A Dialogue about the Past and Future of Democracy

“Regardless of your political affiliation—and all political affiliations are welcome voices at the University of Pennsylvania—I think it’s safe to say that we’re at a unique moment in the modern history of the United States.” With those words, Peter Struck, Gregorian Professor of the Humanities and Stephen A. Levin Family Dean of the College of Arts & Sciences, kicked of the 2025 Ben Talks NYC.

The event, which took place this year at the Times Center in front of a crowd of 270 people, focused on the past and future of democracy. Faculty presenters included Jeffrey Green, Professor of Political Science and Andrea Mitchell Endowed Director of the Andrea Mitchell Center for the Study of Democracy; Donovan Schaefer, Associate Professor of Religious Studies; Michele Margolis, Associate Professor of Political Science; and Sophia Rosenfeld, Walter H. Annenberg Professor and Chair of History, who moderated the discussion.

Green spoke first, touching on the loss of trust in, and frustration with, democracy in the U.S. and other parts of the world. “We expect a lot from our democratic regimes,” he said. “We expect more than democratic citizens centuries ago did.” Perhaps because of those expectations, he added, there’s tension between what people believe they want and what democratic institutions are actually delivering.

After each presenter spoke for a few minutes, Rosenfeld opened up the conversation to the audience. Attendees asked questions about safeguards to protect democracy, the “disillusionment” of Gen Z, a media “under siege,” and more.

“What should we do about this conflict? I’m not entirely sure,” Green said. But he left the audience with two possible solutions: One, try to do better as a society within our current parameters, or two, attempt different approaches to reform, given the “formidable” and “formative” nature of wealth and family, respectively.

Schaefer, a philosopher of religion, next took the podium. “My area of interest, I would say, is the relationship between emotion and belief as a kind of philosophical question. It turns out, though, that this philosophical question is not just interesting when you’re talking about religion, it’s also interesting when you’re talking about democracy.”

He honed in on modern information environments, arguing that people today don’t solely exist in echo chambers, but rather hear and see opposite perspectives often. What drives their reactions are emotions, “the way that our beliefs feel to us, whether they’re true, whether they’re false,” Schaefer said. “That emotional aspect, it can’t be erased. This is important because this shapes what we find convincing.”

Margolis took the conversation in a slightly different direction. As a political scientist, she focuses on public opinion, political psychology, and religion and politics in the U.S. Her current research looks at what she calls the “identity paradox,” the notion that people act, vote, and participate in the public sphere based on the labels they give themselves rather than on their true beliefs.

We’re acting politically based on our group attachments, the team that we’ve chosen rather than core beliefs that we generally think and—especially in that idealized version of democracy—hope are underpinning our political decision-making.

“It’s the identities that matter when it comes to politics,” she said, concluding a few moments later with this thought: “We’re acting politically based on our group attachments, the team that we’ve chosen rather than core beliefs that we generally think and—especially in that idealized version of democracy—hope are underpinning our political decision-making.”

Finally, Rosenfeld spoke for a few minutes. “I’m a historian of the taken-for-granted. I like to talk about things that are so ordinary and obvious that we rarely talk about them except in moments of crisis,” she said. Here, she pointed out several such democratic norms she believes are currently at that tipping point: the notion of truth, the conviction that the rules matter, and solidarity with others.

“Those qualities need to be cultivated for a democracy to work,” Rosenfeld said. “All are under stress, and all of them require thinking about solutions.”

From there, Rosenfeld moved into the question-and-answer part of the evening, starting off by asking her colleagues about the role of universities and a liberal arts education today in maintaining and strengthening democracy. Audience members also asked about what safeguards exist in the U.S. to protect democracy, whether we’re working hard enough to learn about the perspectives of Americans in different places across the country, how to establish truth, the “disillusionment” of Gen Z, a media “under siege,” and more. Finally, the evening ended where it had begun, with alums and faculty mingling and enjoying refreshments, discussing the past, present, and future of democracy in the U.S.

For a gallery of images from the event, visit our Flickr gallery at https://www.flickr.com/photos/pennsas/albums/72177720323748524/.