Protests in the United States have long been seen as a form of civic engagement and a means of expressing dissent. However, recent reports suggest that this aspect of American democracy may have become increasingly commercialized, with activist groups and lobbying firms playing a significant role in organizing and financing such demonstrations. One such group, Crowds on Demand (CoD), has come under scrutiny after its CEO, Adam Swart, claimed that he was offered millions of dollars to recruit protesters for anti-Trump demonstrations.
According to the report, CoD provides a range of services to political movements, including hiring protesters, organizing speakers for council meetings, and facilitating phone-banking for Congressional offices. Swart described his company as the ultimate ‘guerilla lobbying and government relations firm,’ indicating that CoD’s primary function is to support political causes through strategic and often covert means. The report indicates that CoD was approached by interests aligned with a Democrat-backed astroturfing effort, potentially offering a $20 million contract to support a specific protest. Swart, however, rejected this offer, citing the risk of violence and the potential damage to his company’s reputation.
These claims have sparked debates about the role of corporate funding in shaping political movements and its implications for democratic processes. While some argue that such practices undermine the authenticity of protest movements, others suggest that the presence of professional organizers can ensure greater visibility and effectiveness. Yet, the controversy surrounding CoD’s involvement in the ‘No Kings Day’ protests, which are reported to have drawn millions of participants, raises questions about the extent to which these demonstrations are influenced by corporate interests.
As the debate continues, the report emphasizes that the commercialization of political activism is a growing concern for policymakers and citizens alike. The issue has also drawn attention from other figures, such as Alan Dershowitz, who has accused organizations funded by George Soros and the Rockefeller Brothers of playing a role in fueling anti-Israel protests and potentially radicalizing activists. Such claims highlight the broader tensions around the influence of corporate and philanthropic entities in shaping public discourse and political outcomes in the United States.