Home | About | Donate

Groundbreaking Study Maps 'Insidious' (and Alarmingly Successful) Strategy of Anti-Choice Movement

Groundbreaking Study Maps 'Insidious' (and Alarmingly Successful) Strategy of Anti-Choice Movement

Jessica Corbett, staff writer

The far-right religious fringe "has spent decades building the political infrastructure they need to attack abortion access from all sides."

screenshot of report

Be reminded that the anti-choice fringe is not just against abortion, they are against all forms of birth control (except abstinence) and against all forms of women rights (except rights for wealthy women).

Also, be reminded that laws against abortion and other forms of birth control have limited those choices only for women unable to AFFORD to exercise those choices via plan B. Wealthy women have always had access to abortion irrespective of where they had to travel to access it.


The anti-choice movement operates under the guise of religion, but I believe its real purpose is to increase poverty as both cause and effect of an uncontrolled increase in the birth rate. A US population of even a billion people makes sense in terms of long term capitalist labor development. Masses of unskilled and even illiterate workers competing for the same jobs will allow corporations access within the US to the kind of low wage workforce now available only in Asia and parts of Latin America. The popular myth among liberals is that the work force of the future will need to be highly educated, but this is not borne out by the facts. Simply compare the level of arithmetical skills needed by, say, a cashier fifty years ago vs. today. To be a New York City taxi driver, as I used to be, required passing a challenging geographical test of the city but now your Uber driver can rely on a GPS.

More importantly, perhaps, the growth of large impoverished families is ideal material for cannon fodder for a society founded on permanent war. America’s high tech armies have failed over and over when up against uneducated tribal people - clearly an investment of ten or twenty thousand American lives might turn the tide in places like Afghanistan but that kind of sacrifice is not acceptable, but not because we Americans love peace! Historically, war is never supported in societies where parents have , at most, two or three children. If you look at the statistics for World War One, for example, all the combatant countries featured very large families that could, to be cynical, spare a son or two to the wars of the fatherland.

The greatest mistake in facing the current anti-choice challenge is to concede that any of it is motivated by any kind of genuine religious belief. It is all about recreating the kind of mass poverty which nourished capitalism in this country throughout the 19th and the first half of the 20th century.


Question: Why does the far right, religious fringe, Bible thumping nut cases and their fellow Republican cohorts care so much about the unborn while they seem to care less once they are born?

1 Like

The pro choice movement can take a good look at the anti choice movement’s strategies and use those strategies themselves. Learn from your enemy and use what you learn with integrity for the good of all.


[quote=“Shantiananda, post:4, topic:48449”]
Why does the far right, religious fringe, Bible thumping nut cases and their fellow Republican cohorts care so much about the unborn while they seem to care less once they are born?

My best guess is that it is all about power. We are ruled by a patriarchal death cult. Controlling life, and therefore women, is a crucial element, and, indeed, is its bedrock principle.

1 Like

It is interesting to me that what the right is and has been doing, " ‘the anti-choice movement has spent decades building the political infrastructure they need…’ " is exactly what the left should be doing but doesn’t. And, although, it’s true that the right has more money from wealthy billionaires, there is still plenty of money that could be raised and used intelligently to do the same in an honorable way. The rise of the rightwing think tanks and media outlets could have been balanced by similar efforts from the left, or maybe not. But what hurts, is that the progressives never really seem to have tried beyond limited and fairly localized outlets, such as community radio and Pacifica.

I just have to wonder what if CBS belonged to the public and was run in the public interest. What if NPR really was committed to the ‘public’? What if progressives had run for and ‘taken over’ the school districts and textbook committees? What if Ted Turner still owned CNN or turned it over to Michael Moore?

Simply pointing fingers at what the right has done successfully, just doesn’t cut it.


The lesson here is that a fringe political movement, over the last 45 years, has successfully built independent power in a way that has profoundly impacted the law and the lives of millions of Americans.


Meanwhile we on the Left, which holds the majority pro-choice position, have followed another strategy. Instead of building actual power, we fixated on electing pro-choice candidates. And here we are, with dozens of states and localities effectively anti-choice, one Supreme Court decision away from losing it all.

1 Like

Progressives should learn these organizational skills of the anti-choicers.