"The last thing that I would point out is this:

   I think the history of canvassing over the last 30 years shows it to be a very cost-effective way of acquiring a donor list.

Hmmm. What else has characterized the left over that same exact period? Stagnation. Decline. Destruction of labor/environmental/consumer protections. Lossing (over and over).

Coincidence? I think not.

It's time to scare the foxes out of the henhouse, it's time to purge the PIRGS from the party!"

Alex, I'm pretty sure we're mostly on the same page here. I definately agree that a canvass without a larger strategy is potentially dangerous to a progressive movement. I agree that The Fund's model does a poor job of cultivating progressive activists.

I'm not sure I'm a partisan of the thought that this is therefore the strangulation of progressive politics, so much as it is a symptom of a larger abandonment of organizing and civic engagement in the post-CRM and anti-war movement world.

But this last part, that I quoted above (sorry I'm so html illiterate that I can't make the cool snippet box everyone else uses), I just have to say "correlation is not causation".

First, I only said 30 years because this kind of mass fundraising used across the country has only really been done for the last 30-40 years.

Second, the collapse of organizing is the result of a number of different trends including the rise of mass media and direct mail advertising for candidates, the rise of television itself, the decline of unions, and the collapse of 1950's and 1960's membership groups that fed the 1960's movements. I'd also throw in the creation of the 501c3 organization as a result of the 1956 revision to the tax code and the post 1974 reforms of the political money system. It ain't just the rise of canvassing.

'Nuff said. We're basically arguing about commas when we agree on the chapter.