#20 Organizations in Action: Mainstream

Organizational Opportunities to Fight Our Emergent American Authoritarianism

Mar 06, 2026

Summary Overview

In this post, we discuss the role and place of organizations in advancing not only the change we seek in the world, but also the response we must bring to rising authoritarianism.

We begin by outlining specific ways “mainstream” organizations may act to integrate “democracy positive” practices into their structure and operations.

We continue by discussing how groups working to intentionally advance net positive impact in the world need not stop their work, but rather place that work within the context of this these times and seek to optimize their potential to act in opposition to the forces of authoritarianism and fascism in the world today.

If we are to be successful, the very way we think about or envision evolved practices must also change. It is no longer enough to propose new initiatives and frameworks if those proposals do not account for the radically altered circumstances we now find ourselves operating within. Whatever you care about, authoritarianism is the ultimate intersectional consideration we must bring to our thinking and practices since it will have a direct impact upon your ability to act on the issues you care most about.

Introduction

We have now spent numerous posts exploring how we arrived in this time and place, understanding something of the dynamics that brought us here and appreciating the very meaningful and real danger this particular moment presents not only to our own freedom, but the freedom of families, communities and eco-systems quite literally around the world.

Many of us wake up anxious, feeling stressed regarding the future of our world, lives and those we love, just as we are deeply concerned for our planet as a whole, nations we have never visited or know very well, and eco-systems everywhere—we know we are each and all at risk, yet are often unclear how best to respond, how to act.

As previously discussed, at times like this, how we maintain a calm and deliberate mindset is critical. As Mahatma Gandhi is said to have said,

Whatever you seek to do will be absolutely insignificant.

And it is very important that you do it!

Just as we know there are limits to our direct impact, we know also our cumulative impact, our showing up in our specific role and on our terms, when taken together with the hundreds of millions of other souls acting in their own individual time and place, in their own family, organizations, community and society, is the only force that will turn this around. Acting together will help us learn from the mistakes and errors of our individual and collective past while shedding light upon where we now need to progress.

A previous post explored the place of the individual in this process of challenge and change. In this and following posts, we turn to a discussion of the place of mainstream and impact-oriented purpose driven organizations as vehicles for advancing our efforts to overcome the rise of authoritarianism and forces of fascism and bring us closer to the world we seek to co-create.

Mainstream Organizations Standing Against American Authoritarianism

One of the challenges of these times is understanding how “traditional” organizations (ones that do not have a specific impact or advocacy agenda) might be positioned to act as catalysts of change and response to fascism as opposed to corporations of capitulation.

Our opportunity is to take firms, funds, entrepreneurs and strategies in this vein and turn them just a bit—five degrees? ten degrees?—to capture something of the full blended value potential of not only their core strategy, but their capacity to act in opposition to the continued advancement of authoritarianism, the rule of kings and, ultimately, fascism.

Today, we see something of the opposite as many companies and other organizations opt for a course of capitulation, accommodation and financial opportunity in the absence of considering—much less acting upon—the larger implications of what it means to be complicit in permitting the changes we presently witness in our world.

Here are some realistic steps to be considered by those looking to manage their core strategies to increase their leverage and potential to act in positive ways to promote an alternative vision to what we see emerging from the White House:

Build a “Corporate Democratic Responsibility” policy. Codify how your fund/portfolio companies/organization will protect democratic norms (fair elections, rule of law, non-violent civic life) the same way you codify traditional good governance. Emerging scholarship dubs this Corporate Democratic Responsibility and sketches practical governance steps you can adapt. (Academy of Management Journals)
Support and Fund civic infrastructure year-round, not just during election spikes Democracy groups say intermittent, election-year funding leaves them brittle; they need continuity for voter protection, local organizing, and legal capacity in between cycles. Shift to multi-year, flexible capital. (AP News) (See AtA Post #19 on Philanthropy’s potential role for more on these ideas).
Adopt best-in-class political spending transparency If your organization (or portfolio companies) spend money in politics or lobbying, use the CPA-Zicklin Model Code: board-level oversight, disclosure of direct/indirect spend (including trade associations), and alignment screens so contributions don’t undercut your stated values. Then benchmark publicly via the CPA-Zicklin Index. (net)
Protect civic participation at work Offer paid time for voting, facilitate nonpartisan registration/education, and normalize “civic PTO.” Large business associations and research bodies outline proven tactics employers can deploy without drifting into partisanship. (org, Brookings, The Fulcrum) Remember: While there are clearly partisan issues at play, in the end this is about promoting a positive, protective democratic process as opposed to the Democratic Party.
Treat anti-ESG/anti-fiduciary mandates as financial risk—and document it State anti-ESG laws and “blacklists” are imposing costs and litigation risk; several analyses show potential performance and fee penalties for beneficiaries when fiduciaries are handcuffed. Record the financial case for considering material ESG factors, and be prepared to litigate or avoid exposure where laws conflict with duty. (Americans for Financial Reform, Green America, Financial Times). See the AtA Series Bonus Post: Authoritarianism As Investor Risk for more on this theme.
Back the Rule-of-Law & anti-backsliding toolbox locally and nationally. If you’re a foundation, prioritize grants and PRIs to groups that litigate against abuses of power, defend election administration, and reinforce independent media. Field guides—updated in 2025—map what works and how to sequence responses. (Brookings, gov)
Align your narrative work: invest in trustworthy information ecosystems Underwrite local news, fact-checking, digital literacy, and anti-disinformation tech—areas philanthropies and values-aligned investors are co-funding to counter authoritarian tactics that exploit information decay. (Financial Times)
Use portfolio stewardship to set red lines If you are managing capital investments of a firm or acting as a fiduciary of other assets, when and as you engage, be clear: (a) no political retaliation against employees/customers, (b) no contributions to candidates or groups undermining elections, (c) no support for violence, (d) public commitment to accept legitimate election outcomes. Tie voting policies and director votes to violations.
Shift more capital to “civic positive” place-based finance Prioritize CDFIs and community intermediaries that expand broad-based economic participation (access to capital, resilient local infrastructure). Philanthropy & impact research shows democracy strength correlates with civic capacity and problem-solving institutions. (upenn.edu)
Measure democratic co-benefits—and publish them Move past activity metrics (e.g., “x registrations”) toward outcomes and learning agendas: which pro-democracy investments actually work, for whom, and at what cost. The field is calling for better evidence; help build it. (The Chronicle of Philanthropy)

These steps may be more natural for those in nonprofit or impact roles, but the reality is many more mainstream business and traditional organizations need to step up and seek to leverage not simply their capacity for generating financial returns and value, but the need for them to act as responsible corporate citizens defending good governance and management practices—not taking orders from outside actors.

The recent contract discussions between the former Department of Defense and Anthropic are a great example of a company, at least in this moment, having real clarity regarding is values and Northern Star while acting as a solid corporate citizen advancing its work, policies and practices in what it believes are the best interests of the United States of America as a nation and people.

Finally, consider this:

All companies and all capital create impact in our world.

The question isn’t whether or not traditional, mainstream organizations create impact, but rather whether their impact is intentional and strategic or incidental, cheap impact.

It is critical all organizations seek to understand their role and place in the present moment. Each and every organization, regardless of its type, should seek to act as vehicles to promote not only financial returns but their potential to operate as responsible, effective corporate leaders defending the principles of not simply capitalism, but the power of capitalism as a tool for freedom!

If they do not, it is not long before they will find their

business,

markets and

firms

struggling to survive challenges that have nothing to do with business and everything to do with corruption, crony capitalism, government practices based upon patrimonialism, and ultimately the infringement upon their very license to operate and fulfill their entrepreneurial potential within ever competitive, global markets.

Bottom Line:

Regardless of its exact strategy, purpose or type,

don’t let your organization be a

corporation of capitulation!!

Mainstream Organizations:

How do the above steps “sit” with you?

Are they realistic for organizations (regardless of type) that you are involved with?

What might be some additional, more practical steps you could take within a traditional organization?

Antidote to Autocracy

Discussion about this post

Ready for more?