Episode 67. Conversation that Undermines Local Government and Public Service Interview with Brooks Williams
Michelle Rathman: Hello, one and all, and welcome back to a brand-new episode of The Rural Impact. I'm Michelle Rathman, and I do mean it when I say thank you, thank you, thank you for coming back and joining us for another conversation that aims to connect the dots between policy and rural everything.
Now, if you were unclear before about what the everything, I'll put that in air quotes, means, well, today the mystery is going to be solved because rather than discuss a specific policy matter on a subject like healthcare, which I know we've been talking a lot about lately, or the economy or housing or education, all of which are very important for rural prosperity.
Instead, we turn the topic to behaviors and their relationship with policymaking, civic engagement, and the impacts on local governments and their ability to function, and function that is at a high productive level. Now, I don't believe I'm going out on a limb here when I say that civil political discourse, and what that really means, of course, is the practice of deliberating about matters of public concern with others in a way that seeks to expand knowledge and promote understanding is now done.
And I'm gonna preface it by saying it's not in all places, and it's not all the time, but increasingly is done with contempt, anger, and as social media has shown us with a type of performative outrage that was once limited to so-called reality television, not suitable for children or a general audience. Okay?
So in his 2021 book, "American Rage," Stephen W. Webster, details how anger has become increasingly pervasive in US politics, and it walks readers through the political climate, dominated by outrage at the opposing party, its leaders and its supporters offering a much needed explanation of how we got here, what and where we are likely to be heading.
Now again, that was in 2021. Fast forward, we are at the end of September of 2025, so that is where we were, we are heading. Now, Webster holds back no punches when discussing anger as a consequence of partisan sorting with racial, ethnic, and cultural and ideological identities, as well as the drastic changes to the media landscape.
You know what I'm talking about here, right? Which has become characterized by polarized news, echo chambers, and the internet. Now, in the second part of American Rage, Webster turns the focus to the consequences of rage for American democracy, including how anger leads to lower trust in government, a greater belief that the national government is unresponsive to the public.
Now I share this with you. I don't have this author on the podcast today, but I share this with you because I really felt it was important for us to have a conversation about how all these things are impacting small, rural community governments. And I have witnessed it firsthand, and I won't go into the details as to where and how and why, but I will tell you, it has become increasingly difficult to govern at a local level as a result of these other things that are going on.
So as I share this with you, as I said, I want to have a good discussion about how anger and rage is impacting small governments, the places I've been working in for nearly three decades, be it a population of say 576 to 5,976. Either way, this outrage that we're gonna be talking about today is keeping people from being civically engaged and making it increasingly unappealing to serve, be it on a school or a hospital board, or in city or county government.
So with that on the table for you, let me tell you that for this episode of The Rural Impact, I sat down with a city manager from Ferris, Texas who wrote an outstanding book, what he refers to really as a survival guide that I hope you'll consider reading. It's called appropriately so, "Performative Outrage, How Manufactured Fury Undermines Local Government and Public Service."
His name is Brooks Williams. He's an eloquent writer and communicator. And now this is my invitation to you to tune out that background noise because we know there's plenty of it waiting for you when this podcast is over. And tune into my conversation with Brooks Williams as we discuss Performative Outrage and strategies for how small and rural town leaders can successfully lower the heat and increase civility in civic engagement.
Are you ready? I know, I sure am. So let's go.
Hey, Brooks Williams, Chief Executive Officer, AKA City Manager of Ferris, Texas. It is, and I mean it when I say great to have you here on the Rural Impact. Welcome. We're glad you could join us
Brooks Williams: Michelle, thank you. I'm glad to be here. This is an honor, so I appreciate you taking the time to talk with me for.
Michelle Rathman: Well, it's my pleasure you know, I'm kind of a troll these days. So, I met Brooks, so to speak, on LinkedIn because I started reading your blogs and they really spoke to me. And we talked before we started recording today about the reasons why. And that is because I do a lot of work with municipal hospitals and rural spaces. And so many of them rely on public support. It has become increasingly difficult to break through the noise. And that is a putting it mildly, I would say. So I would just say this Brooks, I mean, the conversation that we're gonna have could not be more relevant. I don't know, you'll have to tell me a little bit about how you came up with this idea and how you released it so timely. But before we dive in, and I'm gonna talk a little bit about what you wrote, talk about your day job for people who I never assume, where is Ferris, Texas? Tell us about the population you serve and the things that we need to know to tee us up for the conversation we're gonna have.
Brooks Williams: Sure. Ferris is about 18 minutes south of Dallas, Texas. And so we are on Interstate 45. And the great part about our location is when I say 18 minutes, I mean 18 minutes, you can go from Ferris to the center of downtown Dallas in about 18 minutes. Which is remarkable because you know, if you live in some of the, the, the area surrounding Dallas, you can't get outta your driveway in 18 minutes. So, we love our location. It's an exploding area. I've been here for right at about six years. Six years ago the population of Ferris was about 2,300 people. We are well over 5,000 now, so we've doubled in population.
Ferris for 20 years had either a stagnant or declining population. So, for us, this has been a remarkable turnaround and something that I don't think that the city expected, but we're excited that, that this is the growth trajectory that we're seeing.
We tie it directly to, because not every city around us is experiencing that, we tie it directly to kind of the intentionality that we have put into being a city that is very distinct and different from any other. And so, we run ourselves very much like a business. We don't talk about residents or taxpayers, we talk about customers. And while it's difficult in the government space to run like business because of the restrictions we have, we try to inject as much common sense as we can and hold ourselves accountable and to a standard.
I tell people all the time, if you can go to any other government website. And on the front page, there'd be a performance dashboard like ours that shows literally every metric that you could possibly measure in a government. And it puts it out in front so that our residents can see it and anybody else can see it.
And we can see where we're doing good, where we're doing bad, where we need to improve, what those improvement plans are, if we're not meeting expectations. We're just, we are a very different, I think, city government than most people experience. And so, the last six years have been a ride.
Michelle Rathman: I would say I did go to your government website and I really did appreciate the level of transparency. And I think that again, led itself very well for the conversation that we're going to have because we are in a, I would call it a crisis of trust at present. So, you wrote a book last year called Rising to Serve, Reimagining Public Administration for a New Era. And then in July of this year, you released an excellent, and I mean that,
Brooks Williams:We are.
Michelle Rathman: I don't say it lightly, 90 page read, very easy to read, very important to read. It's called Performative Outrage, How Manufactured Fury Undermines Local Government and Public Service. Again, if we are not being honest with ourselves, we can say this is not relevant to anybody, but honestly folks, please stay tuned and listen because I do want to talk about the re-imagining public administration, but I want to start with performance outrage and if you'll indulge me, Brooks, I just want to read an opening paragraph and then we can go from there.
So, it starts out by saying the ability to self-govern is one of the greatest achievements of civilization. Yet today, the principles of reason, discourse and decision-making that once formed the foundation of governance are drowning in an era of performative outrage. Local governments, the bedrock of democracy are increasingly paralyzed. The problems they face are not too complex to solve, but the real challenge is navigating manufactured fury that thrives on soundbites rather than solutions. This is not a natural evolution of civic engagement. It is a deliberate distortion of it. So let's start there. You intend this book to be a survival guide for public servants? How so? Because this is a big, big piece right here.
Brooks Williams: I do. I think this is a, a field manual for survival in the world of public service today. And the reality is, I meant what I said when I said this is a deliberate distortion of it. And I think that what we have seen is a shift from public servants elected, public servants, and our public as a whole, where we used to really believe that public service was a calling where we were meant to improve the lives of the people around us.
And the reality is now it has become more about who can get the greatest sound bite, who can get the greatest opportunity for clicks online, and how do we create an environment where there's so much outrage against the other side that we can win. And that tribalism that we are seeing, just take over the world of public service, I think is going to come back and haunt us.
I think it's already haunting us, but I think it's going to come back and haunt us in a way that we can't even imagine. And this is meant to really help those that are serving, who want to serve in the right way, survive this landscape that we find ourselves in.
Michelle Rathman: I think it's haunting us.
Michelle Rathman: You know, I, for many years, I thought about serving, doing public service. I serve on boards and things of that nature. My husband begged me not to because of the climate. said, you know, the reality is this performative outrage that you write so eloquently about is scaring really good people that do have public service in their heart away from it because of it. So, in your first chapter, you talk about outrage as currency. And I had to read it a couple of times and it's short.
It's only a few pages, not because I didn't understand it, but because I really wanted to take it in. Talk about outrage as currency. Kind of go into the layers of what you mean by that.
Brooks Williams: Well, I mean, I think to talk about it at a real high level is, I want anybody to just pull up Fox News, pull up, CNN, I don't care what the platform is, you know, apolitical as far as I'm concerned. And I want you to watch any senate hearing, congressional hearing, local government hearing.
I mean, look at, look at a Harris County meeting. I don't care what it is. Any layer of government and watch what you see unfold. There is not an exchange of ideas. There is an exchange, of pure hate and vitriol towards the other side. And when I say other side, I mean the person sitting opposite that's being questioned or interviewed or testifying.
There is not a desire to solve problems. There is a desire to create outrage at the other side's ideas or the other side's position. And so that I think is the currency of our time is get enough people mad, put out enough information that upsets people to where what they do is wholly right off the other tribe that we're fighting against, if you will, so that we can now say we won, that we're right, they're wrong.
And what we've seen is now a complete standstill of any progress that could be made. Because the reality is if you're on one side and you agree to work with the other, you're gonna be cannibalized by yours, because you chose to reach out. And if you're not extreme enough on the other side, then you're not part of us either.
And so, we've created this model where outrage has become the norm and it is the currency, like I said, of our time. Where if that's the goal now is can we get enough people upset? Can we get enough people so angry that they will agree with us and listen to any amount of reason that could exist and we win then?
And so, the real sad part about that is, is I think those of us that live right in these communities and those of us that live in this state and in this country don't realize that we are losing every single day. We are, we're losing because there is not any good progress happening. We are not solving any problems.
I think about it every time I watch it, I'm like, what? What? Hungry child just got fed because of this debate? Right. What, what, what process really got fixed because of this exchange that they just had? Where now we've manufactured, where we have manufactured something that really doesn't exist, or we've blown it up into something that does not exist.
Michelle Rathman: It, it, it's, it's delusional.
Brooks Williams: It’s delusional. We're not a solution-based group anymore. We, we don't care anymore about actually fixing problems. What we care about is, did I stick to the to the motto of my party, did I create enough outrage on the other side where I'm gonna have people cheering, and is there somewhere somehow on social media going to be a clip of me carrying the banner forward for my party or my side?
And again, I don't, I'm not saying that this is a one side, I'm applying this universally to all.
Michelle Rathman: Universally, yeah. And again, you know, it may not play itself out in everyone's workplace every day, but I know that increasingly it's seething under the surface. And you know, your next chapter talks about the performers and their stage. And you just mentioned a moment ago about social media. And I said, at the end of the day, you know, we have weapons and our words are now weapons and we have the stage with the social media. And so to your point, when you manufacture all this outrage. It's got to get out somewhere and it's right there at our fingertips. So, talk about that just a bit, the performers and their stage. It may seem obvious, but I think you can glean some additional light on the subject.
Brooks Williams: Sure. Well, I'll talk about the stage and I really do think that social media is the stage, and I think that social media is the devil's playground, if you want my honest opinion. I don't wish ill on anyone or anything, but I would say this, if social media got hacked and destroyed and went away, I don't think that the world would be worse off at all.
I think we would all be better. I really do. I think what was once intended as a way to connect people and to share ideas, and to create an environment of transparency has been perverted into something that it was never intended to be. And so you're right. Now, this is at our fingertips, right? And that's where we get to pull the strings and we get to control the puppet through every keystroke that we have on social media.
And we've been made to believe that if we have a thought up here, that it should come out on our keyboard, into our keyboard, onto social media, and we should share it. And the reality is, is that's not true sometimes, that this is exactly where that belongs until we have more information and we can process it and we can get facts and we can understand the situation, but we know now that we can go out there and create a like, or a heart, or an applause from people.
It is satisfying something that is, that is actually pretty sad if you were to ask me. We have taught a generation now to derive their self-worth from people clicking like. And if that's the only place we find self-worth, and it is for some people, I think that's dangerous for us. And that's where we've gone.
And so what that does to local government, we are in a position where, how do you combat that? How do you combat a group of people that go out and seek validation through spreading misinformation? Because 90% of the time they do not have the correct information. They go out and they spread that misinformation and they do it in a way that they are looking for validation to come from that.
And so, you know, I use this analogy of people all the time. You and I when we were, when we were growing up, look, we dated somebody, we decided we didn't want to date 'em anymore. Who did you go to to say, "Hey, I think I think I'm gonna break up with this person?" You didn't go to their best friend because their best friend's gonna say, oh, don't, why? Why would you do that?
You went to the person you knew was gonna support you. Yeah, yeah. Do it. Absolutely. That. Go for it, right? You sought support and that's what social media has become is an opportunity to do nothing but seek support from people that we know are going to get behind us and support us and say, you're right.
So we put out there, local government is corrupt. Local government is inefficient. Local government doesn't know what they're doing, and what do we know is gonna happen when that occurs, a groundswell of, you're right. You know what, you're right. You know what you're right. And trying to combat that even with fact is almost impossible.
Because, you know, we have a saying around our city hall that my facts don't care about your feelings, but the reality is on so social media, their feelings don't care about facts. They're more interested in being validated and they're more interested in seeking whatever hollowness there is inside of them being filled through that post.
Michelle Rathman: And in the really tragic part of all this, and I agree with you a thousand percent is that now we have so many platforms from which to choose. And again, it's such a manipulation of our emotions. think about something John Dickerson said, he's a CBS reporter. He said, what do you miss? He said, an unexpressed thought.
Brooks Williams: That's exactly right.
Michelle Rathman: I think social media has just really just completely diminished our ability to do critical thinking, impulse control, all those really important emotional intelligence, those things that really mattered and whether or not we're gonna have a relationship with somebody or an argument. Let's talk a little bit about the feedback loop of fury because again, I'm gonna read something really quick and then the other side to talk about that. In chapter three, again, the Feedback Loop of Fury, your write, “the feedback loop of fury drives on human instincts. Deep down, people are tribal,” which you said earlier.
“They sort themselves into us and them as if their very survival depends on it. In a local community, tribal lines might form around political factions, neighborhood identities, or loyalties to a particular leader or cause. Once those lines are drawn, outrage becomes a weapon and a shield.”
Brooks Williams: Yeah I mean, I think it is our natural human instinct. And unfortunately we don't understand that translating Sunday football mentality, right? My team versus your team and this diehard, commitment that I've got to it into local government is the quickest way to ensure that local government fails.
Local government has to be a partnership between the government and the people in the community. And unfortunately, what we find is an us versus them mentality that is existing, and I think that that is being permeated from the the federal level down to the state level, down to the local level.
And we are no different. I mean, we, we overcomplicate things I think all the time, right? We are really think about a parent-child relationship. Children model the behavior that they see. And what we are watching is a society modeling the behavior that leaders are showing us. And so, we're seeing this us versus them. It's, we're right, they're wrong.
They can't have any good ideas if they're on that side. It's got to be choose a side and that's what we're doing, and we're carrying that into our local government. We're carrying that into every single interaction that we have, and I think it is destroying the very fabric of who we are as, as human beings and as a society.
I think it's a sad place for us to be.
Michelle Rathman: It Is. And your next chapter, you talk about decision-making under the shadow of outrage. And I think about, know, on this podcast, as you know, all of our listeners, we aim to connect the dots between policy and quality of life. It's very challenging, maybe impossible to develop sound measured policies that provides equitable solutions for all. And I still use the word, no one's going to take that word away from me. It's very difficult.
to have sound policy decision making under the shadow of outrage. Is this kind of what you're talking about here?
Brooks Williams: It is. I think again, and I'm gonna say at every level of government, I don't think that there are sound policy decisions being made because of the fear of that outrage. That outrage has teeth. And I think people are terrified of it. Those that are in elected office and those that are shaping policy are terrified of it.
And I think that that is driving what you're seeing as policy. And when that happens, I don't think we're serving anybody. And I think that what elected officials seem to forget is, they weren't elected to make sure that they pleased everybody. If that's what they wanted to do, they missed their calling. They should have opened an ice cream shop. That's how you make everybody happy, right? I mean, go. That's what they should have done. Not run for public office. Public office was meant to be for those who want to be leaders, make tough decisions, and stand up against that outrage and that fury that people bring forward.
But that fear, I think, has created, what we do is we create policies now that are what I'll call safe. Right? It's the safest point of least resistance that we can possibly find to say that we did something and then we.
Michelle Rathman: No matter how dangerous is it.
Brooks Williams: No matter how dangerous it is, we're seeing it in the space of healthcare. We're seeing it in the space of education. We're seeing it in the space of immigration policy. We're seeing it. We're seeing it across the board, and I think it is a dangerous, again precedent that we are setting where we are now, letting this outrage dictate how policy is shaped rather than saying what we're gonna do is solve problems and help people.
And the other sad part about that, you talked about how it pushes people away from wanting to run for office. I couldn't agree with you more because you have people that look and say, I'm a rational person, I'm a logical person. I want to inject common sense. There is no place anymore in public service for a person with that attitude.
You have to sell your soul to one side or the other in order to be able to run for office and be successful. And when you sell your soul, you're selling it to people who understand what that outrage is, and they understand what drives the money that comes with that, and that is that outrage. And so you are immediately a slave to the outrage that is controlling every single facet of public service today.
And so that, I think, is something that we have to work to, first recognize so that then we can start to change that reality.
Michelle Rathman: Well, know, outrage is powerful and there is a saying and I won't try and get the entire quote right, but it isn't it? Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts, absolutely. And I think that the outrage piece of this has been instrumental in garnering power to your point. You can get more and more more more people on your team, on your side, if you will.
At the end of the day, what happens is we erode public trust and that is the next chapter, the erosion of public trust. And as someone who has been working in healthcare for 37 years, I think about the erosion of public trust in public health as but one example. And Brooks, I don't know how we get back. I know we must get back, but talk about the erosion of public trust because it doesn't happen overnight. You've said it yourself. You've written about it. Let's talk about that section in your book.
Brooks Williams: I don't think it happens overnight. I think it is a slow trickle towards that. I think what is extremely sad is what we don't realize is becoming, a slave to that outrage is really what is leading to then the lack of public trust. Because what they see is we are making decisions that are not benefiting them.
Right? They don't see it in that immediate decision that's made. They see it as, oh, good, we won. They listened. They did what we wanted them to do. But then as those decisions play out and people realize this is not in our best interest, what ends up happening is saying, you guys are not there doing what's right for us.
We can't trust that you're gonna take care of us, but we're not. We're not connecting the dots back to, this all goes back to the original thing of had, we stopped, to your point, and taken a deep breath and become informed and not had that spoken thought right away and taken time to be deliberate as we developed policy.
Maybe we wouldn't be in this place in the first, we wouldn't be in this place. We're seeing it in our state, right? We're watching our legislature slash at the ability of local government to function and cheering that they are doing it on behalf of the taxpayers and the people of this state. Then on the opposite side of that, we watch local government be able to not even do and conduct core services that it was designed to do.
So, then the public turns and says, you're not doing what you're supposed to as a local government, you're failing us, which creates that erosion of trust. Which, so now we've just got this perpetuated cycle that, that people are going, government can't be trusted. They said they were gonna take care of us.
This guy at the state capital's cheering that he did it. Okay. But my tax bill's still not cheaper like he said it was gonna be. And not only that, local government's not doing what they were supposed to for me. So, it is a slow progression towards local government, just being a completely untrusted institution, which is I think, again, a very dangerous place for us to be because local government.
We, we hear it all the time, but it's kind of like when you were in high school and your dad told you something or your mom told you something and you blew 'em off, and then you get to be a certain age and you go, ah, I should have listened. I should have listened. You know, we talk all the time about local government impacts your life more than any other more than any other level of government.
But I don't think people listen, and I don't think people really pay attention to that. When you have a three to 5% turnout in local government elections and an engagement that's even going down further than that, that I think speaks volumes.
If we could get, I say this all the time, half the amount of people that are willing to post on Facebook vote in an election, we could fundamentally change the trajectory of local government and other levels of government, as well.
Michelle Rathman: Yeah. Before we close out, we're going to talk about how to make that happen. And I, I read one of your blogs on LinkedIn about the fact that exactly what you were saying. And I had this conversation with somebody very close to me yesterday, you know, they're moving from one state to another.
And they said, but we don't have to pay for this. And we had to pay for this. I said, but when, how will your trash be picked up and how will you and so forth? Well, there it's in, I say the same thing about working with hospitals that rely on levies, you know, and when it comes time to renew a levy, people go, You know, why should I pay? But healthcare is so expensive. I said, yeah, but it's not the other side, but there's no interest in hearing the logic, the facts, because facts to your point earlier, seemingly no longer, they do matter. However, it's very difficult for them to rise above that very loud noise. Yeah. Let's talk a little bit about when outrage wins. I think we can see that all around us. Talk to us a little bit about your perspective where that is concerned.
Brooks Williams: Fury. I think where outrage wins, the, the concern I have with that is, exactly where we are right now as a society. I think outrage is winning and I think that's why the book is so important, and I think it's why we need to pay so much attention to it. Because I think if we want to have a country, a place, and I, and, and I know that can, anytime you bring up a country, a nation, people think you're giving a stump speech and it becomes kind of cheesy. And that's not the intent of it.
But if we want something that any of our children can recognize as we move forward, then something has to change because as outrage wins, hate begins to take over, logic is no longer important. Facts are no longer relevant. Fury is what becomes the most important and primary dominator in every single conversation and interaction, and people lose at the end of the day.
That's the saddest part, especially for people. Most public servants I know are in public service because they have a heart for people, and so for us it is standing and watching and looking and saying, what has happened to a system that I have spent my life working in to try to make better for people?
And we're watching the very people that are going to lose cheer this on. It's like they're screaming, push the pedal down further in a bust that is headed for a cliff and you're yelling to them, the cliff is there and they say, we don't care. Push the gas harder, push the gas harder, push the gas harder.
And that's what I think is happening is outrage is winning. Outrage is dominating. Outrage is taking us to a place where by the time it all falls apart, it's going to be so far gone that recovering it is going to be very difficult for us. And so, I think it, it's time for those of us in public administration, public service to start standing up and saying, enough is enough. And we've got to reclaim this. We've, we have got to reclaim this.
Michelle Rathman: Yeah. Well, you, you use the word courage and anyone who follows me on LinkedIn or any place else. I mean, I do my writing from time to time and I say, Hey man, courage is calling pick up the phone. It is time because we're going to get to a point later will not occur. We don't have any more time. We are truly at that tip, at that cliff. I agree with you. So because this has been so you know, such a positive start to the conversation. Let's move on to some of that because there is leadership beyond the noise. There are strategies. This is absolutely not hopeless by any stretch of the imagination because we have the power to change this. Talk about leadership beyond the noise. What does that look like? Where do we start?
Brooks Williams: I think it starts with having honest conversations, right? Meeting people where they are not being afraid of that fury, not being afraid of that outrage. As hard as that is, I think to your point, it is still rooting yourself in fact, bringing that to people, trying to educate them, not once, not twice, but as many times as it possibly takes to get there.
I think it comes from organizations and industry as a whole, public administrators as a whole, coming together and pushing back against those elected officials that are spreading that misinformation or giving that false hope that these policies that are built on, you know, platforms of outrage are going to actually solve something.
I think it, it also requires us to not just say that there's a problem, but to actually bring forth the solution. So, when we go to those elected officials or when we go out into the community, we say, we understand there's a problem, but here's a solution that can accompany it.
It takes a lot of courage moving forward for us to be able to be successful in this, and it's gonna take a relentless effort on our part to do the things that we can do to remove the stigma that exists around local government. Like you aren't trustworthy. Okay. You know what? Publish everything you possibly can. Make it transparent. Let them see it. You know, where I come from? We talk about let 'em see how the sausage is made every single day so that they can understand it and they know it.
They realize that corruption. That doesn't exist. That's just a buzzword somebody used to create some outrage and begin to push people against you. So, do it in the open. Do it in the light of day. Explain those things. Give them an opportunity to have a say in the process, but also explain to them why things can and cannot happen the way that they may want.
Because there are restrictions on us. There are things that we don't like to acknowledge, but it's called money, and it's called reality. And there's things that can and can't happen. I think it's very important that transparency be that piece that we utilize so that people can see exactly what is going on.
The other book that I think people ought to read, and I didn't write it, is "How to Lie with Statistics." And I think that every politician has probably read and utilizes that book as a playbook. When we start talking about the problems that plague this country, the state, the local governments, and we use statistics as a way to push that most of the time. Those are statistics that have been manipulated to fit a narrative, to drive outrage.
And I think people need to learn to question, and when I say question, I don't mean call out. I don't mean go to your keyboard and call people out and say you're wrong and here's what it is. Question, deeply question so that you can understand what it is that is actually going on, or the discussion that's actually taking place or the root of the, of the real problem so that then you can be a part of that solution.
But I think we need to become a more inquisitive group of people. We need to be, and, and I don't mean ChatGPT inquisitive. I don't mean Google inquisitive, I don't mean Facebook inquisitive. I mean deeply inquisitive people that start to really look for facts, verifiable facts and understand situations so that they can be a part of the solution. And I think that it requires us as government, us as leaders in government to put those things forward and to be willing to have those conversations with people.
Michelle Rathman: Yeah, Brooks, was just sitting here thinking because I say often, you when I do my work teaching and culture transformation in the healthcare space, there's a difference between asking questions and questioning people. And so when we think of, you go before someone and you have prepared thoughtful questions because you have done your homework, then it's not this, you know, battering conversation, rather it is a thoughtful exchange.
I have my grandchildren staying with me and the two little ones, you know, they ask questions all the time. Like why, why, why? And it'd be very easy to say because, because I said so and so forth.
But I think it is, that is a part of our ability to see each other as human beings by just asking thoughtful questions versus questioning someone's integrity. You know, questioning whether or not they're taking you for a ride or what have you. I love that. right.
Brooks Williams: I think the intent behind your question is what we need to focus on as people. What is the intent? Is my intent in asking this question to really learn, or is my intent to impugn this person? Is my intent to prove my my preconceived thought that I already had? I, is it my gotcha moment? Is it my opportunity to create more outrage?
To get my viral moment.
Is that the intent? If that's it, you're not questioning for the right reasons. You're questioning, as I go back to what I said before, to fill that hollow spot inside yourself, which is really, you need to, you need to go somewhere else besides Facebook or even to a public meeting to figure out that situation.
The intent behind it needs to be to truly understand so that we can fix this and we can get better as people
Michelle Rathman: And public meetings, know, there used to be a day where public meetings, people were kind, they were polite, they were, you know, civil with each other and so forth. And now it is all about the performance. Let's talk for a few minutes, the time we have left, I want to talk to you about the role of public servants as culture shapers. You know, because we do have such an erosion of culture and there's, you know, there's culture could mean a lot of different things, but in the space of being a public servant, talk about how public servants can be culture shapers and not be seen as someone who is telling people what they should do, how they should act, what they should feel, for example, because I think those are probably pretty significant trigger points.
Brooks Williams: I think they are. I think, you know, we talk about in our organization, we don't care how good the strategy is, the culture will eat it for lunch. That's just a fact.
I don't care what anything is on paper. I don't care what your strategic plan looks like. I don't care what your comprehensive improvement plan looks like.
Your strategy will get eaten for lunch by your culture. You have to have a culture that is rooted in a set of core values that is focused on the community, and that is focused on doing the right things. And so I think our job as leaders in public service is to shape culture.
And I think you, you know, you've mentioned bringing up people's thoughts and feelings, how they should feel or what they should do. I don't think our job is to dictate to anybody what they should do or how they should feel. I think our job is to respect everybody as human beings. I think our job is to respect that everybody has a different point of view and a different lived experience.
And I think our job is to say, but you know what, this is the baseline for where we are as government. Right? This is the baseline of how we're gonna operate and what we're gonna do. This is a set of standards that we're going to have as your government, and we are going to put that forward and we are going to show you what that is.
But as far as us dictating to you how you should feel about it or how you want to feel about it as something different. If you want to question it, please question it. If you want to disagree with it, please disagree with it. I don't have a problem with with rational disagreements on how we move forward as government, but I do think that it is our job to model honesty, to model integrity, to model sustainability.
I think it is our job to model innovation as leaders in the public space and to show people that we can be different than what has been. But I think to get into the business of trying to control people as far as to your point, their thoughts and feelings, I don't know that that's really what our job is.
I do think, and we do it here, I spend a lot of time talking about with our community. How I think that we should process information and come forward and react, right? What the appropriate way is to approach your government and to approach those things that you have questions about. At the end of the day, you may still have the same opinion you have after we go through that process, but my request of them is always, let's approach it with the right intent.
So, I think our job as public servants and leaders is to, again, help people see. Look at the intent, right? Start with what is your, what is your purpose in questioning this? Why? And then at the end of the day, make the conclusion or draw the conclusion that you have, but then also teach how do you respectfully and appropriately disagree with it and communicate that versus again, going to Facebook, creating outrage, doing those things.
So, I do some very crazy stuff, like pick up phones and call people. I meet with people one-on-one over coffee. I go to their house and talk to them because I
think it's,
Michelle Rathman: That’s insane, Brooks!
Brooks Williams: It's insane. Right? But it's amazing. It is amazing. It is just what happens when we do that, when we go eyeball to eyeball with each other and we realize, wait a minute, you're, you're not the demon that somebody said you were.
Right? And I think that what we have to teach people above all else, and I mean this, I truly do, is to hope for or seek the demise of another person or an institution, is the job description of a demon. And that's not what we should be doing. And if we can teach people that, and we can teach people that it's okay to disagree, but there has to be some level of respect that exists between us as we move forward, then I think we're doing our job.
Michelle Rathman: Yeah, you know, there's a wonderful saying, I hate to sound so cliche this morning, but relationships are built at the speed of trust. And I think that is how we get, we start to, you know, chisel away at that, all the layers of crap, if you will, that have been built up by outrage and the distrust that it, that it unfortunately has really kind of built like plaque.
Brooks Williams: Yeah. And you know what? I, I leave, I leave people's houses sometimes, and at the end of the day, they still don't like me and they're okay. And they, and they'll tell me they, they still are not my biggest fan. They understand why the decision was made, or they understand how we got to where we are, but they still don't like it or they still don't like me.
And you know what?
That's okay. Yeah, That's okay.
Michelle Rathman: That's a huge win. That's a huge win in my book. All right. So Brooks, usually I end by asking our guests, because we do focus so much on policy. And I just, think this conversation for me in particular has been so enlightening. Instead of asking you about like what's in your advocacy toolkit and all that, I do want to ask you about you writing your book.
I mean, we have to look for solutions. These are great, unbelievably great concepts. And we're going to make sure we put links on our website, theruralimpact.com. for your book, but you talk about the fact that ideas around strengthening civic literacy, we've had many conversations on this podcast about the need to build civic muscle and what that means, but civic literacy and education and inclusive public engagement, why is this critical? And any advice on how we take this and turn it into reality for those who are saying we need to have a sea change, a shift from outrage to...
What would be the next, you get out of outrage and you move the dial ever so slightly to the point where we can at least be civil and have this, as you say, you know, the public trust and civil discourse.
Brooks Williams: Sure, so A squared plus B squared equals C squared is what? The Pythagorean Theorem, we all remember it from school. Unless you're an engineer or went into some field of mathematics, it serves you very little good to know that. But we make sure every kid in America knows that as they go through school.
Yet we are not teaching kids how to properly engage with their government. We are not teaching kids basic civics anymore. We are not teaching kids the things that actually impact their lives on a day-to-day basis. And I think it is a fundamental failure of our education system in that way. And I could name a hundred other things like that, that we do, that we, and we spend time fighting over, whether it's in the curriculum or not, but we are raising a generation that does not understand basic civics and what it means.
And what they are learning and well, and I should say we're raising through our formal education process, we are, but I'm gonna tell you, they are learning how to engage and they are learning what it means, and what they're learning is the bastardized process that we have allowed to be shown to them through social media and other formats.
And unfortunately, that's what they know as truth because they're hearing it over and seeing it over and over and over again. And so I do believe that there needs to be a fundamental shift back towards teaching civics at a very basic level throughout people's time in school. I don't think that it is bad for local governments to teach civics lessons, have open classes like you would anything else, and offer the opportunity for people to come.
Where we are, we have something called Ferris University, and it is a 10-week program and we walk people through every single department of the city, how it works, why it works, what makes it tick, what's the basics around the civics of it. Where does it come from? Why do we budget this way? Who says we had to do that? Why can't we operate more like a business? We try to pull back the layers on everything so that they can understand it from a very basic civics point of view. And I think that's important for local governments to do and to open it up for everybody.
Michelle Rathman: How has that approach changed Ferris?
Brooks Williams: I think it not, I think, I know those that have attended it have turned into ambassadors for the community. When you see things now on Facebook of why didn't the city do, you'll see somebody, an ambassador is what we call 'em from our, from our, yes,
Michelle Rathman: Empowered
Brooks Williams: they're empowered with information and they say, you know, I actually learned in the class that I took, these are the reasons why that can't happen, or these are the things that actually go into them making that decision. And what that changes is us.
If we say it. It's, yeah, right. You're just lying to try to get out of it. Now what you have are people in the community, your neighbor, your friend, the people you go to church with, the people that are on your son's baseball team, right?
They're the ones saying, hang on, friend, let me, lemme take a minute and educate you as to why that is. It fundamentally changes the conversation in the community and changes the way that people perceive things. And I think that there is incredible power behind that and that's something that we, we have to do more of.
Michelle Rathman: Yeah. We had Cynthia Wallace from the New Rural Project down a few months ago out of North Carolina, and they engaged braver shops and beauty shops and for the exact same reason. And because now you're, now you're hearing it from those whom you already have a relationship with that you trust. I love that idea. Oh my gosh, Brooks. I'm going to say, I would love to have you come back. Maybe, maybe we'll have a how-to webinar on how you set up, establish exactly what you described.
I do encourage folks to follow Brooks. Where can they read your blogs? And they are incredibly insightful. And I love watching how people engage with you and how measured you are with your responses. Cause some people like to come at you with outrage. You just, you're pretty level. Yeah.
Brooks Williams: I appreciate it. They do. Some do, and I just try to be very, to your point, very measured. Yeah. So yeah, I do post a lot on LinkedIn. Uh, all of my posting is through LinkedIn. And so please take a look at it and read it. And I tell people all the time, I don't expect you to agree with everything.
Nothing I say is meant to be an attack on anybody. It's to really peel back the layers and let people see what it is that we do in local government and the challenges that we face as administrators, because I think that they need to see that.
And I spend a lot of time telling people, you know, the the people or the entities that you're criticizing, there are real people behind that. People that are putting their blood, sweat and tears into it to try to make it a better place for you and give them that opportunity.
And I, you know, I think one of the ways that I, I hope to really walk through these trust builders kinda like I was talking about is, I'm writing a third book, it's called "Parables of Public Trust." It's really short stories about the way we've gone through and built public trust and what I think we others can do to build that public trust. And so I hope people will go to LinkedIn and read those blogs and understand that the intent behind it, and I hope they engage if they agree or they disagree because again, I think rational discourse is 100% okay for us to have.
Michelle Rathman: Yeah, it sure is better than the alternative. I'm gonna show people the books cover right here. You can see all my little post notes on it, Performative Outrage, How Manufactured Fury Undermines Local Government and Public Service.
And we cannot afford any more of the erosion of these systems. It's imperative that we build and strengthen our local governments. Because at the end of the day, we've got a lot of challenges on the federal government side. We need our local governments to be effective and you cannot be effective when you're operating from a place of just pure outrage, rage, hate and so forth. Brooks Williams, it's been a joy to have you on. I really do appreciate your words of wisdom. And again, you are welcome back anytime.
Brooks Williams: Thank you, Michelle. I appreciate it very much.
Michelle Rathman: All right, so for the rest of you, we know we have to say a bit of farewell to Brooks, but don't go anywhere because we are gonna be back in just a few minutes. But first I want you to hear from our really important partner that is the National Association of Rural Health Clinics. Sit tight.
Michelle Rathman: My sincere thanks to Brooks and all the wisdom that he shared with us today. And as I said, from the top, we're gonna make sure that we put the links to Brooks' books. There's more than one on our website. You can easily find us at theruralimpact.com. And while you're there, just take a few extra seconds to become a subscriber.
When you do we'll, make sure that you get our show recap, e-blast, and previews of what's to come in your inbox. Every four to six weeks. We don't wanna clutter your inbox, we just wanna share important information that we believe you will find helpful. With that said, I also wanna make sure that I, give a special thanks to our partners at the National Association of Rural Health Clinics.
And if you are interested to learn how we can help you expand your rural reach, again on our website, there's a really easy way to find a partner's page and you could download our media kit and learn how we can again, help you expand your rural reach. Lastly, a few quick shout outs, and the first is to the Rural Urban Bridge Initiative and their Beyond Resistance Campaign, which aims to reclaim our nation for the workers who have built it.
Again, we're gonna make sure that we have links to the Rural Urban Bridge Initiative on our website. And again, while you're there, make sure you just drop us a comment, leave us a note, let us know the kinds of conversations you would like to have us have. We are always appreciative for your feedback.
Lastly, I just wanna make sure that I thank Brea Corsaro, our associate producer, and Sarah Staub for her amazing technical and creative work on this podcast. I couldn't do it without either one of you. So again, thank you from the bottom, middle, and top of my heart for all that you do. Until we're together again, my friends, my old ones and new ones, just a quick reminder to take the best possible care of yourself and to the best of your ability those around you. We will see you again on a brand new episode of The Rural Impact.
