folks, and he talks about the the seven, I think it's the seven sorrow songs, and this is one of them. So when the stars begin to fall is a song that is ostensibly a Christian song about when the rapture happens and sort of when people ascend to heaven, and, and slave people would sing this in the field as they try to manage this very hard life, but what it is actually about is emancipation, but they couldn't sing explicitly about their desire to break free of this institution. So they often cloaked their desire for liberty for freedom for emancipation and Christian themes which were permitted. So when the stars begin to fall is sort of it has dual meanings, and I sort of I take that into the book to say that when the stars begin to fall as in the stars on our flag. Is, have we achieved the nation where the stars are falling into place, or have we created a nation where the stars are sort of falling out of the sky and collapsing on ourself, as we have lost the promise of America by not living up to our values. So, so let me then come come to the point about solidarity and then specific and specifically. So you defined it as the bonds between people as they're holding their government to account so I want to ask you, you know, to give us some examples of what that looks like in practice and then I also want to talk about why specifically black solidarity but but start with it's not a deeply American concept right you know in Europe and in Africa there are other cultures where that are much more solid solid I guess you'd say are just a prize solidarity, you hear movements in the United States talk about solidarity and of course that was the name of the Polish anti communist movement. But it's, you can look at a lot of American documents and that's not the word you'd see so just talk a little bit more about what it means what it looks like in practice. In practice, solidarity is not just unity it's not the kind of rally around the flag that we feel after we've been attacked say in pro harbor or 911 solidarity requires sacrifice of everyone to be in solidarity with someone is not to be in solidarity with them is not to stand in unity with them, but is to be willing to sacrifice something in your life, so that the cause or the person you're standing in solidarity with is helped as a result. So you're right that this is not something one the concept of solidarity is not unique to America but I would argue is maybe more difficult to find in America, because of our history. And because we are a nation of 330 million people from different races, ethnicities religions languages customs cultures. There's nothing about us that is homogenous. And it is incredibly difficult and all of the scholarships suggest this to build bonds of solidarity between diverse people and especially in a large society. I don't know why the project is so difficult, but this is why it is also so powerful, because if we can find the solidarity, if we can create bonds of affection between people who only share a belief in the American idea. That's the only thing that connects them, aside from the legal obligations of citizenship, then we will have created something new a multi racial democracy, where people across different stand in solidarity with one another. I mean, when it comes to voting if some groups are left out of having access to the ballot and you stand in solidarity with that group. That doesn't mean you just write your congressman a letter and then go off and do your own thing. It means you almost force the democracy to pause force government to stop and take notice that some people, even if it's not you are being their rights are being infringed upon solidarity means giving up your time, your resources to ensure that the principles that I'll say you hold dear, or the things that actually govern how how you live and what you believe. So really a kind of leaving no one behind right that I could see the head but I'm going to tell my government stop until we bring everyone with us. It's interesting I was just thinking. If you think about you know the French Revolution and the American Revolution and the different kind of doc founding documents and of course the United States is much more individual right every man every human is entitled to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness and the French for liberty, equality and fraternity, right, which you never have the United States but you're, you're right of course the French nation is far more or was far more homogeneous but less less so today but that concept of a bond that requires that you share something and that you give up something to stand with with your fellows. So in chat I think in chapter six one of your chapters you say black solidarity. So is talk about what that means specifically in terms of both why black solidarity black solidarity and what the African American community or the black community has has to teach the rest of us. So black solidarity is when it's a novel creation I like it's, I think too many in the nation. Consider the unity seen among black folks one as a kind of political unity because 90% of black people vote for Democrats and congressional presidential elections, but they treat it as if solidarity is innate, you know you're sort of it's in the melanin in the skin that you will also bond with other black people and it happens naturally, but if when we look back to 1619 coming forward, the black people that arrived in the United States were not homogenous. They were from different customs cultures religions dialects languages from different parts of sub the hair in Africa, and they were mashed together under the the boot of slavery under under the lash to become a new people. And so the African American was created from a diverse set of African people who were subjected to slavery. So the solidarity that was created in this this matching together was one a survival mechanism, but it is also it is so ingrained in the black American experience because of our history that it finds new ways of expression, both political and civic in particular. In the chapter in the book, I'm talking about the social aspect of the solidarity and social solidarity is a take the definition from a scholar, her name is Sally shows, and she talks about this kind of solidarity being one that you're born into a group that you don't sell select into the one that you are assigned or by happen by virtual some incident, you know you become a part of. So there are solidarity among like breast cancer survivors there tends to be solidarity among those who have suffered national or a natural disaster, or solidarity among family members. We don't choose our parents more times than not we don't choose to be victims of natural disasters. We don't choose our illnesses, but we find bonds of connection with people because of the shared family history, or because of a shared experience. And so black solidarity for all of its political and civic ramifications is really about being born into this group that is now subjected by by no fault of members, no fault of their own, a particular experience in this country that requires that they bond together. If any one of them is going to have access to the full rights and privileges of citizenship at the nation is supposed to guarantee. So it's not just political action, it's not just making demands of the state, but it's so is the group membership and the willing and you're the understanding that your state is linked to those of others in the group. And that's the kind of social solidarity that I think Americans, we could sort of scale out when Americans could adapt if we had that common set of beliefs, because certainly there's not a common set of American experiences, given how large and diverse we are. So I want to shift ground to the personal for a minute. I, as you're talking about, you know, imagining the spread of that solidarity I'm with you I mean I, I so will see and hope that we can achieve a country that really that find solidarity traditionally trans ethnically trans all our differences, but I can hear my husband and many other more cynical people in my life saying oh come on you know that that's just by in the sky. I wonder to what extent your own experience and your focus on solidarity is connected to your experience in the military, because obviously the military in many ways depends on achieving that solidarity leave no soldier behind right fight for one another fight so talk a little bit about the extent to which you think the appeal of the concept is linked to your own personal experiences. It's deeply connected and I think part of the issue with race, we have today. Never mind the history and the public policy implication those sorts of things, but we can't talk about racism honestly in this country because we have self segregated socio economically and racially throughout much of the country if you look at the schools neighborhoods go to if you look at the neighborhoods that we live in. It's often more people like us and not lots of diversity and difference there. And so when you're when you're self segregated in such a large society. The stereotypes and caricatures of others who you don't come in contact with are easier to believe, and they take root much more easily, because what experience do you have what knowledge do you have to sort of controvert the thing that's being sold to you. What the military does is it forces Americans who would never meet one another in any other instance to now work together for a common mission. And it doesn't mean that you suddenly believe the same, or that you, you know, you begin to like the love one another and sort of skip off into the sunset together, but it means that you are willing to to extend grace to people who are different from you who believe differently from you who have different ideas about what should happen. And because you recognize their fundamental humanity the dignity, but also that they kind of want the same thing out of the whole project that you want they just disagree on the best way to get there. And so much of what plays our country today and we can look we've got folks in Congress and at the stage talking about critical race theory and wanted to defund schools and tear up school districts that talk about anti racism or structural racism, or white supremacy or the the words become more important than the people, and the words are used to divide us and not to try to bring us together. And it's so easy to say those black university professors teaching this stuff to your kids are teaching you that white people are bad. When you or your children don't know other people across the racial across the color line. So it's easy to ascribe the worst to them because you've got no tangible experiences that would suggest that maybe that caricature is inaccurate. And I think, and one of the recommendations I make in the book is for a national service program to incentivize if not compel Americans to get out of their bubbles and begin to form civic kinships civic friendships with these Democratic strangers we call our compatriots. The segregation point is so powerful Paul Butler, our new president, the president and chief transformation officer of New America asked early on when we were talking about race and equity and transformation, he said that one of the exercises he's used is to ask a group of people to think about the 10 people in their lives who are most important right you know who are just your 10 essentials obviously your family is going to be there some friends, and then ask how many of them are of a different race or ethnicity. And I will say, I think for most of my friends certainly growing up. Me, I think most of them would not have any in that top 10 who is of another race. And I think that's different for our children somewhat because America itself is becoming more diverse but probably not, you know, if you would then add class in there and as you say housing segregation. It's a little so how are you going to see that other person as, you know, a parent, somebody with anxiety, so you know all the ways in which we are, we are human but I, it's, it's very hard to, as you say, to to see the people behind the politics and yet ultimately, you do, you do have to. Social media has exacerbated it if you only one would think that social media would introduce you to more people, and you would have more perspectives, but again, more of the scholarship has shown that even our social, our social media circles are as segregated as our actual physical circles. So if you look at people's Facebook feeds or their, their Twitter, you know, connections or followings. They tend to look a lot like the people they talk to in real life and so now we live in these mega bubbles and these like really insulated echo chambers and and they have the ideas and the connections that are formed in these chambers are strengthened. And if you're not part of that, you are now seen as the other way and it's really easy to mobilize a group of people who feel connected against the others who none of them have any real connections to. Absolutely. So I want to ask you we've, I'm, we're going to be turning to audience q amp a in 10 minutes we've got a couple of questions already but by all means put your questions into the q amp a and and I will see them, and we'll, and group them as as best I can. So Ted, one of the other things I was struck by reading the book is you talk about African Americans as superlative citizens, which I find a really wonderful description and I will frame it by saying also that so often in the right left divide the right claims patriotism and citizenship and you know it really though those civic values and often it's rare that I think you'd hear people on the left of describing themselves as patriots or or even even cleaning this kind of idea of superlative citizenship and it's certainly not how the right sees the left or sees many people of color. So talk about why you, you use that as a description of superlative citizens. So superlative citizenship is essentially a political strategy that exposes the breach between who a nation is, and then who they are actually who they actually are based on their actions. And so what's what I say in the book basically is that African Americans have used superlative citizenship as a way of making a claim on the equality that is being denied to them by the state. So superlative citizen, I mean, executing all of the duties all of the excellencies of citizenship, even when the state doesn't deliver on its obligations to the citizens. This is like enslaved the black people running off of plantations to fight in wars for our independence in the war of 1812 in the Civil War. And then certainly in the Revolutionary War in the war of 1812 returned to slavery after the war was over, as if their willingness to sacrifice their lives for independence and freedom wasn't enough for them to earn their own independence and freedom and and for those wars it certainly it wasn't. This is African Americans going off to fight in World War One to Korea, and then returning and not having full access to the GI bill which would allow them to buy a home or to the educational benefits which would allow them to pursue higher, you know, a college degree. And so the making of the middle class that the GI bill that the GI bill inspired or sort of fueled black folks were left out of even though many died and sacrificed in those wars, and not a single Medal of Honor was given to any black service member for World War One and two, until decades later when Bush Clinton and Obama retroactively looked at the citations for lesser medals and determined actually these were Medal of Honor worthy actions. So that is a kind of superlative citizenship. Another kind that I talk about that's fallen out of favor, frankly, more recently is the politics of respectability or respectability politics. This is the idea that you're, you know, dressing appropriately and having good etiquette and prediction forces people to recognize your humanity such that the denial of certain rights and privileges is no longer acceptable. I know that it's never enough, you know, if you are, if you are at the wrong color and the wrong part of town stopped by the wrong person it doesn't matter if you have a doctorate or that you're a veteran or whatever. Sometimes your skin precedes the the entire interaction and I can vouch for these things personally, but a century ago, it was a political strategy, mostly among church going black women who said, and these were women exposed to sexual violence by work of being by virtue of being domestics and many white households. So the politics of respectability. It kind of argued we can't be treated like animals. If we dress appropriately if we speak well if we have all the manners and etiquette that this culture treasures. I mean it is something to see black men and women and their Sunday best sundresses suits being attacked by fire hoses and German shepherds. Who is the barbarian in these pictures, who's the which side is acting uncivally, and that's hypocrisy that that mismatch of these people who have rights behaving civilly and these people who are agents of the state acting like animals is part of the power of the politics of respectability which is writ large, the power of supportive citizenship. And the last thing I'll say is this is not exclusive to black people, any group that's ever been marginalized whether it's women immigrants, you name it Native Americans, supportive citizenship has often been a way that they that these groups make direct claims to have access to all other rights and privileges of citizenship all of the constitutional rights by by showing that not only do they want to belong not only can they be a citizen, but that they can be exemplary citizens, and the state not delivering on its end makes the state look like it's like it's the one that's behaving uncivally. And just to take it back to the way you described the, the three sort of broad art themes of the book, where you then this idea of superlative citizens representing America, right, challenging United Statesians, right, or their fellow citizens to live up to the best values of the country so that it's like whole, you know, claiming actually act believing and acting on those values in the face of those who are not, which is a, to me it is a very powerful move, particularly at a time where as I said the left right are, you know, often that's a fault line, the sort of wrapping yourself in the flag and the claims of patriotism and this is this is a way of saying, we stand for the, for the promise, the promise that as you say in your title. So I, we have a couple of questions again keep them coming I have a couple more but I'm going to turn to the audience. We have one from Vivian Nixon says, what are specific ways that perceptions of solidarity among blacks prevents civil discourse across a range of political views, given the emergence of cancel culture that is controlled by the most vocal, sometimes polarized groups. How do we change that and honestly Ted I remember your and my one of our first conversations was sort of the compression of the space for black political discourse as a sort of the outside pressures you know I honestly I believe that if you, if we really had a quality you'd find as much divert political diversity among communities of color as you would among white communities or anybody else so that's a big question. It's a big question it's a hard one and I my guess is my answer is probably going to be that satisfying but here's where I'll say one. Usually black solidarity in practice when it's demonstrated is experienced politically by the rest of the society. And so, once you get out of places like barbershops and beauty salons and off of black Twitter and just see how solidarity operates in the public sphere. It looks like black people want the same party to dominate government. What's black solidarity is organized around is not in opposition to anything it's not black solidarity in opposition to white Americans, or in opposition to diversity. It's not black solidarity in support of Democrats. It is black solidarity in support of civil rights in support of equality. And so politics is the means to move a nation state from the way it's behaving to a way that's more racially progressive or a way that ensures civil rights protections are controlled and then implement. So this kind of solid. So here's the hard part about this is that it's easy because of sort of how I set this up to look at black political solidarity and say all they want is for black people to get free money via reparations from the government. They don't actually want to integrate. They still want to go to their HPC use, but they just want the government to sort of take care of them, and they're not trying to integrate and be part of this larger project, and look at this anti racism stuff and look at this critical thing they think we're all white people are all racist and evil and are on the hook for everything bad that's happened to them. So it's easy to mobilize against black solidarity. Because it's easy to caricature especially when you, again, when our social connections don't allow us to break down some of those, those stereotypes. So I don't know the answer of how to stop that caricaturing, except to say, talk to folks who stand in solidarity with other black folks which is to say the vast majority of us. If you listen to the rhetoric of Tim Scott, black Republican from South Carolina, Cory Booker, black Democrat senator from New Jersey, and Raphael Warnock black from Georgia, listen to them to talk about their growing up they almost always mentioned cotton and civil rights, like listen to them talk about education they almost always talk about the importance of education for black families for poor communities and the importance of equitably funding to use. They often talk about economic empowerment. They are co sponsors on an anti lynching bill that the Senate still can't seem to pass because of one or two Republicans. So this is the kind of solidarity that is on exhibit every day for us at the congressional level. And yet all we ever hear because of rhetoric that all these men also say is where they're divided. And, which is goes to show that there's not a political and in black America that there's lots of diversity and lots of differing ideas, but on the basic question of equality, and on the expansion of opportunity and prosperity for black communities. That solidarity is just as present among black Democrats and Republicans as it is within this bubble of black solidarity that we typically typically ascribed to. So hopefully that does some justice to the question. That is really interesting because as you were talking I was thinking so in some ways, you know, many of the, the, I mean, voting rights bills, the, that many Democrats want to see get through would be probably better changed by more black Republicans than by more black Democrats in the sense of actually thinking about what do you need to cross party lines that's that that's quite interesting. And frankly it's happened. You know Tim Scott has been trying to get the Walter Scott notification act pass which is, you know black man shot in the back and North Charleston by a white cop who then lied and said, he dropped his tazer by the guy and said he was trying to drop his tazer. Yeah, yeah, and Tim Scott offered a criminal justice reform bill but of course he wanted to exclude qualified immunity, whereas the Democrats wanted to include it. But where the 90% of places where black people across political ideologies agree, that's not sensational enough sensational enough to to report on and so it's the 5% or 10% of things where they disagree. And because all of these men in this example are good partisans, they sort of view the party line, they kind of make it easy for, for us to point to the to the divisions and suggest that there's a black solidarity, and then there are those black people who don't want any part of it and would be willing to undermine the whole thing in service of partisan gain. So we have a related question from Rachel Walsh who says, how can we achieve national solidarity in a country that celebrates diverse and often opposing ways of thinking which is the, the question of the day. Yeah, it's hard. And so there's two quick things I'll say on this one is, if we look at the summer of last year of 2020. I've started calling it the summer solidarity and it may be a little hokey. But if we think about how the nation came together after the murder of George Floyd, which came right on the heels of public knowledge about a Mark Arbery, being killed by white vigilantes in Georgia and Breonna Taylor. There her 911 call on being killed by police and during a known as a no knock search warrant that all comes to the fore around May, or so late April and then certainly George Floyd in May. And that's also when the nation is now understated home orders or social distancing or being sequestered in their homes, because of the coronavirus pandemic. It's also when a lot of people are losing their jobs because coronavirus has hurt the economy, the government has not responded forcefully enough. And people are now wondering where their economic security is, and we're debating about masks and vaccines and the legitimacy of science and the CDC. George Floyd is killed and we get a summer where people in every state in the union and territories across lines of race generation party lines, ideological lines, regions, coming together every day for months on end to protest. And it's not just murder, but but I think was actually happening where people were dissatisfied with agents of the state abusing their power with the government not being responsive enough quickly enough to the coronavirus pandemic, and people were longing for connection to the government after being stuck in their homes and doing everything on computers or no engagement at all. And so we got a taste of what national solidarity could look like that summer, the last summer, and then the presidential election happens with a sitting president who is in division as a way of winning as a way of strategic electoral politics so a way of holding on to power is to set Americans against one another. And the year ends with the highest voter participation rate in the nation in 120 years which is an example of how this solidarity we felt over the summer turned into action, and then January six happens, it's just a backlash to that solidarity is sort of a way of undermining connection across difference. So, I think we've got a taste of it it was too thin to endure, but we got a sample of it. What is the thing that can connect us going forward that can be maybe thicker. I talk about the concept of American civil religion in the book, and this is as old as Russo, but was sort of brought back to my into modernity by the sociologist at Berkeley named Robert Bella and 67. And he basically says that there's a quasi religious way of being an American of sort of a civic exercise that feels religious at times we have our pantheons with George Washington and Lincoln and King. We've got our sacred text and the Constitution and the Bill of Rights and the Declaration of Independence. We've got our sort of our exemplary citizens and our rituals with Pledge of Allegiance and the National Anthem and we've got our symbols like the flag and the Statue of Liberty, all the marks of religion we have in our civic life. And that is the thing that has to be the bond the basis for our connection, our values, and then a demonstration of our belief in those values. It's very difficult and easily hijacked, because one side claims the flag for themselves, and to the exclusion of the other side, that is a harmful practice of civil religion that we're more likely to see. And the newer version of it, I think can be one that is to be the basis for a real thick national solidarity that could hold the state to account and create, create connections across difference. So that's a great answer. And but I'm going to push harder, because we have another question from Ahmed El-Tamini, who says what do we need to do to change this environment of racism and establish solidarity within the nation. And I want to sharpen that to say specifically with the next generation, you write about your own son in the, in the book and I've talked to many of my colleagues, white and black and other folks of color who say, you know, you can talk as you just talked about the promise of the country about the, you know, the values. And yet, many folks, and I'll include folks of my, my children's friends, don't, they just see the hypocrisy. Right. When you say the flag and the pledge of allegiance, what they're seeing is the deep racism that accompanies those things. And so when we sing, you know, the national anthem Francis Scott Key is, you know, the land of the free and the home of the brave and he's a slave holder. So how do you reconcile that? How do we recognize the racism and yet hold to the values at the same time or overcome it or change it as the question. Right. Yeah, so multiple parts here and I'll be more concise. The first is that since our inception, we have been a paradox. We were the nation that said all men are created equal and then we enslaved people as we signed the paper saying that we're all created equal. And yet Abraham Lincoln hijacked the language from the declaration to inspire the country to go to war. And though he didn't go to war because he suddenly had an epiphany about the humanity of black people, he recognized it was in the nation's interest to be a union. And that the only way that was going to happen is this slavery was abolished. But in order to make the case for a civil war, he used the language of the declaration. When Martin Luther King made the case for a more egalitarian, racially equitable society, he used the language of the declaration and the Constitution in the I Have a Dream speech which both sides cite ad nauseam now. So the fact that the author of the national anthem was not a good American and certainly in the sense that when we're talking about ideals, doesn't mean that the words or the ideas inscribed at least in the first verse, don't have application. He does, you know, sort of veer off path a little bit. So what what I say is, we get to redefine the things that bring us together and the national anthem can be divisive, but only if we say so, it can also be unifying the best rendition of the national anthem in my opinion ever sung was Whitney Houston in 1991 a black woman, part of the great migration out of the south who grew up in New Jersey, during war, when the United States is at war in Iraq, singing at the Super Bowl, the most beautiful rendition had to be a black woman from a deep south church in her upbringing in a American flag tracksuit at frankly a very civilly religious venue in the Super Bowl at a time war, singing the national anthem. And if that doesn't give you like if that doesn't show you that this thing can be inclusive, then, then we're focusing too much on the thing, and not on the message. So what can we do. The first thing is racism right now is being described. No matter what we're talking institutional racism systemic racism structural racism is all about hatred. So when people say is the United States racist. They are asking does America hate black people does the United States hate black people, and I would say no the United States doesn't have the capacity to hate. There's the capacity to like implement policy that is intentionally discriminatory, and it's sometimes, and especially in institutions like slavery or in the Native American, you know forcibly remove, removing them from land it can be lethal. But the institution the state itself is about its interest not about right wrong good bad love hate. We have to think of racism as the product of the structures in our society that mean two people who are otherwise similarly situated except for their race or ethnicity have very different experiences for no other reason than the way our society is structured. And for the lack of protection one side gets in the benefits and privileges the other side gets. And if we think about it as a crime of the state, which is an argument I also make in the book, and not as bickering that happens between groups, then we can pull away from your responsible for my life easier as we attack one another to the state is responsible for not sufficiently addressing the things that mean me and my group don't have the same level of access to a quality life living for super happiness as others. And then the final sort of trick here is to get everyone to recognize that the persistence of racism harms everyone. There is a reason that white men, especially in rural America are the fastest growing rate of suicide in the country. There's a reason that the opioid crisis hit white communities much harder than communities of color initially. This is an economic anxiety alone this is a group of people who have been harmed by bad policy decisions and have been sold those policy decisions on the backs of those, those other people of color who are stealing from the state who are cutting in those who are lazy and using up social safety net resources that's the reason for your, your anxiety. It's that kind of divert that divisive rhetoric that that is, is causing a lot of our issues. I, you know, I, there's like so much I want to say about this but in a sentence transformative leaders are required to help pull us out of the muck. And right now, we've got leaders who are more interested in keeping us divided, and then winning positions instead of leaders that are willing to pull us together. And even if it means losing on policy battles but the end result is a more united country. I guarantee you that after your book tour you're going to get the question often at the end that says well are you going to run for office but I'm going to hold that. I want to come back. I want to, I want to shift gears again a little bit there's a question that I that I also wanted to ask about going back to the personal and the political because one of the things that makes this book so powerful is the way you you draw on your own story and the opening line I had written that I was 12 years old the first time someone call me the n word. So talk about how, how you, first of all how you came to want to tell your own story and to weave it together and how you see the counterpoint between your own story and that's an amazing opening line for a book that is deeply patriotic. The promise of America that's probably not the opening line many would expect so just talk a little bit about that and then we do have a couple more on those sort of the national issues. Okay. Yeah, so, look, some of it was unavoidable. You know the book, the byline is Theodore R Johnson but my full name is Theodore Roosevelt Johnson the third, and I was named after my father was named after his father. My grandfather was named after President Teddy Roosevelt, when in 1901 Teddy Roosevelt invited Booker T Washington to the White House for dinner. It's the first time ever a black man had been invited to dine with the sitting president. Frederick Douglass had visited Abraham Lincoln but through the back door talk politics and then sort of out the back door. Washington sat at the dinner table which is a symbolizes racial equality. And the nation received it very differently lots of white southerners were really upset, but lots of black southerners were inspired and my great grandparents were so inspired that they named their third son after the rich white New Republican president, and not the southern black educator Booker T Washington, almost as a claim, like, and to expose hypocrisy, you know, my child is an American, and should have just as much chance of becoming president someday as anyone else, but by, but because of their skin. This will probably never happen and yet they claimed some of the symbolism symbolism from the dinner for their family and that they're the sort of tracks throughout the book. So the point and bringing in the family narrative from my enslaved great great great grandfather, all the way through to today is to show that as I make these arguments about supportive citizenship, or social solidarity or civil religion, that these are radical concepts that if any perfect environment in a vacuum. If we put them just right in the light hits it just right, then we'll get a prism of national solidarity that just that shines through the country. It's to show the real and tangible impacts of bad policy of bad leadership of those moments when we could have made better choices, what happens to the people, and my sharecropping grandparents on both sides suffered under Jim Crow might have been, you know, on my mother's side, the first record I could find was of an eight year old black boy with no name just the property of a family, you know, in Bluffton Georgia. And this, this isn't an abstract occurrence, this is my family story. And so in this way I hope that the family narrative would build out and allow some of the historical analysis and some of the theoretical ideas and constructs that are presented, and put some meat on those bones and put a face and a name and an experience to the ideas, so that we can see both the challenges and where we fall in short, but also the promise. These, my family, like many American families still believed, despite all the evidence to the contrary, that the nation would be better for their children than it was for themselves. And, and, you know, I am happier to be, I am happy to be a black man in 2021, then in 1921, or certainly then in 1821. So while it's important to understand the black American experience in 1821. It's also important to acknowledge all of the suffering and sacrificing blood sweat and tears that happened over the last four centuries that allowed us to progress. Without getting stuck in the history or without, you know, sort of patting ourselves on the back and only acknowledging the progress. I think that I've one of my questions was going to be what keeps you optimistic but you've answered that so we have a another another question but one thing I want to highlight because I, you know, I, on one side, I come from people who slave holders from the old south and, you know, the Southerners are fixated on family, you know, my grandmother could trace back here and she could tell you who generations of our own family and how we were related to everybody else. And really I'm ashamed to say that only within the last five years have I fully realized the deep inequity that of course it's hard for you to find those records as you said right that that's one of the great divides if you are a black American who comes from enslaved Americans your records are going to stop if you can find them and it's something that white Americans take for granted that you're going to be able to trace. You know I'll think about all the genealogy programs etc and it's so so it's it's yours is a powerful story but it to me as I hear it it also highlights exactly one of those huge differences that is the result of racism. That I think many white Americans are were until recently oblivious to so it was a particularly powerful part you know I sort of what we, you know, with DNA testing will all find how interconnected we can trace it trace it. So there's one more, one more question and then, and, and if anybody else has, we've probably got time for two more but here so here's a quite specific one. Anthony Hainor who's very much looking forward to reading the book that's good. But who asked you specifically about, do you talk about narrowing or eliminating the educational gaps do you think about in the book do you talk more specifically about, you know policies that would result from greater national self solidarity. I'm not not really so I hint at actually I call out explicitly the range of racial disparities across different social economic factors wealth, pay, employment, education, housing, health care on and on. But the book is mostly about how what are the policies that can help us create national solidarity that can create conditions conducive to the to a the arising of national solidarity. And the five things I propose at the end of the book one is democracy reform, which is about, you know, getting, you know, stopping gerrymandering and protecting people's voting rights and getting dark money out of politics that sort of thing. The second though is civic education. So in this way I do bring education and but it's not education via like math science English kinds of things. It's how to be a better citizen. And it's beyond how many branches of government are there do you know who your Congress person is, but do you know how to be a productive citizen and a constitutional, no liberal democracy. And we are skills are sort of lacking because we're not taught how to be good citizens were just taught to pay your taxes obey the law, and you know, good neighbors make or good fences make good neighbors and that's sort of like the sum of the lessons there. So I think it's about the need for deliberative democracy to bring sort of compel citizens to be part of the democratic process beyond just voting, but the deliberations that happen and the decisions that come out of it. And again the need for national service so that we can get to know one another and the superordinate projects and a mission that is bigger than the both of us, so that we can create these connections. And then the fifth thing is transformative leadership which I've already talked a little bit about. The thinking for me though is if we do these things, then even if we never pass another piece of legislation on education, because we will be in solidarity with one another. We will ensure the existing system delivers on the things that are important to us like equality and fairness and justice. Even if the law doesn't mandate it be so and and where there are gaps and where there are people that try to exploit vulnerabilities, then we'll have a government that's responsive to us to plug those things. So it's kind of like we can't legislate ourselves into national solidarity. We can't address gaps in specific disciplines and then hope the, the outcome of that is solidarity kind of have to find solidarity alongside the fights for fairness and justice and equality and these different institutions including education. That's wonderful. So I'm going to just ask a last question and we will close it up. But as I hear you, I also think, you know, real solidarity to go back to your point about seeing one another as humans means looking at, you know, black kids, or kids of color, or for that poor white kids who are who show tremendous educational disparities and not seeing their color, just seeing talent that we are leaving behind to me that I look at the look at, you know, if you assume that the talent is distributed equally and opportunity is not what we have to assume I just think what what extraordinary cost that is to all of us that we are we are leaving that talent behind and that we are not living up to our ideals that every human being ought to be able to get as far as his or her potential can take them. So here's my final question. Everybody listening everybody listening and all the talks are going to be giving goes out and buys your book which we absolutely want them to do and reads it cover to cover and is totally inspired. What do they do next. Yeah, it's, it's so the first truth I think is that change in this country is not going to come from top down. It's not going to be we elect some president or we get some very charismatic leaders in Congress that then teach us how to be better. And we all follow their example and walk up to the sunset together. I think the America that we all want is going to bubble up from the bottom from localities communities and force change to happen at the state level and nationally. The way that the actions we have to take to create this national solidarity begin with our social circles and our and in our neighborhoods and communities. And the thing we can do individually is to kind of be the superlative citizen, you know, to kind of practice the excellencies of citizenship. Not in terms of tax paying though pay your taxes not in terms of military service or law and order, but how you treat your, your neighbors your fellow man, and when they are treated unfairly. When their rights are infringed upon, are you, is it not your problem and you go about your life, or do are you willing to ensure that the problem they're facing is not one that will eventually reach you because you fail to to acknowledge it. The biggest one thing I would say though if there was just one thing I would ask people to do is to proactively meet other people who are not in your circle presently, go to restaurants that are 90% black if you're white or go to, you know the soccer or the yoga thing or whatever, find places where you are not in the majority where people like you are not in the majority and and take residents there you know don't take it over don't try to change it but get in those spaces where where you are forced to confront difference so that you can see just how much similarities there are it won't be easy. My book wouldn't be necessary would have already conquered the thing, it will be difficult, but it's solidarity again requires sacrifice, and also requires forbearance by white Americans black Americans Americans of every race and ethnicity no one gets off the hook easily. And so we're all going to have to step up to the plate if freedom really isn't free. This is the cost that we have to pay. There's no better way to end in that. So Ted, thank you. Thank you for writing a wonderful book. Thanks to everybody in the audience for listening and for giving us your questions. Again, it's a wonderful book I urge you to buy it and read it and tell your friends about it. And finally thanks to the New America Fellows Program. Thank you both for supporting dead to write this book but also for working with the new America events staff to put on a wonderful event. So thanks to everyone. Thank you.