As a political theorist, my research draws on the history of 19th and 20th century thought as a lens through which to examine the motivational sources of action in contemporary politics. In other words, I’m interested in how various features of our psychological makeup shape our motivations to act politically.

My first book, Contesting Conformity: Democracy and the Paradox of Political Belonging (Oxford University Press, 2020) brings a fresh interpretive lens to the writings of Alexis de Tocqueville, John Stuart Mill, and Friedrich Nietzsche in order to investigate the notion of non-conformity and its relationship to modern democracy. Drawing new insight from their work, the book argues that non-conformity is an intractable issue for democracy. While non-conformity is often important for cultivating a most just polity, non-conformity can also undermine democracy. Insofar as democracy depends on the ability of each citizen to exercise individual judgment, express their views, and dissent when necessary, Tocqueville and Mill enable us to appreciate non-conformity as an ethical and political ideal for democratic citizens. However, non-conformity can also undermine democracy, as Nietzsche helps us see, insofar as unconstrained expressions of non-conformity may stand in tension with the moral and political equality that is constitutive of democracy. So while non-conformity is valuable for democracy, non-conformity is not necessarily democratic. This book draws on the work of Tocqueville, Mill, and Nietzsche for understanding this intractable relationship and offers resources for navigating the relationship in contemporary democracies in ways that promote justice and freedom. Articles drawn from this project have been published in Constellations (2017) and Philosophy & Social Criticism (2015).

Since Contesting Conformity, I have turned my attention to the kinds of motivations necessary for generating social change in contexts of historical injustice. This is the focus of my second book project, White Losses: Moral Psychology and the Demands of Racial Justice, which is under advance contract at Oxford University Press. This project employs the thought of Ida B. Wells-Barnett, W.E.B. Du Bois, and James Baldwin—in conjunction with analyses of popular forms of American liberalism and contemporary political theory—to illuminate the psychological transformations required by members of historically dominant groups for the sake of a more egalitarian society. Articles drawn from this project have been been published in The Journal of Politics (2021), Polity (2022), and Political Theory (2024). This project has been generously supported by the Oklahoma Center for the Humanities, the W.E.B. Du Bois Center, and the National Humanities Center.