The Power of Proxy Activism

By David Brin, Ph.D.

http://www.davidbrin.com/proxyactivism.html

As a participant in several "philanthropy discussion lists," I have time and again

seen the same concern expressed -- that too much attention is paid to large donors,
governments and corporations. We also should seek ways to stimulate charity and
activism at the ground level. What's needed is vigorous engagement by private
citizens in the problems and concerns of our time.

In view of how generous Americans are in times of crisis, how can the goodness of
average people become better leveraged, especially during intervals between crises?
How shall we best stimulate our fellow citizens to get involved?

Some of you have seen the following idea before. (I touted it 15 years ago, in the
afterword to my novel Earth.) Still, it bears repeating. The thing that I call
"Proxy Power" may, at one level, seem obvious. And yet, I feel that it's deeply
under-considered.

Proxy Power is the uniquely convenient -- but seldom discussed -- ability of a

modern person to participate in activism... helping to change or improve the
world... by the simple expedience of joining some group that is vigorously pursuing
that part of your personal agenda. In other words, you add both your membership
dues and the political impact of your membership, in order to get behind people who
are striving to save the world for you.

There is a wide and eclectic
groups that you select will,
people who agitate -- or act
magazine or web site. Hence,
your own hopes and goals for
variety of such organizations to choose from. The
presumably, contain passionate and well-informed
-- in ways that are explicitly laid out in the group's
you can know in advance how well their program matches
the world.

Of course, millions of people already do this. In fact, the expansive range of

activist organizations can be looked upon as a vast market place, selling options
on a better world. Every person's list of memberships is different, reflecting a
particular -- or peculiar -- set of values and concerns. A set that can adjust
yearly, depending on the individual's passion and available cash. Millions of
dollars in membership dues pour through organizations that range from The Sierra
Club and Habitat for Humanity to the Feral Cat Society, empowering and encouraging
these groups to keep fighting or doing good works.

Still, I find that many seem reluctant to talk about this marketplace of proxy
activism, or even to view it as genuine philanthropy. Perhaps some people find it
somewhat shameful to rely upon others, in lieu of direct involvement or genuine
sacrifice. If you cannot swing a hammer or wield a stethoscope, you should donate
large lumps of cash to those who do, and then donate more until it hurts.

Otherwise, aren't you just a dilettante? Generosity isn't supposed to be

convenient. Indeed, doesn't convenience make charity look less... well...
charitable?

Baloney. In a nutshell, if convenience lets people do more, why not? The modern
appeal of this approach deserves praise, not disdain.

Anyway, try to look at the big picture. Ten million people, each donating $25 to a
dozen activist organizations, would add up to $3 Billion, sent to groups whose
professional staff may know far better how to use the money, than most of those ten
million passive members. Members who could never find the time or expertise anyway,
to do much on their own.

[image from Old Dominion University]

I think this is a deeply under-rated aspect of activism in modern life. And it has
under-recognized potential. While fanatical groups have become very good at fund
raising -- especially through morally coerced church tithing -- Proxy Power
represents the alternative for busy moderates, whose lives and work and kid
schedules simply will not let them study or devote huge amounts of time, passion
and cash to saving the world.

My own list -- those organizations that I join or assist, yearly or occasionally --

is given in the sidebar. These aren't my only charitable endeavors -- not by a long
shot. Still, I am glad they help to fill out my own busy agenda of to-do project --
those that I'm too harried and busy to take on by myself. Instead, I can send my
dues, vicariously participate by flipping pages in their magazine, then put it in a
public library and get on with life, knowing I've empowered others to work in my
behalf. In a dozen areas.

[image from unaidspcbngo.org]

Yes, there are dangers. Some people may pick up their copy of OXFAM or SIERRA
magazine and say "There! I've saved the world." and walk away. This certainly
happens.

Another possible drawback: the citizen may join an organization that is all show
and no substance, or whose efficiency score is very low, devoting most of dues-
income to further fund raising. Others object to membership magazines that are too
expensive, glossy or ecologically wasteful. (Some organizations make the magazine
optional.)

But I don't see these as flaws in the overall concept. Not compared to the benefits
of proxy activism. Indeed, what appears to happen quite often is an interesting
psychological quirk. Simply by virtue of having joined one activist group, a member
starts to think of herself or himself as that type of person. It is easier to
persuade them to donate double-dues, next year. Or to join another organization, to
address yet another sector of that person's own, perceived problem-space.

Essentially, what Proxy Power does is offer a wide array of activism products to
consumers, well-packaged and pursued by devoted staff. It is a capitalist-style
market of competing organizations -- often using gloss and style as part of their
pitch -- presenting the small donor with a whole supermarket of philanthropic or
activist choices.

Isn't that what we want?

(And yes, some of our chosen charities will oppose or cancel each other! Some
people send money to the Heritage Foundation, which opposes my libertarians and
democrats in almost every way, relentlessly seeking to re-establish rule by
aristocratic lords. So? The whole pragmatic method of the Enlightenment has been to
foster lots of open ferment and competition. When it works, the result is a NET
movement for the good of all. It is when such groups act to squelch others, erect
barriers of secrecy, or evade debate, that we get a warped process.)

I am convinced that we need to look at this whole realm of activity with more than
a cynical glance. It is working. It does good. Moreover, it does not ask of our
fellow citizens -- the busy ones, with frenetic jobs and kids and school schedules
-- more time than they feel they can commit. (And time is the precious limited
commodity!)

Some contend that, by taking this approach, you'll fritter your charity dollars in
small bits, when a single, large donation may have more direct impact. There is
some validity to this point. On the other hand, this ignores how your contribution
is effectively doubled each time you join a worthy group. Because they then also
gain political impact and momentum, with every increase of their membership rolls.
As paid numbers increase, they are better able to lobby... or to approach large
donors and say "help leverage our momentum with a big contribution." (This means
that even undergrads in a dorm room, who join at the Student Rate, are doing good.)

Finally, Proxy Power offers a unique service to each donor. You get to create a
profile of your own personality, your passion and commitment, by choosing a dozen
groups who will be your deputies in saving the world, while you are too busy to
save it, yourself.

Is it possible that this concept may even deserve some stimulating investment by
bigtime philanthropy? What if some millionaire funded a small effort to get Proxy
Activism out there, as a universal desideratum. A minimum expectation of any self-
respecting citizen. One million dollars, spent pump-priming, in order to get
several million more Americans joining this vigorous marketplace of problem-solving
solutions, each one following his or her own sovereign instincts about optimizing
tomorrow. Might this add up and multiply the effect, many times over?

Radicals of all kinds are already connected and tithing (and marching and arm-
twisting politicians). But moderate citizens? Yes, they send a check and bags of
clothes in a crisis. But day to day?

To average folks, the world seems frustratingly big and daunting. "What can just
one person do?" they (quite reasonably) ask.

What if someone got on TV and showed just how broad and vividly creative is the
vast array of excellent active organizations. Moreover, suppose a few celebrity
spokespersons also said:

"No one is trying to convert you, or get you to pick any one of these groups. But
if you don't choose a FEW... sending dues to people who believe what you believe...
who will help to save the world the way you want it saved... then aren't you simply
part of the problem?"

THE END