Keep up with everything happening in The Commons by signing up for the Chronicle’s Philanthropy Today newsletter or our weekly Commons LinkedIn newsletter.
It’s a theory backed by evidence yet awaiting proof points. And it will likely be tested before and after January’s Inauguration Day. But … are Americans after Donald Trump’s election victory ready to see their political opponents as something less than mortal enemies?
That’s the hope of a number of leaders of a young and small movement that aims to bring a divided America together and strengthen bonds of community. They say that people on the left and the right — exhausted by three hate-filled presidential elections and curious about the racial and ethnic broadening of Trump’s coalition — may now be in a position to move past stereotypes and learn more about each other.
This outlook feels optimistic given that a lot of MAGA rhetoric and Trump’s anticipated moves are seen as threatening the security and well-being of immigrants, the LGTBQ+ community, and even major foundations and donors. It’s also unclear whether funders will see this as a moment to invest, particularly progressive grant makers and donors building what will likely be a hard-edged “Resistance 2.0” movement against various Trump policies.
Still, some leaders see a shifting landscape that could benefit their work. “There is a vast opportunity,” says Jake Harriman, founder of +More Perfect Union, a civic-engagement organization working primarily in rural communities. Donald Trump’s clear victory and the relative quiet that followed can persuade Trump supporters that they have been heard. “Republicans are going to be more willing to get in those rooms. And I think rural communities are going to be more apt to be involved in bridging conversations than they would have been if they had been arming up with their militia and feeling like an election had been stolen again.”
Students on college campuses — some of which erupted in protests over the war in Gaza last spring — are demonstrating a new curiosity about the motivations for people on both sides of the ideological spectrum, says Manu Meel, CEO of BridgeUSA, which has more than 100 chapters in colleges and high schools to fortify campuses against schisms. Directly after the election, a woman describing herself as “far left” wrote to say she had thought BridgeUSA was courting racists and anti-LGBTQ extremists. Now she was curious and wanted to learn more.
“We would have never gotten that message a month ago,” Meel says. “You are seeing average, everyday students and young people saying, ‘I don’t want to operate on the assumption that 72 million people are racist.’”
With the election complete — and the end of the $11 billion in political advertising that pummeled Americans with divisive messages — the grip of an “us versus them” binary framework may loosen, says Tom Fishman, CEO of Builders, a global nonprofit (formerly known as Starts With Us) that aims to reduce polarization. “The moments of acute polarization are an opportunity to put bridging and builder behaviors into practice.”
There’s also an exhaustion factor. Humans are not designed for perpetual conflict and outrage, says Andrew Hanauer, head of One America Movement, which supports faith leaders working against toxic polarization. “We have seen a lot of people in the congregations we work with who might have described themselves as fully partisan warriors a few years ago,” Hanauer says. “At this point, they are really open to: How do we get through this, and how do we bring the country back together?”
“People are fed up with all the division,” says Evan Feinberg, senior vice president at Stand Together. “They’re looking for off ramps from the division and on ramps on to making progress together.”
‘It Will Still Be Hard’
Of course, the hopefulness assigned to this moment may be misapplied or short-lived. The FBI and local authorities are investigating text messages sent to Black Americans in a dozen states threatening to put them in slavery. Calls from LGBTQ+ young people to the Trevor Project, a suicide-prevention group, soared after the election, the group reported.
Dave Isay, who leads One Small Step, an offshoot of the nonprofit StoryCorps, says it’s too early to know how the election might affect his program’s efforts to build relationships across divides through conversation. ”It has been hard, and it will still be hard,” Isay says. “It’s like we’re clawing our way up a mountain.”
Others say the return of Trump to the White House will make the work of bridging divides all the more difficult. In his second administration, Trump and his allies will have fewer checks on their impulse to build power by dividing Americans, says john a. powell, director of the Othering & Belonging Institute at the University of California at Berkeley. “The environment is very different [from 2016], and it’s very fraught with a lot of pretty dangerous things.”
Work to bring people together will be “more needed but more challenging,” powell adds.
More in Common, which helps social-change movements broaden their coalitions, is awaiting results from a national poll. The field is navigating a tension, says Jason Mangone, director of the organization in the United States. “It looks as if President Trump has indeed broadened his coalition,” he says. “That’s true. And on the other hand, it’s true that a number of other Americans feel afraid of what he’s going to do with his mandate.”
“I think it’s too soon to say what meaning we should and shouldn’t make from all of this,” says Kristen Cambell, CEO of Philanthropy for Active Civic Engagement. “I think the question for me is what do these results tell us about what’s happening in America and not in a way that reconfirms our own prior biases or assumptions or, you know, jumps to oversimplified conclusions.”
The funding picture is also unclear. The field of groups that want to bring Americans together — by bridging divides, increasing the sense of belonging for marginalized groups, and strengthening community engagement and bonding — is relatively young, with many organizations created only since 2016. Many say they don’t yet have the metrics to win over data-driven grant makers.
Fighting Trump policy goals will also top the priorities of some progressive funders. Grantees of the Trust for Civic Life, a cross-ideological funder collaborative that aims to build community in rural areas, are “very unsure of what happens next when it comes to philanthropy,” says executive director Charlie Brown.
For a long time, Brown adds, funders have told community groups: “Your work has to wait until we get on the other side of the election.” Now groups are getting signals that they’ll have to wait even longer as philanthropy goes even deeper and harder into advocacy work.
“But they’re saying: ‘We’re the ones who are actually on the front lines here,’” Brown says.
The weeks before the election saw at least one shift among funders. The Omidyar Network announced this fall that it was changing its priorities, which included a robust program to build cultures of belonging, particularly for marginalized communities. Its “strategy evolution” will take months, but the grant maker said all of its work will aim to “shape the digital revolution.”
One bright sign in the funding outlook: +More Perfect Union announced this week that it had raised $1.25 million in just two months, including $500,000 from the Ford Foundation.
Also, a number of funders are gathering soon for a briefing on recommendations from a new report by the American Academy of Arts and Sciences to strengthen civic culture. It includes proposals that aim to engage people in the civic life of their communities.
“What I’m hearing from a variety of funders is: ‘You all are right,’” says Eric Liu, CEO of Citizen University and one of the authors of the report. “‘It can’t just be Resistance 2.0. It can’t just be electoral work that surges every four years. We’ve got to tend to the brokenness, the alienation, the resentment, and the mistrust.’”
Grant makers and donors outside the field are showing “curiosity and interest, a sense that there must be a new way or another way” to advance their issues, says Liz Vogel, interim director of New Pluralists, a funder collaborative. Some will step up to back organizations that face attack, but they will have to balance the short-term needs against the long-term benefits of work to bridge divides.
New Strategies
If nothing else, the election results point to possible shifts in the work that brings people together. Those communities at risk in a Trump administration — particularly immigrants — are already skilled bridge-builders, says Nwamaka Agbo, CEO of the Kataly Foundation, a social-justice funder. “They have figured out how to build bridges to help them stay here and live with dignity and find a pathway to citizenship.”
They will continue to demand change and will not compromise their values, Agbo says, but they will be looking to broaden their coalitions. “It’ll be a matter of how they can also be in a deeper relationship with people that might have voted against their interests.”
The results and exit polls suggest that community builders and philanthropy must also grapple with education as a key fault line in America, says Kristin Hansen, executive director of the Civic Health Project. “It’s hard to do this, but I’m hoping that bridge-building work can find its way into more spaces and communities that include Americans without four-year college degrees.”
Others suggest that work should focus on local communities and away from national politics. “We have to reprioritize the local,” Liu says. “We have to prioritize what it means to build trust and belonging and commitment in the places where we live.”
The Commons is financed in part with philanthropic support from the Arthur M. Blank Family Foundation, Einhorn Collaborative, JPB Foundation, and the Walton Family Foundation. None of our supporters have any control over or input into story selection, reporting, or editing, and they do not review articles before publication. See more about the Chronicle, the grants, how our foundation-supported journalism works, and our gift-acceptance policy.
