TM Connect

Donate Now
Use "My TM" for log in & register.

Democracy Alliance decisions and ‘Do it again!’ games

Joyce L. Arnold, Liberally Independent, Queer Talk, equality activist, writer.

Earlier today Taylor wrote about the Democracy Alliance decision that dropped certain progressive groups. It so happened that I’d focused on the same thing today. We do that occasionally. Maybe it’s a liberal thing.

Anyway, check out Taylor’s piece. You can see the breaking story by Ryan Grim at HuffPo.

David Dayen at FireDogLake wrote about the DA decision:

I would argue that de-funding outside groups has been uniquely unhelpful to the progressive movement over the past few years. So here they go again.

I’d take another step in considering the DA decision. I agree with Dayen about the “here they go again” responsibility of those making decisions to dump and de-fund progressive groups “outside” the Democratic Party’s dominating influence. But I think that can be expanded. It’s kind of like kids at the stage in their development when they love knowing what’s going to happen because, in part, it gives them a sense of power and control, and so they request “Do that again!” That’s basically what the electorate, in general, tells the Duopoly, with every election: “Do that again!” The DA decision, it seems to me, is geared toward that same end.

The Democracy Alliance describes itself:

We are a first-of-its-kind partnership of changemakers who are committed to a stronger democracy and a more progressive America.

Launched in 2005, the Democracy Alliance (DA) was created to build progressive infrastructure that could help counter the well-funded and sophisticated conservative apparatus in the areas of civic engagement, leadership, media, and ideas.

DA does not directly fund progressive groups, but through two annual conferences, among other things, make connections between donors and organizations.

“Changemakers” is an interesting term. But how much “change” can take place when your decisions basically maintain the status quo? How much “change” can happen when voters keep telling Wannabe’s and Electeds, “Do that again!”

According to Dayen:

The Democracy Alliance came about as a way to replicate the culture of donating to movement infrastructure on the right. Through a roundabout process, members of the Democracy Alliance come together to hear presentations and support different progressive organizations.

Grim’s “Democracy Alliance Dumps Progressive Organizations” includes:

The donor network has long faced tension over how to build a progressive movement and bring about social change, particularly over whether to focus on electing Democrats in the next cycle or building lasting infrastructure. The group has faced particularly acute friction over deciding if it should devote funds to President Obama’s reelection or invest in more long-term projects.

Among those who support the creation of a progressive infrastructure, there is heavy debate over whether to fund organizations closely aligned with the Democratic Party or those that operating outside it and pressuring it to move in a more progressive direction.

The groups dropped by the Democracy Alliance tend to be those that work outside the party’s structure. Groups with closer ties to the party, such as the Center for American Progress and Media Matters, retained their status with the Democracy Alliance as favored organizations.

Included among those dropped by DA are Brave New Foundation (Robert Greenwald), Citizen Engagement Lab (James Rucker), Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW, with Melanie Sloan), NDN (Simon Rosenberg), Third Way, the Center for Progressive Leadership, the Advancement Project, Democracia, and Free Press.

According to Grim,

Groups working on issues relating directly to people of color appear to be the most dramatically affected.

America Votes, which works on electing Democrats, was retained, as were the Center for Community Change, Progressive Majority and the New Organizing Institute. …

Read Grim’s article for details about what the “dumped” organizations are accomplishing.
An official at DA explained the changes:

‘The recent decisions were part of a natural funding cycle that all philanthropic organizations go through.’ …

And the fact that we’re well into the 2012 version of “Do that again!” two party politics has nothing to do with it? From a now former DA member of the donor network:

… Deborah Sagner … said that the decision was in line with the group’s unfortunate drift toward supporting only groups closely allied to the Democratic Party. …

Why, many may be asking, haven’t we heard much about Democracy Alliance? Grim writes:

The Democracy Alliance maintains a low profile by forbidding recipients from talking publicly about the organization. But former recipients are under no such rules.

He adds this, from CREW’s head, Melanie Sloan:

‘CREW is very appreciative of the Democracy Alliance’s past support. … Still, at a time when Americans are increasingly concerned about the corrupting influence of money in our political system, it is disappointing the group has chosen to focus on other areas.’

All of this reminds me of the “Do that again!” stage of children’s development. There’s a sense of empowerment, of having an impact, when they know what will happen. Of course, that’s about something they enjoy. People saying, via organizational decisions and votes, “Do that again!” to Duopoly Electeds who clearly do not have our best interests in mind isn’t. Or if it is something “enjoyed,” then there’s another, very big problem involved. At some point kids move on to other ways of learning. But when it comes to the Two Party Front for the Oligarchy, there seems to be an insistence that voters keep saying, “Do that again!” while pretending something has changed.

About Joyce Arnold

Liberally Independent, Queer Talk beat, equality activist, writer.

, , , , , ,

7 Responses to Democracy Alliance decisions and ‘Do it again!’ games

  1. Taylor Marsh February 29, 2012 at 4:30 pm #

    Great minds again, Joyce. ;-)

    This is a very interesting story & important.  Appreciate your take very much.

     

    • Joyce Arnold February 29, 2012 at 4:44 pm #

      We might want to start keeping a list of when this sort of thing happens, with both of us focusing on the same thing, to see if there’s a pattern of some sort :)

  2. fangio February 29, 2012 at 5:11 pm #

    “  Democracy Alliance maintains a low profile by forbidding recipients from talking publicly about the organization. “  How very democratic of them.  What makes them any different than the Republican’s and their loyalty oaths.  Democracy is about the free exchange of information,  not forbidding it.  This is why I am a contributor to Free Press and pleased that they are no longer associated  with these people.  Everywhere you look these days someone or something is trying to stifle what you say or think.  This is the greatest danger to our society,  it is creeping fascism and it may already be to late to stop it.

    • Joyce Arnold February 29, 2012 at 6:05 pm #

      I like Free Press, too.

      By now, I’m not sure that “creeping” is strong enough. Efforts to, as you put it, “stifle what you say or do,” seem to be increasing, and in ways that are quite open. Those doing the “stifling” seem to think they can get away with it, and have little to nothing to hide. Wonder why they think that?

       

  3. Cujo359 February 29, 2012 at 6:03 pm #

    In my capacity of Mr. Optimism, I’ll point out that there is a potential benefit to this, assuming that these organizations survive. Big progressive organizations have for too long been far too unwilling to show independence from the Democratic Party. I know I’ve mentioned that feeling before here. Now I know a little more about why that lack of independence exists.

    In the long run, this should actually be good for progressives, since it’s very clear that the Democratic Party wants nothing to do with us anyway. In my case, that feeling has been mutual for quite some time now.

    As Bruce Willis said in Die Hard, “welcome to the party, Pal!”

    EDIT: I suppose I should add that yes, this certainly looks like another decision on the part of the Democratic Party to screw its base, no doubt assuming it won’t pay a price. Time will tell, I suppose, but there are certainly a lot of progressives who need to be given a wake-up slapping, and the party just did that today for some.

    • Joyce Arnold February 29, 2012 at 6:19 pm #

      I see this as possible good thing, too. And as I’m reading around at various places, I’m seeing quite a few people thinking the same way.

  4. TPAZ March 1, 2012 at 1:14 pm #

    It feels so good to be wanted, yes?