http://www.newpol.org/node/298
. . . the major political parties, both Republicans and Democrats, are creating new foundations and non-governmental organizations to expand the base of the parties and attract new voters. Those party think-tanks and NGOs in turn create what could be called pseudo-social movements, often describing themselves as "grassroots," though, in fact, they are created and controlled from above by inside-the-beltway D.C. organizations. . . . we're witnessing the development of a new corporatism in American politics.
some (partial) background poli-sci:The ultimate goal of the Republican and Democratic Party neo-corporatism is to prevent the development of independent political parties which might disrupt the regular rotation to power of the two capitalist parties.
for years i thought of corporatism in politics as strictly right-wing stuff. but as the following examples show, the left side of the aisle has had some success with corporate-driven, or top-down "grass roots."More recently, the Republican Party's economic conservatives, still representing the interests of finance, industry, and oil, also both helped to create the evangelical religious right which acted to draw lower middle class and working class white voters into the party's fold. Perhaps the starting point of the neo-corporatist organization of politics was with Jerry Falwell's Moral Majority, established in 1979. . . .
Similarly, with the rise of the civil rights movement of the 1960s, the Democratic Party succeeded in drawing in and subordinating the NAACP . . . The organized women's movement too succumbed. The workers movement of the 1930s, the civil rights organizations in the 1960s, and the women's groups in the 1970s had all been tumultuous movements, but once gathered into the Democratic fold they ossified. . . . .When these groups pressed hard enough, the Democrats would take up their cause, and often even a token effort proved to be enough to continue winning the votes of workers, African Americans, Latinos and women. . . .
MoveOn.org provided the prototype of the a group created and commanded by Democratic party loyalists who wished to use the organization to both create and contain a social movement, a movement which might otherwise have found its way into other more independent channels . . .
After the election of Barack Obama, the same core group that had created CCIR founded a new group, Reform Immigration for America (RIFA) . . . Genuine grassroots immigrant groups and their allies will have little if any voice in the political process of passing some sort of immigration reform, which will remain in the hand of the Democratic Party. The Democrats will subordinate RIFA to their aims
By January 2009 the Tea Party had been born -- and while the proliferation of Tea Party websites, organizations, political programs, and ideological orientations gave the impression of a genuine grassroots movement, in fact the Republican Party and its most conservative think-tanks backed by the corporations had quickly taken command of the group.
. . . at this point most independent anti-war activists are working to build a new independent anti-war coalition of some sort. Certainly the continuing war in Iraq, the expansion of the war in Afghanistan, and the shameful drone attacks on Pakistan which have killed civilians demand that we build a new anti-war movement, and MoveOn.org, with its commitment to the President and the Democrats cannot and will not provide leadership. Ultimately, for those of us who work in the grassroots, the point is this: We need no condescending gardeners.
