Speaking generally, it seems like we're moving toward a two-level model. On one hand, most national organizations being centralized and focusing their members' attention on DC (which is also the most effective way for them to raise small dollars); in contrast, state-based and locally-based organizations are more likely to be federated/have some level of real member input and feedback loop, but they require significant infusions of cash from national funders to sustain that model.
This system isn't perfect, but it can work so long as resources are allocated properly; unfortunately, one of our movement's weaknesses is a myopic focus on the federal level.
Yes! Part 2. I really appreciate your insights. I agree with your take, netroots is a lot of hub and spoke mass weaker mobilization but there is value in the deep chapter style thats under emphasized. i work in a federated org but whew its hard.
Speaking generally, it seems like we're moving toward a two-level model. On one hand, most national organizations being centralized and focusing their members' attention on DC (which is also the most effective way for them to raise small dollars); in contrast, state-based and locally-based organizations are more likely to be federated/have some level of real member input and feedback loop, but they require significant infusions of cash from national funders to sustain that model.
This system isn't perfect, but it can work so long as resources are allocated properly; unfortunately, one of our movement's weaknesses is a myopic focus on the federal level.
Yes! Part 2. I really appreciate your insights. I agree with your take, netroots is a lot of hub and spoke mass weaker mobilization but there is value in the deep chapter style thats under emphasized. i work in a federated org but whew its hard.