Effective responses to multiple civic crises in today’s America depend on analysis of how people develop capacities for work on public challenges. The history of civic engagement in the Twin Cities and today’s resistance to the overbearing behavior of federal agents’ in the Twin Cities hold le ssons. These lessons are cross partisan, building the civic muscle of community to work together on common problems with the goal of building healthy communities for all across differences. Political theorists like James Tulley distinguish between civil views of citizenship, focused on what government does, and civic views of citizenship, including deliberation and public work that citizens do together. This is also the difference between government and the larger idea of governance, which taps the energies and talents of whole communities for building the commonwealth, a reframing of democracy championed by groups like the Institute for Democracy in South Africa. In 2010 the Center for Democracy and Citizenship at the University of Minnesota’s Humphrey Institute (now School) released a report on the Twin Cities civic culture, partnering with the congressionally mandated National Conference on Citizenship. The report, “A Tale of Two Cities: Civic Health in Miami and Minneapolis-St. Paul”, compared civic engagement in both cities and showed that the Twin Cities was the most civically engaged metropolitan community in the country. As I described in the St. Paul Pioneer Press, we worked with other research centers to make such an assessment, aggregating several factors. These included government-centered practices such as voter turnout and attending public meetings. They also included civic practices such as volunteering, community engagement, charitable giving, and one-to-one interactions with neighbors. Demographic differences didn’t explain the disparities between the two cities. In both, people with more education and higher incomes were engaged more actively in public life. But low-income people in the Twin Cities were more civically involved than people in the wealthiest tier of Miami. In both Minneapolis and St. Paul, we found that people had built capacities for collective action across differences for well over a century. The flood of immigrants who settled in the area were a motley crew – clannish Scandinavians, Germans, Irish Catholics escaping famine, Yankees from New England, Black refugees from the segregated South, Mexican workers seeking a better life. In the 1900 census, 29 percent of Minnesotans were foreign born. Most of the rest had immigrant parents. Often they saw each other as enemies. When I moved here in 1976, I found that many refused to go from “their” city to the other. But over time the Twin Cities built a network of civic institutions and public spaces – faith groups, business groups, unions, arts organizations, music and sports networks, settlement houses, parks, libraries and nonprofits — where people created relationships and learned skills of collaborative civic work. These were foundations of the Twin Cities’ empowering and vibrant civic culture. The large-scale civic activation in the face of the deployment of 3,000 ICE and Border Patrol agents shows how people’s pride in this civic culture has been affronted by the surge of federal forces and crude disparagements by federal leaders of local residents, especially racial minorities and immigrants. On Jan. 23 , the “Day of Peace and Freedom,” businesses suspended operations, museums closed their doors, people stayed home from work, and tens of thousands gathered in Minneapolis to protest what people saw as a federal occupation in deep subzero weather. Dozens of clergy members staged a sit-in at the Minneapolis-St. Paul airport to protest deportations. The next day, after Alex Pretti’s killing, the Guthrie Theater and First Avenue cancelled shows, the Timberwolves game with the Golden State Warriors was postponed and the annual Grand Day Parade in St. Paul was called off. Leaders of large businesses soon issued a call for de-escalation and cooperation across different levels of government. As I learned when I worked for Martin Luther King in the civil rights movement, episodes of undisciplined anger can add to more polarization. Last month, one group disrupted a church service whose pastor works for Homeland Security, causing great controversy. Protesters vandalized cars and attacked a hotel where they believed federal agents were staying. Political leaders sometimes have used polarizing rhetoric that makes compromise more difficult across levels of government. But overall, civic action has been peaceful, disciplined, courageous and cross-partisan. Myriad small-scale efforts of mutual aid and support have proliferated. Many participate in grocery-delivery programs for immigrant families afraid to go out of their homes, Others serve as observers for schools. Citizens’ cellphone videotaping of ICE actions have made visible stories that would have otherwise remained unknown. Twin Cities history holds many lessons for civic culture-building in a divided time, when many feel powerless and hopeless. Developments in the depolarization group Braver Angels offer ways to spread them. After years of work with methods which teach people respect for others even across deep disagreements, Braver Angels is in “a new stage,” focused on “courageous citizenship.” The new CEO, Maury Giles, champions civic action as well as dialogue and depolarization. When he saw videos of Alex Jeffrey Pretti being shot, he wrote to all Braver Angels members. “What we see in Minneapolis right now is a harsh but true reflection of us as a people,” he said, describing how he believes Braver Angels can contribute to culture change. “Intense conflict requires an equal force in response … that can be domination, power and control, or connection, patience, perseverance and perspective.” Giles advanced a “power with” view of power, far different from the “power over” approach which dominates across many institutions and political perspectives today. Braver Angels’ mission promotes a horizontal understanding of what citizenship entails, far more inclusive and generative than today’s narrow, vertical view of citizenship as legal status. In this anniversary year of the Declaration of Independence, we need to use civic history to reframe conventional views. Thomas Paine is a good source. His 1776 pamphlet “Common Sense” called for every American to be “a good citizen; an open and resolute friend; and a virtuous supporter of the RIGHTS of MANKIND.” Paine saw ordinary citizens as the driver of change with no reference to legal status. His pamphlet “swept through the colonies like a firestorm,” wrote the historian Joseph Ellis. It activated a popular movement of support for Independence that, as Pauline Maier describes, included more than 80 local declarations before the Fourth of July. Collaborative power and self-organizing citizenship became norms in the Twin Cities and continue today. Braver Angels has created a cross-partisan Civic Scholars Council to explore the meanings of courageous citizenship and examine lessons of America’s civic history from different vantages. In this work, Twin Cities history will be a resource for helping us all rise to the office of citizenship. Harry Boyte, founder, director and co-director of the Center for Democracy and Citizenship at the University of Minnesota and then Augsburg University, was a field secretary for Martin Luther King’s organization in the civil rights movement. He is co-chair of the new Braver Angels’ Civic Scholars Council. Related Articles Letters: Don’t mistake TIF subsidies for real growth in St. Paul Skywatch: A disgraced charioteer turned goat farmer Valeng Cha: When Federal ICE meets Minnesota Nice: an immigrant’s perspective Working Strategies: To stress or not to stress? Some prespective Hamid Kashani: What to know about the massacre in Iran ...read more read less