DOI
10.9707/1944-5660.1714
Key Points
This article clarifies a strategic dilemma between bridging difference or advocacy strategies for funders and their grantees seeking social change in the context of polarization, putting it in conversation with social science research on intergroup contact theory, on which bridging strategies are based, and advocacy. Based on a set of interviews and surveys, this article explores how multifaith organizations embody strategies that navigate the contact/advocacy divide.
This article posits that multifaith organizations — those intentionally formed of people or institutions with different faith identities — embody six practices that avoid the false dichotomy of bridging and advocacy strategies: “dual identity” contact, tolerating disagreement, shattering typical binaries, managing shifting constellations of partners, developing local relationships, and possessing extensive reach. In short, they are a micromodel of our society, weathering the hardest of differences, showing the way toward reduced animosity and real improvement in our politics.
Without attention to long-term bridging strategies, the creative ideas produced by activists are unlikely to find their way into acceptance across political divides. Multifaith organizations offer a way out of this dilemma as both models and potential partners for funders. The article offers recommendations for how funders can better support these organizations to promote a pluralistic democracy.
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 International License.
Recommended Citation
Ralph, A. K. (2024). Advocacy and Bridging Strategies Are Failing on Their Own. Multifaith Nonprofits Embody Six Solutions for a Pluralistic Democracy. The Foundation Review, 16(2). https://doi.org/10.9707/1944-5660.1714
Included in
Nonprofit Administration and Management Commons, Public Administration Commons, Public Affairs Commons, Public Policy Commons
