SAVING OUR DEMOCRACY
STEP TWO: IDENTIFY POTENTIAL BRIDGES
As stated earlier, Potential Bridges should be carefully selected to meet three critical criteria. First, they must address both a personal need and a public good. Second, access to the bridges must be local meaning that individuals realize those bridges in real time and in their homes and communities. Third, they must be able to cross strongly held political and social divides.
In testing the bridging model in the Idea of America Network, we found an effective way to begin identifying potential bridges was to ask the participants in our workshops to sit back and think through what are the goods and services and conditions that are most important in maintaining and improving their quality of life. What really matters the most. They were asked to write them down.
The listing ranged from the mundane (food, shelter, safety, security, health care, environmental protection, disaster relief) to the personal (respect, equality, opportunity, various freedoms) to those addressing fundamental rights (voting rights, abortion/birth control rights, legal rights).
The term “mundane” refers to those goods, services, conditions that are most common and generally acceptable to all individuals of whatever race, sex, political, social and economic standing. They are less likely to generate polarized responses.
The term “personal” refers to those conditions that most directly impact the feeling of worth as a human being. These are more difficult to realize in a polarized world and surfaces the challenges of racism and sexism.
The term “fundamental rights” refers to the rights we are guaranteed in the Constitution (Bill of Rights) as well as additional rights that greatly impact our quality of life and our ability to realize that quality of life in a polarized world.
We then addressed the question of whether these potential bridges serve the public good. This is critical in the bridging model for it excludes such issues as segregation, purely self-interests, and white supremacy. We then moved to a discussion of where and how access to the bridges occurred. How were they delivered? Through what means? Local food banks or public health centers? Local government or state agencies? Non-profit civic organizations? Local Churches or Synagogues or other places of worship? Public schools? Local community colleges? And then we addressed the critical question: Were any of these bridges highly political in nature? If so, why?
All of these set the stage for Step Three: Connecting and Engaging for Social Change.