This is Democracy — 300th Episode!

This is Democracy,

a podcast

about the people of the United States, a podcast about citizenship, about engaging with politics and the world around you. A podcast about

educating yourself on today’s important issues and how to have a voice in what happens next.

[00:00:20] Jeremi: Welcome to our new episode of This Is Democracy.

Today’s episode is our 300th episode. We have now been making this podcast for seven years. We began in the fall of 2018, and here we are in the summer of 2025. We have recorded more than 200 hours of conversations and. Insights and, uh, analysis of democracy. And today we’re celebrating our 300th episode.

Zachary, this is pretty amazing, isn’t it?

[00:00:55] Zachary: Yes, yes.

[00:00:56] Jeremi: It has been many episodes and many hours. Did you ever think we’d make it this far? No. It was your idea at the start, wasn’t it? It was, yes.

[00:01:06] Zachary: What did you expect when we started? Um. I don’t know. I thought we’d have some interesting conversations. I thought I wouldn’t really be very involved.

[00:01:13] Jeremi: You thought you wouldn’t be involved. Is that true? Why did you think you wouldn’t be involved? Well, I thought it would

[00:01:17] Zachary: be a way to sort of, um, get scholarship at ut out to a younger listenership, but I don’t think we necessarily envisioned it as a place to get young people actively engaged as much as it has become.

Um. Yeah. I think also we’ve had so many, such a wide variety of conversations following the news, sometimes completely devoid or divorced from the news, um, and, uh, often repeating the same topics, but from different angles over seven

[00:01:45] Jeremi: years. What has been your favorite part of it? The favorite, your favorite thing we’ve done or part of our discussions?

[00:01:52] Zachary: Think two of my favorite things are certainly, uh, I think we did a really interesting episode with our friend, uh, Steve Sonenberg after COVID, or Yes, in the end, towards the end of the COVID Lockdowns about sort of like collective trauma, um, after COVID and what that, what that would be like. Which I think not only was really sort of enlightening at the time, but will be a very interesting sort of like historical mm-hmm.

Piece. A mm-hmm. Way of sort of documenting our experiences. I also really proud of the series we did on different elections around the world last year. Yes, yes. Which was this sort of year in which the most people in the world voted in elections in human history. Uh, that was a very cool series to do.

[00:02:27] Jeremi: I agree.

I agree. I think both of those, I, I think I’m really proud of the range of guests we’ve had. We’ve had novelists. Uh, like, uh, like our friend Larry Wright, uh, we’ve had, uh, anthropologists, we’ve had health experts like Dr. Michael Ris. Uh, we have had, um, sexual assault survivors, uh, like ko. Um, and then we’ve had politicians, we’ve had scholars, uh, we’ve had friends, we’ve had people who see the world very differently.

We’ve had activists, we’ve had students on some of my students, some students from other universities and other places. Um, and, um, we, we really haven’t devolved into partisanship. There certainly are, uh, beliefs we have that are behind this, uh, podcast. We believe in democracy. We believe in citizen participation.

We believe in diversity. Uh, those are all elements of this podcast. Uh, but it’s not partisan. We’ve had, uh, people from all different political parties on I. And, um, we have, I think, proven over 200 hours that you can have substantive discussions about democracy, dealing with questions like war in Ukraine, election security, human rights, uh, economic fairness, and not devolve into partisanship and really be open to different points of view.

And, uh, I’m really proud that we’ve done that. But what I’m most proud of Zachary, uh, is that we’ve been able to have an intergenerational conversation. With you and I and with, uh, guests who span different points of view in different ages. And I think one of the things that’s made that work is not only your voice and your participation in the planning and in the questioning and discussion, but also your poem that opens each episode.

And, uh, I know you’re planning to read your poem from our first episode, which was in July of 2018, July 31st, 2018. You’re planning to read that. For us, uh, today. But before you do, I’m just curious, what do you think the poetry has added to the podcast?

[00:04:34] Zachary: Well, I think the poetry has, um, sort of centered our, our podcast around human perspectives, uh, making these broader political policy issues personal for people I would hope.

And. I, I hope occasionally, uh, putting our guests a little bit off their toes and forcing them to respond or begin the conversation a different place than they might usually. Um, that’s my goal. I think it’s also made me write poetry more regularly on a wider, more challenging array of topics, um, which has been both a blessing and a curse.

Um, and yeah, this is the poem from actually the second episode, which was the first episode. We had a poem, uh, and

[00:05:12] Jeremi: oh, that’s right. Uh,

[00:05:14] Zachary: I’m gonna read this poem from our. The sort of first poem that we had. And then, so this is

[00:05:19] Jeremi: from August of 2018 actually, right? Exactly. Not, not from July of 2018. It’s from ’cause we, we, uh, that’s right.

We had a zero episode, which was a kind of intro episode. And then, uh, August 16th, 2018, soon after my birthday. You read, you read this, uh, poem, um, just before you, you, you, um, read this poem. Uh, many people, when I meet them and talk about the podcast, they, they often, uh. Talk about you, Zachary, about, uh, your poetry.

They talk about our guests. They seem to not remember that I’m on the podcast, but that’s okay. I’m very happy with that. Um, but they often ask me, Zachary, how you do it? How do you write these poems week in and week out on topics that are difficult? Uh, our friend. James Goldey still, whenever I see him, tells me, you did the most amazing thing that you wrote a worthwhile poem on nato, and many others have said similar things.

You might have written the only worthwhile poem on nato, for example. Uh, how do you do it?

[00:06:17] Zachary: Well, I don’t think I always succeed, but I think the, it’s about trying to see the, the humor, the irony sometimes. The pain in other times, the joy in broader political, uh, or, and world events, uh, which is not always easy and sometimes a challenging exercise in and of itself before any, uh, word is typed on the page.

Um, but I also think that it’s an, it’s an attempt to try and, uh. To bring out, uh, the literary quality in these events, but also just the basic human personal quality. Um, and, uh, I like the exercise because it forces me to think about, um, those elements in these broader world events. Um, and it’s become a kind of habit.

It’s now very easy for me to do. It takes, it doesn’t take very much time. Although sometimes it does, and those are often the ones that surprise me. They’re ones that I feel most connected to, or most obviously lend themselves this human personal dimension. And they’re sometimes the hardest, uh, to come to, come to.

Uh, and I think it’s, it’s really about, um, not distillation, but finding a new piece, a new image, a new angle. Um, it’s not about trying to summarize the event. I think when I’ve succeeded the least is when I’ve tried to summarize. Uh, it’s about getting that new. New perspective.

[00:07:37] Jeremi: You, you seem to think about the feelings surrounding the event, right?

I mean, what poetry captures that we often miss as scholars and as talking heads, uh, is the, the way emotion and personality intersect with substantive policy issues, right?

[00:07:52] Zachary: Yes. I think that’s right. I think it’s also about capturing like the historical echoes in different moments, the different sort of repeated images that it’s a, it’s, it’s capturing the sort of.

What I think certainly we’ve both felt over the last seven years, which is the sense of deja vu at so many of these world events. Yes. And then also at the same time, the sense of shock and maybe even despair, um, or joy, uh, when, uh, things that we never thought were possible happen. Um, and then the way in which we sort of settle back into those.

Uh, nor into a sort of sense of normalcy around this events, it’s about breaking from those, uh, initial feelings, um, and, and seeing where they come from.

[00:08:29] Jeremi: Mm-hmm. That makes a lot of sense. That makes a lot of sense. Okay, so let’s hear, uh, this is, this is Democracy poem number one by Zachary Siri. And this was for our episode, uh, which was on August 16th, 2018.

Our first episode. We had an intro episode before that. But this was on, uh, August 16th, 2018. We are all characters in the Living Book of Democracy. That’s what we called the first episode. We were using titles that were too long for episodes. Then obviously, well, I think this is

[00:09:00] Zachary: actually the episode after the one with, uh, oh, Kelsey, uh,

[00:09:03] Jeremi: Kelsey Ritchie.

Yes. Oh, yes, yes. With, uh, former student Kelsey Ritchie. On, um, thinking about politics and spirituality, uh, in the shadow of Trump. That was during Trump’s first,

[00:09:13] Zachary: exactly.

[00:09:14] Jeremi: First, uh, term as president. Uh, so this is from August 23rd, 2018. Yes. Okay, so episode number two out of 300. All right. Let’s hear this. What this, this first poem?

Yes. You’re maid in poem.

[00:09:27] Zachary: This is an excerpt from, from what was a very long and angsty teenage poem. I think largely about actually the shooting in Parkland, which had happened. In February of that year, I wanna say, or maybe the year before. But it was, it was, um, it was a, uh, a moment that stuck in my mind as a, uh, I guess, what was I then?

I was a 14-year-old, so. Wow. And what’s the title of the poem? In a Quieter Time,

[00:09:50] Jeremi: let, let’s hear it.

[00:09:51] Zachary: In a quieter time and a more peaceful place, I swam in a frigid lake beneath the shadow of an alpine summit. It was the clearness of the water, the absolute undeniable cold that numbed the body, and this for many years stayed with me an occasional recollection, a backward glance to a once upon a time.

A distance of years led to a night of pain in front of the TV on the couch, watching Michigan quickly slip away, and then Pennsylvania and then Wisconsin. I wanted to lose all feeling again, but I lacked the courage I. So I move on to bigger things. I walk to the bus stop wishing it would rain and sit in the back of the classroom, head on my desk, wanting to be numb.

One day in the middle of what? Of what would’ve been a torturous band practice. It snowed for the first time in years. I walked out outside in the Texas snow, smiling up at the sky and felt numb, and I went home wanting to feel numb forever, but I still listened to the radio that night. As I went to bed and time passed on Valentine’s Day, the 14th of February, the 14th of February, this year, I wanted to feel numb again.

I wanted to be frozen alone in front of the TV forever. I wanted to shut the radio off and go to sleep, but I knew that I couldn’t. I couldn’t be numb anymore.

[00:11:15] Jeremi: Wow. Uh, it’s hard to remember that you wrote that way at age 14. That sounds that, that that still sounds like the Zachary of age 20. Well,

[00:11:25] Zachary: don’t worry, there are plenty of 14-year-old spelling mistakes that I found as I read through this.

But,

[00:11:29] Jeremi: um, first of all, isn’t it cool that you can go back and read through your repertoire of poetry that you’ve now created across all these episodes?

[00:11:37] Zachary: Certainly, but I, I think what, what, honestly, what strikes me the most about this poem is how differently I feel now. Seven years later, as I would like to think I’ve lived through even crazier times, certainly not quieter times then, uh, we, I had lived through in 2018.

Um, it strikes me how differently I feel or how differently my poems, uh, reflect our moment as we’ll see when I read one of my more recent poems at the end of the episode, um, I think, I think, um, it’s a very different feeling, less angsty, I hope.

[00:12:08] Jeremi: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. What. What were you feeling at that time? Can you remember?

[00:12:12] Zachary: I think it was a sense of despair or, um, uh, a sense of the need for action, but not really knowing where to direct it. Um, I think there was a lot of anger there too, I’m sure. Um, and a sort of strange relationship with the news that I think we all grew into in this period of time, which was a, a kind of, um.

Obsession. That also was, uh, a kind of abusive relationship where, uh, it often felt like our mood or our life events was dependent on the news or vice versa. Um, and I’d, I’d like to think I have a much healthier relationship with the news these days, although I’m sure that’s not true for all of us, and probably not true for me even.

But I think, I think it was a sort of. First foray into trying to understand the world, um, that, uh, was very scary. Yeah. Very violent as it still is.

[00:13:11] Jeremi: Yeah. It strikes me that, um, when we started this podcast seven years ago, we were in the first Trump administration about halfway through, and we were concerned about the future of democracy, which was one of the reasons we started this episode.

Also, we were concerned about, uh, the lack of. Historical knowledge surrounding democracy, but we also thought it was an abnormal time, and now that world seems so remarkably similar to the world seven years later, I. As if it’s become more normal. And maybe, maybe that’s one of the insights from this, that the abnormal of seven years ago has now become the normal,

[00:13:50] Zachary: or to put it in more positive terms, maybe that what we thought was the end of the world seven years ago was not the end of the world.

And hopefully, hopefully the moment we’re in now, which at times can also feel apocalyptic. Right, right. Can, with a similar level of commitment and engagement or, or a different kind of commitment and engagement, uh, in seven years from now. Look, uh, like a moment when we, we came out better.

[00:14:14] Jeremi: Sure. And, and one of the main purposes of our podcast, in addition to exploring democracy, was to produce optimism.

Uh, not pollyannish optimism, but historical. I. Foundational optimism. The optimism that comes from seeing that we’ve survived worse and from taking lessons from the past as a tool to address the challenges of our, of our current time. And to some extent, I think we’ve done that. What, what, what do you think Zachary have been the best sources of optimism in a, in what has been, frankly, seven years where it’s been difficult to be optimistic?

What are the main sources or the best sources of optimism that we’ve been able to thread through our different episodes? Hmm.

[00:14:54] Zachary: Well, I think, uh, in some ways the optimism comes from the conversations themselves. Um, our ability to return to different topics and see them, uh, in new, in new light, uh, get different perspectives, different opinions on them.

I think that represents a kind of optimism, a willingness to like look back at the same issues multiple times. Mm-hmm. And, and, and. See them in the light of current events, but also in the light of history.

[00:15:19] Jeremi: Yeah.

[00:15:19] Zachary: Um, I think that’s really powerful and represents a kind of optimism. Um, but I also think a lot of the optimism comes, um, from a sense of how many people are out there right.

Trying to make a difference, trying to, um, to, to make sense of our world. Um. We’ve talked to, as you said, it’s such a wide range of people. Um, obviously not remotely representative, but I think drawing from so many different strands of American life. Yeah. Um, and there are so many people out there who at the very least, are trying to make sense of the world in the same way that we are in with a sort of good faith, uh, good faith attempt to do so.

Yeah. Uh, I think that’s optimistic.

[00:15:57] Jeremi: Yeah. I mean, I think our podcast has proven that there’s much more going on beyond the, uh, Twitter and Facebook and Instagram and TikTok pages that seem to dominate too much of our day-to-day discussion of politics and society and culture. Uh, we’ve had on so many serious, interesting.

Thoughtful people who are working hard to make the world better. They’re doing it in their teaching, in their activism, in their writing, in their, um, efforts at working with different kinds of communities in their artwork. Um, we’ve seen that, uh, we’ve seen a palem cyt of. Political and academic and social activism of all different kinds.

And in a sense, it’s alive and well. In a sense, the toque villian world of, um, social connection is alive and well. It’s just not seen. Associations. Yeah, the associations. It’s, it’s, it is alive and well. We’re just not. Seeing it all the time and, and it’s part of our world. It’s not the whole part of our world, but it is definitely there.

I think another source of optimism for me has also been, uh, how easy it has been to get people to talk about what they care about. Uh, we don’t have trouble getting people to come on. They wanna talk. And when we bring them on, we’re able to have really interesting conversations. And I think that shows that, uh, we still know how to talk to one another.

Sometimes you might think we don’t, I don’t think we’ve had any shouting on this podcast. We haven’t had to edit out anyone who was inappropriate. I don’t remember a single time we had someone who was offensive. Or nasty or said things that, uh, would have been offensive to any particular group of people.

People might have disagreed. Uh, but this has been a pure free speech environment, but yet it’s been civil, it’s been thoughtful. It’s been open. Some of that is in the guest selection and perhaps the attitude that we create, but I think, uh, a lot of that is, uh, in the fact that there are people out there who wanna have civil conversation and one of the.

Lessons for me is that we have to provide more avenues for it. Right. Uh, what do you think about that?

[00:18:04] Zachary: I think that’s right. And I think that, uh, might actually be a perfect segue into, um, the last poem, which was written for an episode we just did on, um, free speech as well. Um, I forget or who, who the guest was.

Do you remember? This was about three or four, uh, weeks ago. We did an episode on. Free speech, um, which I think was one of our more interesting episodes because we talked about, uh, this sort of uniquely American institution of the First Amendment, um, and, uh, the importance of free speech still in our world, how it has become a hot sort of political topic.

[00:18:36] Jeremi: Yeah. This was, uh, my former colleague at the University of Wisconsin and leading scholar of free Speech Donald Downs.

[00:18:42] Zachary: Yes. Yes, that’s right. And this, this, this, um, poem, I think when I was going back through my poems over the last 300 episodes, really stood out to me because it feels like the opposite of the poem that I just read, uh, in so many ways.

So, the opposite of where you were seven years ago? Seven years ago. Oh, let’s

[00:18:59] Jeremi: hear it.

[00:18:59] Zachary: Uh, it’s called Ode to Blasphemy.

[00:19:01] Jeremi: Okay.

[00:19:03] Zachary: We have given the world. Its martyrs and its blasphemers. Its transgressors and the laws to be transgressed. And we have said in the state houses, liberty or death, while we have marched the slaves into the fields, it’s true.

We have given the world. Its liars and its prophets, its greatest creations and its greatest bombs. And we have said too often to our brethren, be gone. When we were supposed to say, stay my sister and break bread with me, we have been told to love and yet let our blood redden into hatred that rusts like iron and tastes like steel.

We have lied. We have scoffed, we have rebelled. But what is freedom without malice? What is religion without heresy? Um,

[00:19:52] Jeremi: what, what, yeah. What motivated

[00:19:54] Zachary: you to write

[00:19:54] Jeremi: that?

[00:19:55] Zachary: I think this poem is about how to survive difficult times. It’s about finding hope, even in the contradictions, in the hypocrisy, in the violence, in the pain.

I think it’s about recognizing that. Um, part of what makes our moment a moment of possibility or even a moment of hope, uh, is all the suffering around us. And that we can’t, we can’t, we can, we, we can both, neither we, we should not become numb to the pain, but we also can’t let it control us mm-hmm. And take away from the differences that we can make.

Mm-hmm. And the contributions we can make. Um, I think in some ways it’s a poem that is clear-eyed about. Our American history and the state of our American institutions, but also one that, um, is hopeful for them. Mm-hmm. And sees in, uh, full history, a full accounting, uh, a hopeful way forward.

[00:20:47] Jeremi: But your poem most clearly, um, sympathizes with the blasphemer.

The heretic. Yes. The dissident. Mm-hmm. Is that where you are on this? Maybe

[00:21:00] Zachary: I, I think it’s about the, the, the poem’s about the power of, of the individual in a moment like this actually, it’s about, it’s not the sort of like collective call to action mm-hmm. That I think came at the end of the other poem.

Right, right. I think I’m a little more skeptical of that now. Why? I don’t know. I think maybe I’ve become too cynical, but I think that, I think there’s actually something, I think that the, the antidote to, uh, a rise in authoritarianism or, or attacks or institutions is not a sort of. Collective, um, clap back.

But a, an engagement in serious nuanced discourse that contrasts with that kind of all or nothing attitude. And I think that’s, that’s the model of the dissident or the, the individual who speaks out. It’s, it’s not, it’s not waiting until you have the masses behind you, but it’s saying what you think. Hmm.

[00:21:55] Jeremi: What, what I heard in your poem and what I think has become a theme, our, our podcast, so interestingly right, reflects the zeitgeist of the moment. It, it, it takes in the feelings all around us. It’s not partisan, but we are reflecting the world we’re in as the world shifts in 2018, it was this moment of, uh, panic and sense of worry in a strange moment that would pass.

Or were we actually at the end of something, um. Now, I think seven years later, we feel like we’re dealing with an extended challenge. And um, what I heard in your poem was a pushback against a very crowd sourced, simple populist mass society view that everyone needs to get on board, that it’s one way or the other way.

That you need to join the crowd. You’ve gotta decide whether you’re with Trump or you’re with the anti-Trump crowd. And what your poem is doing is not taking one side or the other. It’s saying actually, it’s our job to nurture many, many different positions and different points of view within that, that there’s a complexity.

I, I, I hear more complexity than individualism in your poem and more eccentricity. And the individualism you’re talking about is not John Stewart Mill individual rights. It’s much more the individualism of the artist, of the original thinker. Right. I

[00:23:22] Zachary: think it’s also, I think this is what, where we began the po, where we began this, this discussion.

It’s also the point of the poems. Yeah. They are supposed to be like a little blasphemous. Yeah. They’re supposed to sympathize. Poetry is supposed to sympathize with the villain. Yeah. Um, as well as the victim. Poetry is, or at least empathize, not sympathize. Right. But, but, but even push the push, push them.

Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. To, to, to understand that perspective. And I, and, and, and it’s supposed to feel a little dissonant with the, with the scholarship of the person we’re talking to or the action or the of the I agree. I think that’s well said. Um, and I think that if there’s one thing we’ve learned from this podcast, the best way to approach a moment like this is not to.

To bring the, the simple, um, like tied with a bow answer or response to the table, but to bring many loose ends. Yes. And to not try to necessarily put them together, but to think of them in combination.

[00:24:17] Jeremi: Mm-hmm. I think that’s, I, I think that’s right. And I want to ask you a question about. The intergenerational theme on this line, and I think that’s a good place maybe for us to close.

’cause there are many unique things about our podcast. Many things I love about our podcast. I hope our listeners love them too. I love the poetry, I love the range of guests. I love the conversational element of it. I love the nonpartisan, but yet rigorous, um, attitude and atmosphere we create. But. Um, one of the really unique things is this intergenerational element, uh, that you’re on the podcast with, uh, with me, with your dad, uh, and then with all sorts of other people who we have on.

We have, in a sense, uh, a range of scholars and ages, uh, on this podcast, but every episode includes a younger voice, which is yours, and those who go back and listen to early episodes, will hear your voices even younger then.

Do you find that the, what you were just talking about, the individualism, the eccentricity, the willingness to pursue loose ends. Is that a youthful purpose today? Is that the role of young people in a world where, uh, those who are established in politics, when we have a very old political class on both sides of the aisle in the US and in other countries where the old political class seems to be sort of taking sides, one or the other, and there seems to be less space for.

You know what we used to call conservative Democrats and liberal Republicans. Is that the space for young people today, or is it the opposite?

[00:25:46] Zachary: I don’t know. I, a friend of mine said something really interesting to me that stuck with me about two weeks ago, which is that for the generation before us, for the millennials generation, between you and I, you and me, uh, the, uh, the, your grammar has improved since we’ve started.

Thank you. Uh, social media and the sort of echo chambers of the internet were, uh, the cool thing. To be engaged in. They were the sort of, uh, greatest invention or contribution of that generation. And it was the place where people went for information, for discussion. And obviously to a large extent that’s still true if not more of my generation, but now I think it’s also, at least among some young people.

Cool. To be off social media. Yeah. To be away from that kind of echo chamber, it’s become a kind of. Uh, representation of all the ills of our society. Yeah. It’s not, it’s not something that I think is seen anymore as the sort of great vanguard of a of, of, of our society’s future. If anything, it seems kind of old.

[00:26:45] Jeremi: Yeah.

[00:26:45] Zachary: And I think in some ways, uh, the hope might be that, that that feeling of, of dissatisfaction with. Um, what was supposed to be the, you know, brave new world of the 21st century might actually translate into a renewed commitment to civic engagement. Um, and maybe that will come with a new use for social media and, and, and for the internet, and I hope it does.

Um, but I think that in and of itself is a, is a hopeful, hopeful. Turning point. Um, and if anything, I think, I think the, the things that were new, exciting, dangerous, deadly violent are now

[00:27:24] Jeremi: old. Yeah, I think that’s right. I mean, I think what we’ve seen talking to our listeners over seven years, Zachary, is that there are so many young people.

Obviously they’re not representative of the entire population of young people in the US or in any other country. But there are a lot of young people, uh, people in their teens and twenties and thirties who really. Like the fact that we have conversations, that it’s not people throwing, uh, 140 character statements at one another, uh, to win points, to win an argument, but it’s actually a conversation.

What makes a conversation different from a debate? And I say, this is a form of debater in a debate. You’re trying to win, you’re trying to shut the other side up. Make the opponent cry. Yes, exactly. Exactly. Whereas in a conversation, you’re actually trying to elicit more thought. From the other side and actually carry the, as you say, the many loose ends forward.

You’re not trying to, uh, smother one side or the other. And I think there is a desire for that. I think the turning off social media is part of that. Um, I think just building on what you said, um, strangely, even though people talk about young. Citizens all the time and what they think, what they don’t think.

They’re very rarely involved in a dialogue with people who are not, um, the same as they’re, and I think building more space for young people to be included in dialogues, not to be included just as an audience or as a symbol, but actually an. Active part of the dialogue, uh, about our democracy is absolutely crucial.

So young people might go to rallies, young people might use social media, they might buy things, but I think what we’re really looking to do is make them part of the conversation. And I think that’s something that you have done, Zachary, and something that, that we have done. What I wanna close on, and I think, uh, we’ve reached the point where we need to move on to episode 301 is, uh, what I hope we’ll do going forward and I hope we’ll continue to build on all the good work we’ve done.

But Zachary, I also hope, one other thing, I hope that, um, as we go forward, we are able to. Broaden our understanding of democracy even beyond where we’ve been. I think there are a lot of topics that we haven’t touched on that we need to touch on, and I think we need to think deeply, uh, about alternatives to violence in our world.

Our world is becoming more and more violent internationally and at home. I don’t have to list the examples of assassinations or attempted assassinations of political leaders, uh, misuses of policing and military force, uh, invasions of countries, uh, terrorist attacks. On countries, um, to make this point. Uh, but I think as we think about alternatives to violence, we need to, on this podcast and elsewhere convince people of the ways in which they can pursue political ends and democratic purposes that not only say they’re against violence, but actually make violence less likely that actually.

Push back against, I think, a very dangerous, dangerous trend, uh, in our world. That will be one of our agenda items, uh, alternatives to violence, learning to pursue democracy and reject violence one way, uh, or I. Another are, are you, are you still optimistic, Zachary? You said you become a little cynical, but are you still optimistic?

[00:30:38] Zachary: Yeah. I think my optimism now, um, maybe comes from, I think I am cynical, but I think I’m also a lot less cynical than some other people, and I think my optimism comes from. Uh, a sort of renewed faith, uh, in the strength of our institution, seeing all of the attacks on them. I think the very fact that, um, people want to or see value in attacking these institutions shows how powerful they could be.

[00:31:07] Jeremi: Yeah. And I

[00:31:07] Zachary: think that I, I think, um, for me, what has been, uh, motivating, I. Uh, is the sense that, the sense that there’s actually still a lot left to save?

[00:31:18] Jeremi: Yeah.

[00:31:18] Zachary: Yeah. And we, we can’t forget

[00:31:20] Jeremi: that. Absolutely. Very well said. And uh, I think it’s not just that there’s a lot less to say left to save. There’s a lot left to save, but I think, um, there are also are a lot of people who care.

Uh, people who want to talk, people who want to work, people who want to learn, people who wanna make a difference. I think that’s a, as alive in our society as ever. It’s not what often gets headlines, but, um, we are as good a people as Americans and those living in other societies as we’ve ever been. Uh, it’s just our goodness is being lost in all the other stuff going on.

And, uh, I’m optimistic that we can do a better job of bringing out who we are as a people and bringing out, um, our beliefs and commitments to democracy in one form or another, that we can do that and it’s there. And maybe this moment of challenge, I think this is what you’re saying. Reawakens that in people and reminds people it, it replaces complacency with engagement.

In seriousness, that’s what our podcast is all about. Serious, thoughtful, hopefully entertaining, uh, conversations about democracy. We are so privileged, Zachary and I to be able to do this. Uh, each week or so to be able to speak to all of you, our listeners and our loyal Substack subscribers, to find optimism, history, learning, and wonder in the world, and to see the artistry of it all through the conversation and the poetry.

Our podcast is an extended discussion of what Zachary called the Loose Ends. It’s an extended investigation of what democracy means in the 21st century, and it’s an extended intergenerational dialogue. We are fortunate to work. With and, uh, talk to all of you. We must close, uh, on thanking our staff that make it possible for us to do this.

Zachary and I have the fun job, but there is a large staff at the Liberal Arts Instructional Technology Service Office here at the University of Texas that make this possible. We want to thank them. We wanna thank our loyal listeners. We want to thank our guests, our loyal Substack subscribers, and. We want to continue to bring you more of these conversations.

Thank you for joining us for 300 episodes and many, many more of this is Democracy.

This podcast is produced by the Liberal Arts ITS Development Studio

and the College of Liberal Arts at the University of Texas at Austin.

The music in this episode was written and recorded by Scott Holmes. Stay tuned for a new episode every week. You can find this is Democracy on Apple Podcast, Spotify and YouTube.

See you next time.