A Dangerous View of Democracy

To the Editor:

Public Agenda has done some fine work over the years, some of which the Open Society Institute has been pleased to support. But the recent commentary by its new president, Ruth A. Wooden (“Building Consensus, Not Partisanship,” My View, October 14), chiding unnamed nonprofit leaders for “relentlessly advancing points of view held by extremes of public opinion,” sets forth a seriously skewed vision of what democracy is all about.

It is hard to know which organizations Ms. Wooden may be indicting, but the two issues she singles out, abortion and gay marriage, piqued my interest, since they are ones where the Open Society Institute and its grantees have strong values we are seeking to advance in the public debate. Call me an extremist, but I believe a woman’s right to choose abortion, or a same-sex couple’s right to the same legal recognition and benefits as everyone else, including marriage, are matters of constitutional dimension, not something that should be subjected to public-opinion polls like too much else in our society.

Every social advance and every gain for justice in American history, from the abolition of slavery and women’s suffrage to more recent struggles to end the criminalization of contraception and interracial marriage, started out with a group of visionaries advancing a position well out of the mainstream of contemporary society, and many paid dearly for their courage and farsightedness in advocating what were seen as extreme stances at the time. Important social change, from the right or the left, starts with core convictions, and so does the patient work of moving society in that direction — not rushing to where you think the center happens to be at the moment.

A number of the movements that the Open Society Institute supports — against draconian drug laws and the death penalty, for equal marriage rights and greater access to emergency contraception — have made enormous gains in recent years because they are grounded in core American and constitutional values. They may start out sailing against the prevailing winds, but pick up speed precisely because they understand how to frame their arguments in a way that reaches many who are unaware or unconvinced. This is hard and important work that deserves — in a time when too many governmental, foundation, and nonprofit leaders have their fingers to the political winds — to be applauded, not caricatured and chastised.

Gara LaMarche
Vice President and Director of U.S. Programs
Open Society Institute
New York