The Mad Tea Party and the Cloward-Piven Conspiracy Theory

Leftists like to say that another world is possible, but I was never
quite sure of that until I started reading tea party websites. There, a
government of leftists is not only possible, it's on the cusp of seizing
permanent power, having broken American capitalism and replaced it with
a socialist state. Down that rabbit hole, Barack Obama and Rahm Emanuel
are communists, and "The Left"--which encompasses everyone from the
Democratic Leadership Council to Maoist sectarians--is a disciplined and
near omnipotent army marching in lockstep to a decades-old master plan
for domination called the "Cloward-Piven strategy" or, as of January 20,
2009, "Cloward-Piven government."

What is this plot? According to David Horowitz, who apparently coined
the expression, Cloward-Piven is "the strategy of forcing political
change through orchestrated crisis." Named after sociologists and
antipoverty and voting rights activists Richard Cloward and Frances Fox
Piven, who first elucidated it in a May 2, 1966, article for The
Nation called "The Weight of the Poor: A Strategy to End Poverty,"
the Cloward-Piven strategy, in Horowitz's words, "seeks to hasten the
fall of capitalism by overloading the government bureaucracy with a
flood of impossible demands, thus pushing society into crisis and
economic collapse." Like a fun-house-mirror version of Naomi Klein's
Shock Doctrine theory, the Cloward-Piven strategy dictates that the left
will exploit that crisis to push through unpopular, socialist policies
in a totalitarian manner.

Since Obama's election and the financial crash of 2008, Horowitz's
description has been taken up by a clutch of tea party
propagandists--from TV and radio hosts Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh and
Mark Levin to WorldNetDaily editor Joseph Farah, National
Review editor Stanley Kurtz and The Obama Nation author
Jerome Corsi--to explain how both events could have happened, here, in
the U-S-A. In their historical narrative, it was Cloward and Piven's
article that gave ACORN the idea to start peddling subprime mortgages to
poor minorities in the 1980s, knowingly laying the groundwork for a
global economic meltdown nearly thirty years later. Beck calls Cloward
and Piven the two people who are "fundamentally responsible for the
unsustainability and possible collapse of our economic system." It was
Cloward and Piven who had the diabolical idea of registering (illegal or
nonexistent) poor and minority voters through Project Vote and the Motor
Voter Act, thus guaranteeing Obama's "fraudulent" victory. And it is the
Cloward-Piven strategy that guides the Obama administration's every move
to this day, as it seeks to ram through healthcare reform, economic
stimulus and financial regulation (all of which, in reality, have
enjoyed majority support in many polls taken during the last two years).

As proof, Beck & Co. point to what they see as a shadowy web of
associations: Cloward and Piven worked in alliance with welfare rights
organizer George Wiley, who mentored Wade Rathke, who went on to found
ACORN, which sometimes coordinated registration drives with Project Vote
(whose board of directors Piven just recently joined), a previous
incarnation of which employed Obama to run a Chicago chapter in the
early '90s. They also repeatedly cite Emanuel's statement, made in
November 2008 after the passage of TARP but before the stimulus, that
"you never want a serious crisis to go to waste." From The
Nation's pages to the White House's brains and muscles--it took only
forty-four years!

All of this, of course, is a reactionary paranoid fantasy. Rahm Emanuel
is no more Frances Fox Piven's stooge than Obama is a Muslim. But the
looniness of it has not stopped the Cloward-Piven conspiracy theory from
spreading across tea party networks. And the left's gut reaction upon
hearing of it--to laugh it off as a Scooby-Doo comic mystery--does
nothing to blunt its appeal or limit its impact. In order to respond,
alas, we have to understand, and that means going through the looking
glass.

Horowitz first wrote of the Cloward-Piven strategy on his website
Discoverthenetworks.org, which claims to be "a guide to the left." His
description is a crude and false account of what Cloward and Piven
argued. For example, the words "capital" and "capitalism" never appear
in their article. The piece is about precipitating a crisis in the
welfare system by legally enrolling masses of eligible recipients, which
the welfare bureaucracy could not handle, thus creating a demand for
more radical reforms, like a guaranteed minimum income--a proposal that
Nixon, of all people, floated in 1969 and that, in fact,
Democratic-majority Congresses voted down through 1972 [see Peter
Edelman and Barbara Ehrenreich, page 15]. Moreover, as Piven recently
explained to me, although the article was written as a strategic thought
experiment, in many ways it described and reacted to changes already
sweeping the nation, chief among them the civil rights and welfare
rights movements, which created newly politicized constituencies to
which the Democratic Party had to respond. "The mainstream," Piven says,
"was responsive to the idea that we could end poverty because of these
movements." In short, the stresses placed on the welfare system were
caused by a confluence of factors, of which an article published in
The Nation, it is safe to say, was but one, and most likely a
minor one at that.

Nevertheless--history and facts be damned--it is Horowitz's caricature
of Cloward-Piven that is now the Rosetta stone of American politics for
the tea party's self-styled intellectuals. Glenn Beck has brought up
Cloward and Piven on at least twenty-eight episodes of his show over the
past year. Beck is sometimes aided by a blackboard on which he has
diagramed something called "The Tree of Revolution," which links Che
Guevara, SEIU and ACORN's Wade Rathke to Saul Alinsky, the Sierra Club's
Carl Pope, Bill Ayers and, perhaps most improbably, to White House
senior adviser Valerie Jarrett. In the center of the tree's arching
trunk, above SDS and Woodrow Wilson (!?) but below Barack Obama, who
adorns the tree's crown, Beck has scrawled "Cloward & Piven."

Beck's tree, however, is derivative of and pales in comparison with the
flow chart created by Jim Simpson, a self-described businessman and
former George H.W. Bush White House budget analyst and the leading
proponent of the Cloward-Piven conspiracy theory. Cribbing from
Horowitz, but adding his own very special embellishments, Simpson has
penned an 18,000-word, six-part expose of the "Cloward-Piven
strategy," which can be found on the websites Americanthinker.com and
Americandaughter.com. I have read it so you don't have to. The central
innovations of this wild and woolly compilation of right-wing myths,
published in installments during the summer and fall of 2008, are to
attribute nearly every past, present and future crisis to Cloward and
Piven and to link them to Obama's political past and agenda. Among the
schemes Simpson credits to the Cloward-Piven strategy are healthcare
reform, the Employee Free Choice Act, cap and trade, immigration reform,
hate crimes legislation and public financing of elections. For Simpson,
the Cloward-Piven strategy is vast, vast--"a malevolent overarching
strategy that has motivated many, if not all, of the most destructive
radical leftist organizations in the United States since the 1960s." And
beyond: somehow, Gorbachev's Crimean dacha is implicated, as are Saddam
Hussein's palaces.

Most integral to Simpson's theory, however, and where his rather
impressive skills as a collagist descend into the orthodoxy of Fox News,
is ACORN, which he says has been "the new tip of the Cloward-Piven
spear" since 1970. In what is by now a familiar right-wing story line,
ACORN is responsible for the global economic crisis. By using the 1977
Community Reinvestment Act--itself a conspiratorial response to the
bogus crisis of housing discrimination--ACORN enrolled masses of
low-income people in subprime mortgages, creating a housing bubble that
caused stock markets around the world to crash, paving the way for bank
nationalization and socialism via the bailout and the stimulus. Whew!
There are, of course, more than a few pages missing in this
whodunit--for instance, that it was ACORN that tried to warn Congress
about risky and predatory lenders; that it was too-big-to-fail banks and
complex financial instruments that spread the contagion across the
worldwide economy; and that in fact the banks have not been
nationalized. [For a debunking of this myth, see Peter Dreier and John
Atlas's "The GOP's Blame-ACORN Game," October 22, 2008.]

If Simpson's chain of events is not particularly original, his theory of
intentionality is: according to him, the left, guided by the
Cloward-Piven strategy, was fully aware that subprime mortgages would
produce a calamitous financial bubble; it supported subprime lending not
to help minorities become homeowners but to sabotage capitalism from the
inside. "The failure is deliberate," he writes repeatedly in
italics.

Like others on the right, Simpson sees Obama's election itself as a
machination of ACORN, which registered millions of felons, illegal
aliens and dead citizens to vote through Project Vote and the Motor
Voter Act, which Cloward and Piven championed and which Bill Clinton
signed in 1993. (Voter fraud seems to be Simpson's enduring
preoccupation and the subject of an early 2007 article on
Cloward-Piven.) By the logic of the Cloward-Piven strategy, he suggests,
voter registration efforts were aimed at corrupting democracy, not
expanding it. This argument depends on the denial of several key
realities: that changing demographics have altered the balance of party
power, that legally increasing the voting rate of key constituencies is
a common and legitimate practice of both parties, and that the
Republican Party consistently fails to win over minorities because of
the policies it promotes. What Simpson and Beck want to cast doubt on is
that the democratic process could elect Obama, or that democratic
majorities would endorse the agenda Obama has proposed. In the months
before the 2008 election, Simpson wrote, "It is not inconceivable that
this presidential race could be decided by fraudulent votes alone."

Beck and Simpson have played the tea party's Paul Reveres, warning the
masses of the Cloward-Piven assault. But nearly the entire orbit of tea
party luminaries have taken it up in some way. In October 2008 the
Washington Times ran an op-ed by Robert Chandler called "The
Cloward Piven Strategy," and Stanley Kurtz wrote about it in National
Review Online. Mark Levin, author of the bestseller
Liberty and Tyranny: A Conservative Manifesto, has discussed it
on multiple occasions on his radio program, as did Rush Limbaugh on the
March 4 broadcast of his show. In a January 13 interview, Beck asked
Sarah Palin if she had seen and believed in the case he had been making
on Cloward and Piven. Palin replied, "I do. I do believe it.... It has
to be purposeful what they are doing. Otherwise--otherwise I would say,
Glenn, that there is no hope, that there are no solutions."

In February, Kyle Olson, a GOP hack who runs an ersatz education
nonprofit called the Education Action Group, posed as a student and
requested a videotaped interview with Piven, which she gave in her home.
Olson posted a portion of the interview on BigGovernment.com, a website
run by Andrew Breitbart, who released the "prostitute and pimp"
undercover ACORN sting in 2009. Olson captures nothing so dramatic:
Piven lucidly discusses homeowner civil disobedience during the Great
Depression as a model for how foreclosed homeowners today could refuse
to leave their homes and thus create pressure on banks to renegotiate
mortgages--a strategy advocated by Ohio Congresswoman Marcy Kaptur and,
yes, ACORN.

Suffice it to say, if Beck and crew believe half of this crap, they
belong in an asylum in the middle of Shutter Island, where they can tend
to their survival seeds and sleuth out imagined conspiracies apart from
the rest of the human population. The danger, however, is that they will
maroon a sizable portion of the electorate there with them. Since
Obama's inauguration, references to the Cloward-Piven strategy have
popped up with increasing frequency in op-eds and letters to the editor
of local newspapers, including those in Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania and
New Mexico. Snippets of Simpson's tome or Beck's rants appear frequently
in the comments section of blogs and articles; a search for the term
"Cloward-Piven strategy" generated more than 255,000 Google hits.

Why does the Cloward-Piven conspiracy theory hold such appeal? And what,
if anything, does it accomplish? On one level it's entertainment. It
allows believers to tease out the left's secrets and sinister patterns.
Since none of the evidence that supposedly confirms the existence of the
Cloward-Piven strategy is, in fact, secret, this proves rather easy to
do, and so the puzzle is both thrilling and gratifying.

On another level, the theory is an adaptive response to the tea party's
fragmentation. As Jonathan Raban pointed out in The New York
Review of Books, the tea party is an uneasy conclave of Ayn Rand
secular libertarians and fundamentalist Christian evangelicals; it
contains birthers, Birchers, racists, xenophobes, Ron Paulites, cold
warriors, Zionists, constitutionalists, vanilla Republicans looking for
a high and militia-style survivalists. Because the Cloward-Piven
strategy is so expansive, it allows tea party propagandists to engage
any one--or all--of the pet issues that incite these various
constituencies. For some, the left's "offensive to promote illegal
immigration" is "Cloward-Piven on steroids." For others, it is the
Cloward-Piven "advocates of social change" who "used the Fed, which was
complicit in the scheme" to "engineer" the 2008 fiscal crisis. In his
speech at the tea party convention in Nashville, WorldNetDaily's
Joseph Farah notes that Obama was just 4 when the Cloward-Piven strategy
was written. "We think," Farah said. He paused dramatically
before adding, "Without the birth certificate we really just don't
know," as a sizable portion of the audience broke into applause.

Racial and class resentments, however, are never far from the surface,
no matter which subject is slotted into the great Cloward-Piven
conspiracy machine. The word "radical," for example, is almost always
preceded by the word "black" when it can be (George Wiley), but nobody
is ever called a "white radical" (Bill Ayers). Whenever grammatically
possible--and sometimes even when it is not--Cloward and Piven are
identified as "Columbia professors" and Obama as a "Harvard graduate."
(Beyond just heaping Nixonian scorn on elites, the Cloward-Piven
conspiracy credits the left with an almost divine intelligence.)

And as of now, the Cloward-Piven strategy is most often used to put two
classes of people on the tea party's enemies list: those who work for
the Obama administration and those who work to increase the political
power of poor people of color. (Doing both--as was the case with Van
Jones--can be fatal.) It is the latter target that is particularly
appalling: here is a so-called populist movement promulgating a master
narrative that holds poor people to blame for the world's woes. The
precise impact of this conspiracy theory and the broader movement it
incites on Obama's legislative agenda is, as of now, unclear. But the
toll it has taken on organizations that advocate for poor people of
color could not be more stark. On the weekend the healthcare reform bill
cleared the House, tea party activists descended on Washington to decry
"the end of America"; their bitter pill was soothed by front-page
coverage of the end of something else--ACORN announced it was on the
verge of bankruptcy, the victim of what CEO Bertha Lewis called "a
series of well-orchestrated, relentless, well-funded right-wing
attacks."

Perhaps most critical, the Cloward-Piven conspiracy theory pushes the
tea party's kettle closer to a boil. In its obsession with voter fraud
and the potential illegitimacy of the 2008 election--and the democratic
process itself--the conspiracy suggests a tit-for-tat strategy for
victory: if the left is going to cynically manipulate the system to
produce tyranny, then so will we. How? To begin, there's the
tried-and-true tactic of suppressing the poor minority vote--which would
next place Project Vote in the tea party's cross hairs. But why stop
there? Like every good conspiracy theory, this one too is a call to
arms.