The Cloward-Piven Strategy: Orchestrated Crisis and the Radical Left
The Cloward-Piven Strategy, a political theory developed in the 1960s by sociologists Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven, has long been a subject of controversy. Originally designed as a method to force systemic change by overwhelming government welfare systems, this strategy has been linked to various left-wing movements and figures throughout modern American politics. A widely circulated diagram attempts to map out connections between radical activists, organizations, and even former President Barack Obama, suggesting a concerted effort to implement crisis-driven political transformation.
Understanding the Cloward-Piven Strategy
Cloward and Piven introduced their strategy in a 1966 article titled The Weight of the Poor: A Strategy to End Poverty. The central idea was to flood welfare programs with enrollees to the point of collapse, thereby forcing the government to implement radical economic reforms. The strategy was rooted in the belief that a crisis could accelerate political change in favor of progressive policies.
This method of leveraging chaos for political gain has been cited as an influence on later activist movements. Some critics argue that elements of the strategy have been adapted beyond welfare and applied to broader societal disruptions, including political protests and economic upheavals.
Saul Alinsky and the Tactics of Community Organizing
Saul Alinsky, a political theorist and community organizer, is often associated with similar radical strategies. His book, Rules for Radicals, emphasized the importance of grassroots mobilization and confrontation as a means of achieving social and political change. The diagram suggests that Alinsky’s methods provided the framework for the Cloward-Piven approach to crisis-driven activism.
Connections to Left-Wing Organizations
The chart in question draws connections between several leftist organizations, including:
ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now) – Founded by Wade Rathke, ACORN was known for its voter registration drives and advocacy for low-income communities. Critics accused the organization of fraudulent practices and radical activism.
SDS (Students for a Democratic Society) – A prominent 1960s radical student organization with members such as Bill Ayers and Carl Davidson. SDS played a major role in anti-war protests and leftist political movements.
The Weather Underground – A militant offshoot of SDS, co-founded by Bill Ayers, known for its involvement in violent protests and bombings during the 1960s and 1970s.
George Wiley’s NWRO (National Welfare Rights Organization) – An organization that sought to expand welfare enrollment as part of the Cloward-Piven strategy.
The chart implies that these organizations, working together with media outlets like MoveOn.org and NARAL, were part of a broader effort to implement a crisis-driven political agenda.
Funding and Influence
Another key claim of the diagram is the involvement of influential donors and foundations in funding these activities. Figures such as billionaire George Soros, through his Open Society Institute, are alleged to have financially supported many of these groups. The diagram suggests that financial contributions played a critical role in sustaining the operations of organizations that sought to implement Cloward-Piven-style tactics.
The Barack Obama Connection
Perhaps the most politically charged claim in the diagram is its suggestion of ties between Barack Obama and these radical organizations. Before his presidency, Obama worked as a community organizer and had associations with figures like Bill Ayers and groups like ACORN. While these connections have been widely debated, some critics argue that his rise to power was influenced by the same activist networks that promoted Cloward-Piven-style disruptions.
Obama’s involvement with the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, a philanthropic initiative co-founded by Bill Ayers, is often cited as evidence of his connection to radical elements within the left. Additionally, his administration's policies, particularly in areas like healthcare and economic stimulus programs, have been interpreted by some as aligning with the long-term goals of the Cloward-Piven approach.
Conclusion: Crisis as a Political Tool
Whether one believes the diagram’s claims or not, the underlying premise is clear: crisis can be an effective political tool. The Cloward-Piven Strategy has been used as a lens through which critics view leftist activism, arguing that manufactured crises are used to push radical policies. While some see these tactics as necessary to achieve social justice, others warn that they can lead to government overreach, economic instability, and political polarization.
As political discourse continues to evolve, the debate over orchestrated crisis strategies remains relevant. Whether applied to welfare, voting systems, or broader societal upheavals, the question remains: To what extent are political movements intentionally creating crises to reshape the system?