An Interview with Daniel Yudkin on America's Common Vision
This week, the Beacon Project released a new report called "Weaving the Dream: How Opportunity and Personal Agency Can Shape a Common Vision of America." I believe the report is really valuable for anyone thinking about how we might bridge divides and work together on big challenges. So I reached out to Daniel Yudkin, who directs the Beacon Project at More in Common, to discuss this research and the broader work he and his team are doing.
Clay: Before diving into your new report, can you tell readers a bit about your professional background, More in Common, and the Beacon Project?
Daniel: I’m a social psychologist who studies how people decide between right and wrong and how these decisions impact society. Over the past few years I’ve been working with the nonprofit research group More in Common to understand and address the root causes of political polarization. Last year, I founded an initiative at More in Common called the Beacon Project. The aim of the Beacon Project is to use insights from polling data, philosophy, psychology, and political science to develop a new civic vision that can speak to modern challenges.
Clay: Moving on to the "Weaving the Dream" report, what are the main questions you wanted to explore and how did you do this research?
Daniel: To understand how this report came about, we have to go back to 2018, when More in Common published a study called Hidden Tribes. In that report, we found that the American political landscape is far more complex than the classic red-versus-blue narrative we hear so often. Instead, it’s comprised of seven different “tribes” who differ in their values and approach to politics, ranging from “Progressive Activists” to “Devoted Conservatives.”
Following this work, we explored what the main fault lines are between the tribes. It turned out that the most important topic that drives disagreements between Americans–on topics ranging from immigration to gun control–has to do with how much control people feel they have over their lives–that is, with personal agency. This started us on a yearslong quest to better understand how people think about agency in their lives.
Clay: Agency is a big theme for us at the Human Flourishing Lab. For readers who might not be familiar with this concept, how do you define personal agency?
Daniel: Agency can have many different definitions but the topic that interested us was reflected in the language of laypeople: how much control do you feel you have over the way your life turns out?
Clay: What are the main findings that you think are important for Americans to know?
Daniel: The most important takeaway is that Americans of all stripes share an abiding faith in the power of personal agency. This belief spans age, race, gender, political identity, and immigration status. People really think they can direct their lives and bear some responsibility for how they turn out. And some of the proudest moments in people’s lives have to do with times they exercised agency and overcame adversity.
But Americans also acknowledge that outside forces play an important role in success, and believe the government should help remove these obstacles. For example, four in five Republicans believe the government has at least some role to play in ensuring individual opportunity. And fewer than 6 percent of Americans believe outside forces play no role in success. This shows that Americans also want a country that offers people a fair shot.
The bottom line is that Americans don’t see agency and opportunity as mutually exclusive. Instead they think that the point of government is to help create opportunities for people to exercise their agency.
Clay: Was there anything in the results that surprised you?
Daniel: One finding that surprised me (but maybe it shouldn’t have!) is that immigrant Americans are more likely to believe in the power of agency than US-born Americans. In retrospect, this makes sense, given that many made the journey to America in search of a better life, but still it was interesting to see this in the data.
Another thing that surprised me is the low correlation between people’s income and their belief in agency. I had assumed that people on the low end of the income ladder would be more aware of how outside forces could hold them back, but it’s not really the case.
Clay: Even though Americans across different groups share beliefs about personal agency, you found that these beliefs have become much more polarized politically over the past few decades. Can you tell us more about that polarization and what you think is driving it?
Daniel: It’s a fascinating question and one that we can only speculate about. My hunch is it has the same causes as the general polarization that’s affecting our country: i.e. the divisive effects of social media, an unhealthy two-party system, etc. But the fascinating thing is that almost all the movement here is among Democrats, while Republicans’ views have stayed the same. I still haven’t figured out why this is the case.
Clay: The report talks about "morally-directed agency" as a potential common vision for America. Can you explain what that means and why this idea appeals to so many Americans?
Daniel: When we ask Americans what makes a good society, they say that people should have the right to exercise agency and direct their lives, but also the responsibility to use this agency not just to better themselves but also improve their country and community. We call this “morally directed agency” because it is directed not just toward self-improvement but also other-improvement.
We find that the idea of morally-directed agency is one that Americans of all stripes can get behind: in fact more than three quarters of Republicans, Independents, and Democrats endorse this idea.
One reason it resonates is that it acknowledges the rights and responsibilities typically associated with the political Left and Right, respectively. But it does so in a way that diffuses tensions between these groups.
Clay: How do you think leaders should apply these findings when they're trying to bring people together and make progress on big issues? I'm thinking about people in politics, business, education, as well as influencers who help shape public discourse.
Daniel: Civic and business leaders are looking for a new narrative for the country that speaks to people’s deepest concerns. This report shows that what resonates is what I call a “politics of empowerment”--an agenda that holds that the path toward building a more fair society runs through, rather than around agency. People want an opportunity to make the most of their lives and so when we talk about building opportunities for people, that’s the way we should be framing it.
This applies to so many areas. In education, we should be talking not just about teaching not just math and science but also responsibility, citizenship, and character. In politics, we should be talking about policies that offer people the opportunity to gain control over their own lives.
Clay: This is the first report from the Beacon Project. What are you hoping to accomplish with this broader initiative, and what's coming next?
Daniel: This report is part of a broader initiative to identify the core values that inspire Americans and offer a new framework that speaks to these values. Many Americans are feeling stuck and hopeless right now, as though we will never escape our endless cycle of gridlock and partisanship. The only way out of this mess is through new ideas. Hopefully, the Beacon Project can contribute some of these ideas.
Clay: I’m stoked to share the excellent work Daniel and his team are doing. You can learn more about the Beacon Project here.
Have a great weekend!
Clay