he kicked them in the teeth and assigned all those idiotic trade agreements that cause a lot of problems we have now. democrats do not talk about that, they say we can give everybody everything, which is crazy. host: we will get a response from peter coleman. guest: i hear your frustration with members of both political parties, particularly more extreme members. bad actors in politics, there have always been bad actors in politics. look at countries abroad interested in stabilizing the u.s. it is an ugly system and a tough system, but it is what we have. democracy is what we have. i would be careful to not get discouraged all on the left or all on the right. there is a variety of different reasons why people support donald trump and have followed donald trump.

i think centralizing any group into one or two things as completely bad actors is problematic. there are definitely bad actors in various political parties and movements, this is an orientation to controlling power, dividing and conquering groups. we know a fair amount about that. it is not new to political systems. but it is discouraging and frustrating, and it is frustrating when you look at some of our past leaders and the seeds they've sowed and how they have come to roost here, the acceptance and tolerance of certain kinds of character in our leaders and how that has come to roost, i understand the

frustration. host: linda from iowa on the republican line. you are on the air. caller: good morning. the polarization, how about going back to teaching in school would kids are supposed to be taught? they are so mixed up anyways, because this is their learning years. stop teaching what they are teaching in the schools. i have a gay son, i am so worried about him. his life, with what the democrats are pushing onto the people. there is all kinds of crazy people out there with guns that do not like all this gay stuff. i knew when it was coming out, i was worried about my son. it is very dangerous and the democrats need to stop pushing

all of this hate for the gay population, because it is not looking good for them. please, democrats, stop pushing this crab. -- crap. go back to teaching the children what they need to learn and we will all have a better life. host: we talk about individuals in the polarization, let me ask you about the media's role in all of this. your advice in terms of detoxifying political conversation, just a headline from this morning let it go-- politico emphasizes the hyped up nature of the political world. the word combat or battle is often used in a headline or story in the media, what is your suggestion?

guest: you are absolutely right. mainstream media, news media and social media are the two main accelerants of polarization these days. how reporting is done in this country and around the world is often -- there is a story, you find two provocative voices with different sides to the story because conflict draws attention and gets clicks on the internet. it is what sells and media. there is a colleague of mine who's been working with solutions journalism to think about how journalism and the business model behind mainstream media contribute to polarization , and are there ways for journalists to do their job that is not oversimplifying issues,

that is not pitting people against each other to watch them fight and get attention, but is able to talk about complicated issues in ways that are informative, interesting and compelling, but not polarizing? she has a piece called complicating the narrative, it is a movement within solutions journalism for journalists to take responsibility and for editors and publishers of journalistic organizations to take responsibility. are they chasing revenues and attention at the cost of civility in our society? how can reporting be dead in ways that are more constructive and less destructive? host: peggy from washington, democrats. caller: good morning. i want to say i think a lot of

the divisive and on in this country is being caused by our churches and church leaders. evangelicals, to be specific. the vitriol coming from them is very, very hateful. i heard a church leader tell someone if she voted for a democrat, she was not christian. devastating. thank you. guest: i would like to respond to that. many in the evangelical church, 14% or something like that of americans are evangelical. there has been a crisis in many places of congregation, just to speak to evangelicals for a moment, something like 43% of evangelical pastors over the past couple years have seriously considered quitting because of the political divisions in their communities and with colleagues. the political divisions, the

tensions are within those systems as well. they are struggling as an institution, but that is true for many religious organizations right now. divisiveness and hate and contempt for the other side has become such a norm and accepted in places that are supposed to be about forgiveness and unity and coming together, serving the greater good. it is another example of how these divisions have trickled down into the community level and into homes and churches and work laces -- places and are continuing to affect our lives. there are bad actors or more divisive individuals in these churches, but there are folks on the other side that are as distraught as you are about that and are trying to figure out, do i leave my church or do i stay

here and try to work through it? host: a lot of us grew up sitting around dinner tables, including thanksgiving dinner tables, with lively debates and discussions on politics. what is the behavior that defines the line between healthy , even somewhat heated political debate, and toxic polarization? guest: polarization is not a bad thing. if you and i want to talk about an issue important to us that we have information on, we can inform each other and challenge each other and debate. that is fine. polarization in a two-party political system is a good thing, it is good to have passionate, true believers who are informed challenge each other to find the greater good and come up with innovative solutions. toxic polarization is a phenomenon that has been

escalating over decades since the mid-1870's. at certain periods, have gotten much worse. it is at a point in this country where americans are physically moving away from each other, even in cities. we do not want our children to marry into other political party , we feel a sense of contempt for them. it is not just we disagree or do not like them, it is a sense of contempt. we start to think about trying to harm the country and the gap between us, the gap in our attitudes and policy positions, are not nearly as we think. -- wide as we think. we are mis-perceiving them as much as they are missed perceiving us. -- mis-perceiving us. that is a different state than having differences or lively conversations. the one premise i would say,

what i have learned from watching groups that manage this well is something -- a reverend that cooks breakfast in new york for red and blue americans every monday said that what happens with our group is we meet every week, we talk through these issues and talk until we realize what we don't know. they are only so many things about the issues, the other our own positions we have not thought about. once you get to a place where you realize what you do not know about the conversation, that is when you can have more open conversations. it is when we go into these things with certainty to win the game of debate, that is when they go nowhere. host: work on the independent line in indiana. -- mark on the independent line in indiana. caller: i am calling in because i want to get a little perspective. worried about political

polarization, it is not a matter of political polarization. it is a matter of satanic or god oriented polarization. it is very simple solution for people in evangelistic church, they have to go by the word of god which says certain things are wrong, like killing babies is wrong. stealing from the people that work and giving it to the people that do not work, or to the rich kids that spent millions or hundreds of thousands on their education. as a working man, that is called theft. then you have lgb situation, where we are told any kind of sexual act divided between male or female and not only that, but they want to teach that to our kids in the schools, then you check that against the bible.

the bible is true when it says the wicked are an abomination to the righteous and the righteous are an abomination to the wicked. host: we will let you go there, peter, you touched on evangelicals earlier. if you want to say more, go ahead. guest: i think that religious communities, religious organization of all strides, are struggling with these kinds of political divisions and oversimplification of the other side and the issue across the country, across the world -- this is a problem in many communities. that his wife participation in churches is on the decline, trust in churches and religious organizations is on the decline. part of it is because we start to lose trust in the others that are there.

it is a problem i know many of these organizations are frustrated by, trying to get their hands around. it is another symptom of this garnered political divisiveness that is baked into our culture. host: in the forward to your book, "the way: how you this.toxic polarization," i recognized tendencies must continue unabated, i hope to offer an alternative way out of our current dystopian struggles. one that will be attractive and feasible to make the more combative approaches to them become much less germane. are you more of an optimist then you were before you wrote the book? guest: i am, i think. it is because what has happened since i wrote this book, as i wrote it and since it was published, i learned about all

of the good people across this country in communities all the way up to washington, d.c. congress that are working tirelessly to increase civility in conversation. one example and must give a shout out to is the select committee for the monetization of congress, mechanism of congress. they have a committee of i believe 12, six republicans, six democrats. they do consensus decision-making, their mandate is to take a hard look at why congress is so divided and so vitriolic in terms of one another and cannot function as well as it should as a body. they've been making about 100 recommendations. about how to reform congress. they've been doing this work for over two years, it is tireless

work, thankless work. but it is making a difference in terms of changing the culture of congress over time. that is one example of the thousands of groups and individuals and community groups , from the bottom up and in different sectors like media and politics, that are working to encourage americans to choose a different tactic. to look for theourselves and iny to find a way to communicate. that is what will bring the temperature down and move back into more functional. let's hear from trevor. caller: i'm here, sir. i'm from jamaica. the issue here, sir, is the lack

of knowledge. knowledge is power. i know here in jamaica. it is. the supreme court, the situation in this country. look at it. the chief justice [indiscernible] roe v. wade. when the republicans nominate the chief justice, and they are supposed to be bipartisan like john roberts they vote against the republicans. john roberts, the chief justice, removed and amended the law.

the law was drafted under the united states constitution. it did not grant the authority -- and not be impeached and removed from the court so he said the law is constitutional. the new york times, all of them, they are told this law was constitutional. it's not. chief justice should have come to the congress to rewrite the law. host: have to let you go there.

we did touch on the judiciary, what else would you like to say? guest: i'm sorry, trevor, it was difficult to hear you i think the connection was a little choppy so i'm not really sure what your question is. i hear your frustration i think with how the democrats are viewing chief justice roberts' decisions and processes but again i wasn't really able to hear it. clearly, again, it's an illustration how politically loaded and it sometimes weaponized the supreme court has become which is never good for democracy. host: political polarization, what typically is the mediation problems and situations that you are addressing? guest: that's a good question. so we work in a lot of different kinds of spaces and often times i work in support of mediators.

within institutions and how organizations, universities, and other large organizations can actually see the conflicts that happen around grievances and discrimination within institutions so those are some of the more large-scale initiatives marginalized groups in organizations and how those can actually be a source of reform and change that leaders don't view them as a problem. they view them as an opportunity to pay attention to problems with their systems. host: let's get one more call her to iowa, kathleen on the democrats line, good morning. caller: thank you for taking my

call. i'm looking forward to reading your book and sharing it with other people. i think the gentleman who called and said that lack of knowledge is part of the problem i have a brother who is polar opposite politically then im and i let him know that i felt that our differences we both want the same things we just want we see them as a different way of getting -- a different way of getting what we want we agree to disagree. a part of what i find with him

is he doesn't explore as much as i do. but once again i'm looking forward to reading your book. host: peter, final thoughts? guest: kathleen, good to hear from you. i went to high school and college in iowa so i'm very fond of it. i hear in your comments that you love your brother and that you want to stay in contact with him despite the political differences. i think that is a fine basis, a strong basis to continue the conversation. again, the more we can kind of reflect our own responsibility for making the conversations more difficult than possible,

find strategies to open people up, reduce their defensiveness. if we go into these conversations realizing that maybe there are things we can learn from them just as there are things they can learn from us there is a possibility that both of us can think and feel differently about political conversations. what i hear in your care for your brother is if ente stick foundation to begin -- fantastic foundation to begin. host: how to overcome toxic polarization, thank you for being on with us this morning, happy thanksgiving. guest: seem to you, thank you for having me on. host: that will wrap up the program this morning. we hope you are with us tomorrow morning as well. up next here on "washington journal", we are going to take you life to hear from the