Mapping the Progressive Politics/Social Justice Divide

Update: Adrienne MAREE Brown, whose name I've been mispelling all over town, sent me an email about this blog post and asked that I post a clarifcation explaining her thought process behind this graph/matrix. Here's what she had to say:

"This map is meant to show the scope of what I consider the 'intermediary' realm of organizing - formal non-profits more than grassroots organizers (we get the two communities VERY confused here in the US, leading to confused identity, shame, competition and delusions of grandeur...rarely leading to significant lasting social change, which we all deeply want). It was drawn to show where I see The Ruckus Society in relation to a lot of other groups which are providing tools and support to organizers, but also to show that this full range of organizations exist in the same realm...in that realm folks are elbowing over resources and fighting to make the same words sound exciting and new.

I've written a lot on reform vs. revolution, I always come to a both/and conclusion. My dream would be that this full range of folks were working with each other more respectfully and strategically within the quadrant to support the small fragment of the puzzle we cover, stretching to make sure there are no gaps in meeting the needs of a movement for change. But that starts with acknowledging where we are. I would love for this to be a growing tool that could be handed to frontline organizers so that they could self evaluate and then see which intermediary non-profits they should turn to for support and resources. Feedback welcome!" --Adrienne

But seriously, the chart (map? matrix?) above comes from a discussion I had with Adrienne Maree Brown, co-founder of the League of Young Voters and now ED of Ruckus Society. We were talking about the divide within the progressive movement between those whose work and centers on electoral politics and the Democratic Party as a vehicle for change, and those who perceive their work to be part of a social justice movement steeped in community organizing. I have been grappling with this divide for a while, and even blogged about it a few months ago.

During our conversation, Adrienne grabbed my notepad and, cocktail napkin-style, drew out a less populated version of this graph to explain how she perceived that divide. Not having time to photo-shop something together, I redrew this by hand earlier today, added in a lot of the major organizations that are part of the 2003-2005 ".org Boom," and snapped a photo with my camera.

Here's how it works. The X Axis runs from Mainstream to Radical (or from "Reformer to Revolutionary" in terms of social change). The further right an organization is, the more dedicated it's members and leaders are to radical or revolutionary change in our system of government and it's policies. The further left, the more mainstream and/or part of the current system. On the Y Axis, the further towards the top a group is, the more likely they are to be involved with the Democratic Party or dedicated to the idea of change through electoral politics with the Democratic Party as the primary vehicle for that change. The further down, the more likely they are to lack faith in or eschew the electoral system in favor of community organizing and participation in an issue based social justice movement. There's a racial/class component to this as well. The further down you go on the Y Axis, the more likely the groups you encounter - their memberships and the communities they serve - are rooted in low income communities and communities of color. That's not a hard and fast rule, but as a generality it's fairly accurate.

I think it's a great formulation, and I have to thank Adrienne, because before our conversation I was only looking at this problem along the Y Axis. Now, I can even imagine adding a Z Axis to plot which groups are top down and hierarchical vs. those that are member driven, decentralized, participatory.

When we plot it out like this, some things immediately jump out. Almost all of the entrepreneurial activity in youth organizing is clustered in the upper left quadrant. The ".org Boom" of recent years consists primarily of new organizations created by people who view electoral politics as their primary vehicle for social change, and it's mostly happening midway between mainstream/revolutionary, but more towards the mainstream than anything else. If this is a revolution - or part of a larger revolution, it's not a progressive revolution so much as it's a revolution in a certain segment of democratic politics

This isn't all that surprising. Most organizers on the other ends of the spectrums don't have access to the resources required to bootstrap a national or even state-wide organization. So while there may be tens or hundreds or even thousands of very small local social justice/revolutionary groups that sprung up in the last few years, we don't hear about them precisely because they are hyper local, and disconnected from electoral politics, which is where all of our attention focused (I speak for myself as someone involved in one of those "midway" groups, and also someone who came up through the Dean movement and early netroots).

The biggest problem here is not that all these organizations are divided along these two spectrums and don't mesh in their tactics, strategies, or theories of change. After all, it would be pointless to try to flatten this map. The depth exists because different communities respond differently to certain types of organizing. There are reasons some folks choose to organize via the electoral system while for others its a non-starter, and each group listed above is generally organizing in the best way possible for its particular constituency/community.

The problem is that there are so few organizations at all in those other quadrants, and those that do exist have very little funding. It means that the larger progressive movement (and I say this recognizing that the term progressive itself belongs at the upper left quadrant of this map) is excluding, or at least not effectively engaging, whole swaths of its natural base. It's not just about the extremes, either. A similar problem persists among organizations that occupy the middle ground; groups like The League and DMI scholars, who operate equally in the worlds of electoral and social justice organizing. These groups can build bridges and help those on either side effectively communicate and collaborate. They're the groups that can explain the concerns of the radicals and social justice activists to those ensconced in the electoral system. They are also the groups that can explain the value and importance of electoral politics to those who have otherwise given up on the system. But they are few and far between, and not well funded. Without those bridge-building, translator organizations, we are less coherent a movement.

One more point. I mentioned (very briefly) that there was a racial and class element to this. In making that argument, I don't mean to imply that the organizations that comprise the .org Boom are run by and for a bunch of white rich kids. That's not only false, but somewhat facile an explanation. Most of these groups are diverse, and many of them do their damndest to comp the costs of trainings, offer paid internships, and generally knock down as many barriers to participation in their programs as possible. Nevertheless, many of them recruit among young professionals or college students - demographics that are already selective and who exclude those who are priced out of college or work low-wage jobs. That's why this divide is much more than a strict race/class divide. It's about a mindset and theories of social change just as much as it is about any privilege of race or class and how those factors impact one's opportunities to participate.

Thank again to Adrienne for putting my thoughts onto this track. And apologies to groups who may feel that I've incorrectly plotted them on this map. It's all pretty loose, a little subjective, and the allotted space certainly distorts things. I think there are lot of groups that overlap a lot more than I depict here. And I'm sure people will want to quibble about their place on the left/right spectrum based on one issue position or another. If you think I've placed an org you work for or are involved with in the wrong spot, please let me know in the comments.