Conservative Industrial Complex and Global Policy Networks

• In Event: Global Policy Networks, Advocacy Coalitions, and the Neoconservative Turn in Education

Proposal

Global policy networks advancing neoliberal reforms have received extensive attention in comparative and international education (Ball, 2012; Ball & Junemann, 2012). The purpose of this paper is to contribute to that literature by analyzing policy activities of the Conservative Industrial Complex (CIC), or a network of nonprofit and for-profit organizations, philanthropic foundations, think tanks, and advocacy groups, which have focused on advancing free-market, libertarian, and managerial reforms in the educational sector over the past forty years. The CIC includes such organizations as the State Policy Network (SPN), funded by Koch, Walton, and other foundations, that brings together over 50 libertarian and conservative think tanks across the United States, as well as the Atlas network of over 130 libertarian think tanks from across the world. The SPN partners with the American Legislative Exchange Council, an organization led by corporate and business elites, which provides model policies for market-based legislation across various sectors, including education. It also partners with the Foundation for Excellence in Education (ExcelInEd), created by Governor Jeb Bush to bring together elected officials and educational reformers to exchange ideas and policy proposals for a disruptive revolution in education. Through its annual summits, ExcelInEd connects philanthropic community, international organizations, such as OECD, with the network of conservative think tanks engaged in rewriting educational policies, such as the American Enterprise Institute, the Heritage Foundation, Manhattan Institute, Philanthropy Roundtable, and others. Together, these organizations comprise a powerful industry that engages in public and policy advocacy advancing privatization by manufacturing problems, stoking moral outrage, offering policy solutions, staging “grassroots” support for these solutions, and pressuring elected officials to adopt those policies in pursuit of a conservative vision. Funded in large part by major philanthropies and corporate partners, these networks have led coordinated campaigns to discredit “government” schools and unleash the power of markets and individual entrepreneurialism in pursuit of “prosperity” across the globe.
We analyze how the CIC has pursued a shared vision for schools, secured funding and built coalitions, and mobilized knowledge to influence policymakers and policy itself. Our text is rooted in the tradition of anthropology of policy (Shore & Wright, 1997; Shore et al., 2011) and nonlocal ethnography that draws on “thick descriptions” of policy events wherever those occur, without assuming the need for the researcher to be embedded at one site for an extended period of time (Feldman, 2011). We also use social network analysis (Borgatti, 2002; Borgatti et al., 2013; Scott, 2009; Scott & Carrington, 2011; Wasserman & Faust, 1994), critical policy analysis (Fischer, 2003; Fischer et al., 2007; Taylor, 2006), and critical discourse analysis (Fairclough, 2003) to map out the connections between various CIC actors, organizations, and funders.
Our findings indicate that the CIC has achieved success in circulating policies that dismantle public education by pooling network resources and deploying network principles as policy dissemination tools. Additionally, CIC’s seductive rhetoric of opportunity, affluence, and freedom obscure the underlying ideologies of rugged individualism, unfettered market rule, and opposition to state interventions.

Authors

• Elena Aydarova, The University of Wisconsin-Madison

• Serena Salloum, Ball State University

• Emily Hodge

• T. Jameson Brewer, University of North Georgia