Corporate interests, philanthropies, and the peace movement.

Abstract

Corporate and philanthropic involvement in the peace movement is growing. In considering medical peace groups as examples, we have studied the ways that corporate and philanthropic funding have shaped the course of activism. Our methods have included: review of the Foundations Grant Index from 1974-1983; analysis of corporations' and foundations' criteria for grants in the categories of peace, arms control, and disarmament; interviews with leaders of activist organizations and with foundation officials; and our own experiences in the peace movement. Corporate interests in preventing nuclear war stem from a concern for global stability in which world markets may expand, and from a hope to frame issues posed by the peace movement in a way that will not challenge basic structures of power and finance. Several general features make peace groups respectable and attractive to philanthropies; an uncritical stance toward corporate participation in the arms race; a viewpoint that the main danger of nuclear war stems from a profound, bilateral conflict between the United States and the Soviet Union; and a single-issue focus that does not deal with the many related problems reflecting the injustices of capitalism. The two major medical groups working for peace, Physicians for Social Responsibility (PSR) and International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW), have accomplished many goals; however, their adherence to subtle criteria of respectability and their dependence on philanthropic funding have limited the scope of their activism. The struggle for peace can not succeed without fundamental changes in the corporate system that initiates, maintains, and promotes the arms race.