"The Drug Abuse Resistance Education program ( DARE) and Mothers Against Drunk Driving ( MADD) both got their starts in the nineteen-eighties. MADD emerged as one of the greatest examples of grassroots political activism in modern America, but DARE has been judged mostly a failure. Why did one flourish while the other proved to be merely a passing fad? Duhigg argues that the answer is in the difference between "mobilizing" and "organizing.""
"DARE raised a lot of money, disseminated an anti-drug curriculum across the country, and held big rallies; it mobilized people into action. MADD, on the other hand, empowered local volunteers to make their own decisions about how to fight for the cause. "Mobilizing is about getting people to do a thing," a political scientist cited by Duhigg explains. "Organizing is about getting people to become the kind of people who do what needs to be done.""
Democratic strategists face the challenge of building a durable voter coalition by learning from historical activist groups. The Drug Abuse Resistance Education program raised funds, spread an anti-drug curriculum nationwide, and staged large rallies but failed to sustain long-term engagement. Mothers Against Drunk Driving empowered local volunteers to make autonomous tactical decisions and developed enduring grassroots power. The distinction between mobilizing—getting people to perform actions—and organizing—creating people who continually do the work—determines longevity. The political right has constructed local, neighbor-to-neighbor infrastructures and franchise networks, like the Faith & Freedom Coalition, that convert institutional ties into political activation. Digital tools aid rapid scaling but cannot fully substitute for localized organizing.
Read at The New Yorker
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]