Kent Lenci, an educator, founder of Middle Ground School Solutions, and author of Learning to Depolarize, dissects a depolarization story in three acts. What starts as a heated confrontation over a seemingly neutral photo of Donald Trump evolves into a masterclass in de-escalation across multiple media, from the rapid-fire tension of video calls to the deliberate, cooling pace of email and the intimacy of a long-form phone conversation. Lenci reveals how discovering shared humanity, like the common struggle of a parent's schedule, can dismantle the "performativity" of public disagreement. It is a powerful exploration of the "Listen First" philosophy and why sometimes the most difficult people to talk to are exactly the ones who need to be heard.

Tell us your argument stories!

• Email guest and topic suggestions to us at whenwedisagree@gmail.com
• Follow us on Instagram

Is civic education a fundamental duty of higher education or a dangerous political risk? Alex Kappus of Carnegie Higher Education Consulting and the Democratic Knowledge Project to discuss the growing institutional fear of being labeled "partisan" for simply teaching the mechanics of democracy. Kappus shares a decade of firsthand accounts (blocked voter registration drives, administrative pushback, etc.) to reveal how the quest for "neutrality" often results in student disillusionment. Together, they explore why colleges must move beyond the "optics" of fear to cultivate an informed, active citizenry that can navigate a polarized world.

Tell us your argument stories!

• Email guest and topic suggestions to us at whenwedisagree@gmail.com
• Follow us on Instagram

Andrew Perrin, SNF-Agora professor of sociology at Johns Hopkins University, reflects on leading a high-stakes effort to redesign general education at the University of North Carolina, revealing how institutional change sparks deep and often personal disagreements about what students really need to learn. What begins as a debate over course requirements becomes a broader argument about the purpose of higher education itself. Perrin describes shifting the focus from content coverage to core capacities like asking questions, evaluating evidence, and acting on informed judgment. The conversation highlights how academic turf wars, incentives, and identity shape conflict, even among experts. Ultimately, this conversation reframes argument as a fundamental skill at the heart of education, citizenship, and public life.

Tell us your argument stories!

• Email guest and topic suggestions to us at whenwedisagree@gmail.com
• Follow us on Instagram

Jennifer Borda, professor of communication at the University of New Hampshire and the co-director of the Civil Discourse Lab, reflects on a family crisis that sparked a lasting insight into the nature of conflict. A painful confrontation with her father during her mother’s final days reveals how fear, grief, and loss of control often drive arguments more than the surface issue. The conversation explores the limits of language in moments of emotional intensity and the unseen forces shaping what people say. Drawing on her work in civil discourse, Borda highlights how storytelling can open space for understanding and shift deeply held positions. The episode connects personal experience to a broader framework for navigating conflict with greater awareness and empathy.

Tell us your argument stories!

• Email guest and topic suggestions to us at whenwedisagree@gmail.com
• Follow us on Instagram

Sarah Igo, the Andrew Jackson chair in American history at Vanderbilt University and the faculty director of Dialogue Vanderbilt, explores why some people rarely experience heated conflict and what that reveals about how we argue. Drawing on her research into privacy and public life, she makes a bold case: over time, reasoned arguments can actually reshape culture, even if the process is slow and uneven. Igo contrasts the generative disagreements of academia with the more chaotic clashes of public life, asking what we lose when arguments abandon evidence and curiosity. The conversation digs into how institutions like universities can model better discourse and why that matters now more than ever. It’s a thoughtful, quietly optimistic take on disagreement as a force for intellectual and democratic progress.

Tell us your argument stories!

• Email guest and topic suggestions to us at whenwedisagree@gmail.com
• Follow us on Instagram

A firsthand witness to January 6 recounts a surreal argument at a casual gathering. Sherman Tylawsky, founder of the George Washington Institute and host of the Friends and Fellow Citizens podcast, reflects on the emotional weight of hearing the event dismissed as fictional, even as he recalls being locked down inside the Capitol. The conversation explores where disagreement breaks down: when people no longer share basic facts. Rather than escalate, Tylawsky models a strategy of grounding conflict in shared values: rejecting violence and reaffirming democratic norms. It’s a powerful look at how civic trust frays and how it might be rebuilt through principled, human-centered dialogue.

Tell us your argument stories!

• Email guest and topic suggestions to us at whenwedisagree@gmail.com
• Follow us on Instagram

What happens when a heated professional conflict comes back years later with unexpected consequences? In this episode, Bill Imada, Chairman and Chief Connectivity Officer at IW Group, shares a high-stakes agency clash that nearly burned a bridge only to reveal a deeper lesson about communication, trust, and second chances. Drawing on IW Group's research into national civility trends, he discusses a striking paradox: most people believe they’re civil, yet expect others not to be. This dynamic fuels silence, avoidance, and missed opportunities for connection. Together, we explore how incivility isn’t just loud and aggressive, but also quiet and withdrawn and why both are dangerous. The path forward? Curiosity, courage, and conversations that bring more voices to the table before it’s too late.

Tell us your argument stories!

• Email guest and topic suggestions to us at whenwedisagree@gmail.com
• Follow us on Instagram

In this episode of When We Disagree, host Michael Lee sits down with advocate Radia Baxter, a community advocate and political advisor in South Carolina, explores a powerful tension: our desire for economic growth without equal access to opportunity. Drawing from her experience as a teen mother who defied expectations, Baxter shares how personal adversity shaped her commitment to second chances and community empowerment. She argues that true “significant success” means helping others see their own value and bringing them along in the process. From leading programs inside detention centers to building trust across divides, Baxter reveals how vulnerability, access, and belief can transform lives. This conversation explores what it really takes to create opportunity and why trust is the foundation of it all.

Tell us your argument stories!

• Email guest and topic suggestions to us at whenwedisagree@gmail.com
• Follow us on Instagram