Civil society is under attack in the United States. How does this affect Canadian funders? The calls for support are multiplying. Some of the work that Canadian funders support, whether it is international aid or scientific research, is being demolished. But funders here may feel that they or their partners in Canada won’t come under direct fire. Should they anticipate any differently?
In a prescient article from May 2024, the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace suggested that U.S. civil society organizations will face legal and political intimidation tactics that are similar to those used to harass and silence civil society in Hungary, India and other authoritarian democracies. In anticipation, the Carnegie Endowment put together some notes to guide U.S. civil society groups and foundations in defending against present and future attacks. Carnegie was ringing an alarm well before the election of the current Trump administration, saying that it was important to take measures to strengthen and enable civil society to survive and fight back. And it put the onus on funders to do more to support civil society defense, whether through rapid response grants to counter targeted legal attacks or more broadly to support sector network voices and narratives.
While we in Canada don’t expect direct attacks from an authoritarian government, is it a good idea for Canadian funders to remain oblivious? Authoritarian attacks outside of our borders can influence our own political discourse and intimidate civil society even if there no signs of government antipathy. This suggests that philanthropic funders might take time now to consider the impact of possible restrictions on civic space in Canada. It’s true that we have seen over the last decade some positive developments in federal rules governing public policy dialogue and development by charities. Yet there is a continuing reluctance on the part of charities to engage in such activity, mostly for lack of resources but also because of lingering worry that charities are not permitted to “advocate” for policy change. A July 2024 report from the Carleton Charities Insights Canada Project documents this clearly. Many charities rely on their umbrella or intermediary organizations to do the advocacy work for them. But these organizations are perennially short of funding. There is no guarantee that a change in government will not return us to more constraints on the ability of charities and nonprofits to speak out. Is the charitable sector limiting its own freedom of expression even before such explicit restrictions might be re-imposed?
The Carnegie Endowment notes that “restrictions on civil society and individuals’ right to organize and advocate freely have been defining features of the global democratic recession that has engulfed all regions of the world over the past two decades.” So, what can be learned from the responses of civil society organizations and their funders in other parts of the world? Carnegie lists some valuable lessons:
What can funders do beyond supporting these strategies through funding toolkits, trainings and other information? Carnegie underlines the importance of greater collaboration and standing together for threatened civil society organizations. The role of network organizations in coordinating these efforts cannot be underestimated. Carnegie suggests that funders “support greater coordination and knowledge-sharing by resourcing cross-issue working groups, convenings, and resource platforms focused on threats to civic space.” Organizations in Canada such as Philanthropic Foundations Canada, Community Foundations of Canada, Imagine Canada, Environment Funders Canada and regional networks such as the Ontario Nonprofit Network and the Alberta Nonprofit Network serve this important function of coordinating positions, monitoring legislation and law, and building positive narratives for the sector. There is much for Canadian funders to do that will strengthen nonprofits and their networks in confronting current or future pressures on their right to speak and act freely on issues where they have expertise. A diversity of voices will always be critical to a healthy democracy in a strong and independent country.