I cheated! Googing away...The below was published in Crossroads, a journal that was an attempt from (mostly) ex-Line of March and CofC to dialogue with the broad left. "Market Leftism: Money, Machines and the Left's Decline"
Nathan Newman and Anders Schneiderman connect the proliferation of "market leftist" organizations and the decline of progressive politics... In the mid-90's, John Judis in Ther American Prospect wrote a piece saying much the same. This piece is collected in, "Ticking Time Bombs: The New Conservative Assaults on Democracy Robert L. Kuttner, editor; published in conjunction with The American Prospect. The New Press. Mark Dowie has a new book on Foundations from M.I.T. Press. The Nation - Selected Feature Selected Feature Why Do Progressive Foundations Give Too Little To Too Many? By Michael H. Shuman The National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy recently reported that between 1992 and 1994, twelve major foundations on the right, often working in concert, pumped more than $200 million ... http://past.thenation.com/issue/980112/0112shum.htm Michael Pugliese >--- Original Message --- >From: Charles Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Date: 4/3/02 6:52:17 AM > > Speaking of What's Left >by Ian Murray >02 April 2002 15:44 UTC > > > >=============================== > >Please count the young people for us : > >Today, "the left" >is really a professional apparatus of leaders, a fundraising >machine, and mailing lists that no one bothers to mobilize. >Instead of establishing a human relationship, a phone call >or a door-knock or a letter from a progressive group is >almost always just a way to raise money. As a result, more >and more young people are refusing to even answer their >doors or phones when political groups call -- which isn't >often, because young people can't make large contributions >of cash that attract contact by progressive organizations. >.... Market leftism gives young >activists and the rest of the left the same kind of >"choices" that the "free market" offers us for getting where >we want to go. We can "choose" between several brands of >(used) cars; we just can't choose to build a better system >of mass transit. > The only people who really get to "choose" the >direction the left takes are the big money foundations and >governments. A few years ago, Michael Albert at Z Magazine >estimated that progressive organizations have raised an >impressive $1 billion in the last 25 years. But because the >left is so fragmented, progressives don't really control >this capital. Instead, many progressive organizations are >dependent on foundation and government money. In a sense, >the foundations and governments are the venture capitalists >of the left -- and that venture capital can dry up when >foundation or government elite fads change or when groups >get too radical. > So what should our generation of young activists make >of this undemocratic disaster? We could just blame it on the >power-hungry, graying activists who find it more comfortable >to run their own small bureaucracy than participate in a >broader movement. But that's too easy an answer. The present >mess is a result of the efforts of another generation of >young activists who fought for democracy and youth >participation. We need to understand their struggles to >understand what we need to go today. > The Sixties youth rejected the centralized, >bureaucratic democratic decision-making of the unions, >parties, and the established civil rights organizations (the >legacy of another generation of young activists). Instead, >organizations like Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) >and the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) >believed in the ideal of engaged "participatory democracy. " >They believed this was more likely to occur in smaller, more >decentralized organizations where everyone could "do their >own thing." These smaller groups would also allow young >people to overcome the racism, sexism, imperialism, and >other shortcomings of the older, top-down organizations who >refused to respond to growing demands from the grassroots. > In the 1970s, the attitudes of SDS/SNCC, the women's >movement, and the new environmental ethic of "small is >beautiful" converged with the lawyer/lobbyist-driven >Naderite activism and the community organizing gospel of >Saul Alinsky. These ideas would spawn an explosion of >organizations, by some estimates leading to a total of as >many as two million citizen groups encompassing 15 million >people by the 1980s. Since many organizations were too small >to support themselves through their members, they relied on >assistance from the government and foundations. They >gradually became professionalized, and the goal of >democratic participation went by the wayside. > In 1980, Ronald Reagan was elected -- in no small part >because decentralized progressive groups could not unite to >effectively oppose him. Under Reagan and Bush, the federal >government "defunded the left" and many foundations followed >suit. As a result, the 1980s would demonstrate the limits of >participation without mass democracy. > With little ability to coordinate comprehensive >campaigns, each group had to retreat more and more to single >issues to maintain its funding ability. Vibrant democratic >community organizations might continue to exist at the local >level, but the dreams of a national upswell of >"participatory democracy" had given way to an alphabet soup >of competing non-profits and an alientated membership. > >TOWARD GRASSROOTS MOBILIZATION > > So what are we to do? > Our generation needs to bring together the ideals of >two previous generations: the 1930s ideals of solidarity in >one movement -- "the One Big Union" -- and the Sixties ideal >of full participation by everyone in "the movement." We live >in a world where police brutality, the lack of jobs, the >collapse of the educational system, racism, sexism, >homelessness, attacks on immigrants, and international >economic blackmail are too closely intertwined to split into >five contribution checks each month or 20 disconnected >meetings each week. But we also have to fight for the ideal >of grassroots democracy in all aspects of a unified >movement, the ability of minority views to be heard at all >times, and the ability to promote creative actions within >that broad umbrella. > What our generation of activists brings to "the >movement" is a greater sense of how that has to be >accomplished: with respect for the integrity of different >communities in our multi-cultural society and a rejection of >the petty sectarianism that has divided the left. In the >environmental justice movement, we now see the melding of >environmentalism and community activism on just that basis. >And new radical union organizing campaigns like Justice for >Janitors are melding the discipline of labor with the energy >of the racial communities that are the most exploited >workers in our society. If we are to mobilize the youth of >all races and classes to social justice, we need to build >just these kinds of trust across issues and organizations to >build the broad democratic movement of the left. > To do so, we need to move away from a focus on >foundations, government, or "boiler rooms" and towards an >active focus on grassroots-based mobilization. For example, >we might set up a structure where grassroots groups collect >funds and organize themselves on whatever basis makes the >most sense locally but pay some percentage of those funds to >the broader unified movement for long-term investments in >new organizing and youth training. Unions operate on this >principle in organizing different industries and places; >the same could be applied to organizing different >communities or different styles of progressive organization. > But we can't count on the petty, graying McDictators of >the left to make these changes. Young activists will have to >fight from below and force progressive groups to start >working together. We need to push them to move beyond >temporary coalitions and create a funded umbrella >organization which can revitalize the dreams of democratic, >grassroots empowerment. Ultimately, it is up to our >generation to restore "one person, one vote" and get "the >movement" back on the track of true democracy. > >[Guess the author...............] > >_______________ > > >Glad you are grabbing the torch of practical-critical activity, Ian. Take it and run with it ! > >Charles > > >l wayside. > In 1980, Ronald Re > >
