Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Democracy Donors: Let's Make Lemonade Out Of Lemons

The gauntlet has been thrown: People want change

Opinion

Democracy Donors: Let's Make Lemonade Out Of Lemons
people holding us a flag during daytime
Photo by Dyana Wing So on Unsplash

The United States, once hailed as the world’s foremost pioneer of democracy, has lost its luster. In recent decades, complacency about its hallowed status has blunted the American establishment’s reckoning with our country’s democratic deterioration, fueled widespread disenchantment with the system, and paved the way for an authoritarian turn.

The first quarter of the 21st century has been marked by accelerating change, disquiet, and tumult. On the right and the left, among institutionalists and populists alike, people are signaling that the way democracy is practiced today isn’t meeting their needs. Nearly three-quarters of American voters don’t think their country is a good example of democratic governance.


The 2024 election results in the U.S. mirrored those in other liberal democracies: the incumbent candidate was rejected in favor of a populist disruptor with an authoritarian tilt. While these outcomes undeniably pose a serious threat to democracy, they must also be seen as presenting an unrivaled opportunity to lay the groundwork for democratic renewal and transformation, something that is sorely needed and too meekly confronted. Philanthropic actors are in a position to provide that nurture. To do so, however, they will need to rebalance their priorities.

Defense is necessary but insufficient

The cascade of actions that disregard democratic norms and practices, attack the administrative state, and challenge the separation of powers merit a robust response from pro-democracy actors. They will face pressure to react to every new shock to the system, as they have before.

Even before January, most philanthropic democracy funding had already been used to shore up existing institutions and electoral processes. This will mean even less mental space and fewer resources to identify opportunities for innovation and positive change amid all the chaos, disruption, and defensive responses, opportunities that ultimately will hold the key to making democracy work better.

The conundrum facing pro-democracy forces is protecting the foundational elements of our current democratic operating system while also renewing and reinvigorating our political and democratic practice with some much -needed system updates and applications. In other words, we must innovate, even as we selectively defend. And when we defend, we must also articulate a vision of what could be better, why it matters, and how it will affect people's daily lives.

Given the torrent of authoritarian and anti-democratic actions to respond to and the suboptimal nature of the status quo, donors will need to be more strategic, forward-thinking, and selective. They will need to refresh their strategies for a new era of disruption and use this democratic crisis to lay the groundwork for a version of democracy that will be broadly appealing to the public.

It’s widely taken for granted that the cornerstone of democracy is free and fair elections. In reality, though, democracy relies on so much more than elections (which, of course, can legitimately elect anti-democratic candidates). All too often neglected are several lanes of democracy work that focus on reinvigorating day-to-day democratic practice and changing how the public experiences a democratic form of government.

The U.S. federalist structure, which gives considerable power and authority to states and localities, creates opportunities for strengthening democracy at the subnational level, even under a presidency bent on weakening democratic institutions. It is, therefore, essential to cultivate democratic innovation at the state and local level while capitalizing where possible on select opportunities for national innovation.

Innovative efforts exist but need to be woven together

The good news is that ma ny actors are already advancing innovative strategies to reform and transform how we experience and practice democracy. Collectively, their work presents an opportunity to improve representation and access, amplify voice and agency, restore trust, strengthen our collective connective tissue, model successful problem-solving, create incentives for long-term thinking in politics, and improve government effectiveness. These are some of the areas that are ripe for expansion and support:

  • Use of technology to give a greater voice to the people and improve government effectiveness and performance, for example, by creating accessible platforms for engagement and channeling artificial intelligence to improve feedback mechanisms and enhance existing processes and delivery of services

Alongside these efforts, developing social infrastructure to improve cohesion, create shared understandings and aspirations, reduce polarization, and counter mis- and disinformation is critical. This could include community media, civic renewal initiatives, social media platforms, pro-social narrative content like speculative fiction that imagines how innovations could change democratic practice, and a TV series that shows us what a more positive future could be.

How Democracy Funders Can Help

In this unstable and rapidly changing environment, donors need to innovate to support democratic innovation and this emerging ecosystem of actors. As explained in Democracy Funders Network’s recent publication, transformational times call for fresh thinking and bold action. Donors need to be nimble and curious, humble about what they do and don’t know, take more risks, experiment and iterate, and be willing to fail to succeed. In short, donors must truly inhabit the “good ancestor” role by leveraging their assets, long lifespan, and independence for collective well-being.

Suzette Brooks Masters is a Senior Fellow at Democracy Funders Network, where she focuses on democratic innovation and renewal.

Read More

A portrait of John Adams.

John Adams warned that without virtue, republics collapse. Today, billionaire spending and unchecked wealth test whether America can place the common good above private gain.

John Adams Warned Us: A Republic Without Virtue Cannot Survive

John Adams understood a truth that feels even sharper today: a republic cannot endure without virtue. Writing to Mercy Otis Warren in April 1776, he warned that public Virtue cannot exist in a Nation without [private virtue], and public Virtue is the only Foundation of Republics.” For Adams, liberty would not be preserved by clever constitutions alone. It depended on citizens who could restrain their selfish impulses for the sake of the common good.

That insight has lost none of its force. Some people do restrain themselves. They accumulate enough to live well and then turn to service, family, or community. Others never stop. Given the chance, they gather wealth and power without limit. Left unchecked, selfishness concentrates material and social resources in the hands of a few, leaving many behind and eroding the sense of shared citizenship on which democracy depends.

Keep ReadingShow less
Protest sign, We the people.
Protests have been sparked across the country over the last few weeks.
Gene Gallin on Unsplash

Why Constitution Day Should Spark a Movement for a New Convention in 2037

Sept. 17 marked Constitution Day, grounded in a federal law commemorating the signing of the U.S. Constitution on Sept. 17, 1787. As explained by the courts of Maryland, “By law, all educational institutions receiving federal funding must observe Constitution Day. It is an opportunity to celebrate and discuss our Constitution and system of government.”

This week also marked the release of an important new book by the historian Jill Lepore: “We the People: A History of the U.S. Constitution” (as reviewed in the New York Times in a public link). Here’s an overview of her conclusions from the publisher:

Keep ReadingShow less
America’s Long History of Political Violence—and Why We Can’t Ignore It Now

Political violence has deep roots in American history. From 1968 to today, Jeanne Sheehan Zaino explore why violence remains a force for change in U.S. society.

Getty Images, B.S.P.I.

America’s Long History of Political Violence—and Why We Can’t Ignore It Now

In 1968, amid riots and assassinations, a magazine asked leading intellectuals why America was so violent. Among the responses was one that stood out—H. Rap Brown’s now-infamous line: “Violence is as American as cherry pie.”

Anthropologist Clifford Geertz dismissed the phrase as a cliché. But sociologist St. Clair Drake took it seriously. “However repulsive and shocking,” Drake wrote, Brown was “telling it like it is.” Americans, he said, must face the fact that their society is, by global standards, a very violent one.

Keep ReadingShow less

Political Violence Escalates: Charlie Kirk’s Assassination and the Fragility of Democracy

The appalling assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk while speaking at Utah Valley University marks another escalation in the dangerous normalization of political violence in the U.S. The murder of such a high-profile political figure underscores the fragility of democracy when disagreement is expressed not through debate or ballots but through the barrel of a gun. The tragedy must be understood as part of a broader pattern of radicalization, identity threat, and inadequate safeguards for candidates and elected officials.

After the assassination of a state legislator in Minnesota, we published an analysis on the psychological roots of political violence. That piece examined how violence is often driven more by deep psychological insecurity than by ideology, which political psychologists refer to as “defensive extremism.” Individuals who feel excluded, humiliated, or stripped of control can come to see violence as the only way to regain significance. This is especially true in contexts of rapid change, social isolation, or echo chambers that amplify grievances. As research indicates, the majority of violent acts are expressive rather than strategic eruptions of anger and fear, which are framed as moral or political necessities.

Keep ReadingShow less