The College Presidents for Civic Preparedness, convened by the Institute for Citizens & Scholars, will focus on three civic commitments: educating for democracy; preparing students for a vibrant, diverse, and contentious society; and protecting and defending free inquiry. 

Tetlow said the coalition’s work dovetails with the values of Jesuit universities like Fordham.

“For 500 years, Jesuit universities have taught not just knowledge but wisdom. We teach our values—empathy and openness, and our skills—critical thinking and active listening,” said Tetlow, who signed on to the initiative earlier this month.

“We encourage students to question assumptions, both ours and their own. We model for students how to argue with passion and logic, without attacking the motives of those with whom we disagree.”

The coalition’s civic commitments are woven into the work of Fordham’s FitzSimons Presidential Initiative on Civics and Civility—a yearlong project of education and engagement, offering a model for genuine, respectful dialogue among Americans and fruitful avenues for cooperation in creating solutions to common problems. 

Institute for Citizens & Scholars president Rajiv Vinnakota said that higher education has a responsibility to provide students with critical civic skills and knowledge to participate effectively in our constitutional democracy.

“College campuses are among the most diverse spaces in our country, and college is an important time for students to develop the habits, practices, and norms to live in a multicultural and interconnected democracy,” he said. 

“Doing so can create a ripple effect, making young people more optimistic and increasingly committed about their future and our nation.”

“If we don’t have healthy political discourse, then we don’t have a healthy democracy,” he said on Sept. 24 at Fordham’s Lincoln Center campus.

“America is founded on ideas that require debate and refinement that comes from talking, from arguing.”

In a lecture and Q&A with Fordham President Tania Tetlow, Dickerson laid out the structural reasons Americans are engaging less with each other on controversial topics. 

The event kicked off Fordham’s FitzSimons Presidential Initiative on Civics and Civility, a year-long project of education and engagement created as a model for respectful dialogue and cooperation among Americans. 

The Gold Standard from the ’80s

The reason political discourse feels unproductive today is because the country’s political climate has shifted dramatically, he said. 

In the 1980s, the relationship between President Ronald Reagan and House Speaker Tip O’Neil became a gold standard for bipartisanship, as Reagan, a conservative Republican, and O’Neil, a liberal Democrat, worked together on issues such as Social Security.

That was only possible, Dickerson said, because, in 1982, voters in 85 House districts sent a Democrat to Congress and yet also voted for Reagan for president. To satisfy these “Reagan Democrats,” O’Neil and Reagan needed to work together. The number of districts where this kind of “split ticket voting” takes place has since plummeted to just 16 in 2020.

He pinned the blame on “money, movement, and media.” In 2012, it cost an average of $500,000 to run for a House seat and $11.4 million to run for a Senate seat. Today, it costs $2.7 million for a House seat and $26 million for a Senate seat. Since outrage fuels fundraising, candidates have no incentive to keep the discourse civil.

Fewer Politically Diverse Counties

Meanwhile, Americans have continued to move to communities where political leanings are more homogenous. In 1976, 25% of them lived in counties where one political party consistently won landslide victories. Today, that number has increased to 58%.

“So in these kinds of counties…the political contest doesn’t then become between two parties,” Dickerson said. “It gets fought in primaries. It [becomes a fight]among the people of the same party. And that tends to lead opinions in the party over to … the more extreme side.“

Finally, he said, mobile devices have made it difficult for people to take time to think in a nuanced way about complex issues.

‘Give Space and Grace’ 

To solve the problem, Dickerson recommended that Americans recognize the ways the current system is designed to keep us in conflict with each other. That means checking yourself to make sure you aren’t disagreeing with somebody because your peers are driving your response. 

It also means placing a premium on freedom of speech, the value of asking why when we are unsure of ourselves, and prioritizing understanding over knowledge.

“So give space and grace to those you disagree with. Listen, restrain judgment, and don’t pile on.”

Watch the full lecture and conversation.