Baffled By Community Organizing

Deven Desai

Deven Desai is an associate professor of law and ethics at the Scheller College of Business, Georgia Institute of Technology. He was also the first, and to date, only Academic Research Counsel at Google, Inc., and a Visiting Fellow at Princeton University’s Center for Information Technology Policy. He is a graduate of U.C. Berkeley and the Yale Law School. Professor Desai’s scholarship examines how business interests, new technology, and economic theories shape privacy and intellectual property law and where those arguments explain productivity or where they fail to capture society’s interest in the free flow of information and development. His work has appeared in leading law reviews and journals including the Georgetown Law Journal, Minnesota Law Review, Notre Dame Law Review, Wisconsin Law Review, and U.C. Davis Law Review.

You may also like...

2 Responses

  1. A.W. says:


    You know it was interesting until you lost me here.

    > So maybe this explains how a party that offered churches and other faith-based organizations who, as far as I know, engage in community organizing to achieve social goals, can attack the idea of community organizing.

    My gosh, you can’t even apply the principles of the information your just pointed out. Hyperpartisanship short-circuits logic. You need to think, sir.

    The republicans didn’t attack it. They just diminished it. there is an important difference. I am sure everyone will say generally community organizing is a good thing, but its really not much to put on a resume when applying for president. Obama would do better to emphasize being a professor, for instance, than that.

    Not to mention that a lot of that organizing was done with that shady outfit, ACORN.

    > As stated above, BOTH sides engage in this rather poor example of living up to using their brain to process.

    Except you are missing something else. “Yes, Virginia, there is a swing vote.” And it might very well be the state of Virginia, although I suspect Pennsylvania is more likely. That is, people who AREN’T reflexively partisan, and gosh, I would wager they engage in that part of the brain involved in reasoning.

    By the way, if you are looking for a democratic example, jeez, the whole palin thing seems like a long version of that. the otherwise liberal people who suddenly say a woman’s place is in the home, or attack someone because their daughter is pregnant. This was done because it was assumed she was for abstinence only sex-ed, but what do you know? It turns out she wasn’t. I even saw an Obama supporter say that if you have grade school children you shouldn’t run for president, ignoring the fact that 1) Palin’s teenage daughter is not in grade school and 2) Obama fits that criteria to a T.

  2. D.B. says:

    A.W., I think assuming that swing voters use reasoning to arrive at their positions is awfully optimistic. There isn’t much evidence that swing voters are smarter than the rest of the country, and polls show most don’t make up their minds until the very last minute. It’s likely they’re still using the emotional portions of their brains, just not in a party-affiliated way — maybe basing their vote on how angry the last attack ad they saw made them.