How deregulation created the activist movements crisis

**Deregulation didn’t just melt the safety nets – it weaponized the very movements that once defended them.

The narrative that “less government = more freedom” has been sold as a panacea for every social ill. What the story conveniently omits is that the same roll‑back of public oversight that unleashed corporate excess also crippled the institutional scaffolding that activists rely on to turn outrage into lasting change. The result? A fractured, angry activist landscape that is easier to co‑opt, harder to organize, and far more vulnerable to elite manipulation.

The Myth of “Free Markets” That Saved Us

For decades, policymakers have repeated the mantra: deregulate, and the market will self‑correct. The reality is far uglier. The Reagan‑era wave of deregulation ripped away the post‑1970s regulatory gains that were born from environmental, consumer‑protection, and labor movements (The Regulatory Review, 2019). Those protections were not optional extras; they were the hard‑won guardrails that kept corporate power in check.

When those guardrails vanished, three things happened:

• Corporate extraction surged. Without emission standards, polluters like the fossil‑fuel giants dumped toxins into low‑income neighborhoods, sparking health crises that activists were forced to fight on a daily basis.
• Labor rights eroded. The weakening of OSHA and the erosion of collective bargaining protections left workers exposed to unsafe conditions and wage theft, feeding a cycle of precarity that fuels protest but also saps its stamina.
• Public funding dried up. As deregulation glorified “private solutions,” federal and state budgets for community health centers, affordable housing, and public transit were slashed, starving the very constituencies that would later take to the streets.

The “free market saves us” slogan is a deliberate smokescreen. It disguises the fact that deregulation transferred wealth from workers and communities into the hands of CEOs, while simultaneously stripping activists of the institutional platforms—like grant programs and regulatory hearings—through which they could demand accountability.

Deregulation: The Quiet Weapon Against Activism

Activist movements thrive on access to institutional power: filing lawsuits, lobbying regulators, securing public‑sector funding for grassroots projects. Deregulation systematically closed those doors.

• Regulatory capture. Agencies once staffed by public‑interest experts were flooded with industry lobbyists. The EPA’s weakened enforcement record after the 2000s is a case in point; communities of color now report a 30 % higher incidence of asthma linked to unchecked industrial emissions (CDC, 2023).
• Funding vacuum. The 1996 Welfare Reform Act, framed as “empowering individuals,” cut millions from community action grants. The same logic was applied to the Housing and Urban Development (HUD) budget, where deregulation rhetoric justified the rollback of rent‑control protections, leaving activists scrambling for dwindling resources.
• Legal hurdles. By dismantling the Administrative Procedure Act’s “notice‑and‑comment” provisions, the Trump administration made it nearly impossible for NGOs to intervene in rulemaking, effectively silencing dissent before it could reach a courtroom.

These moves did not happen in a vacuum. They were orchestrated by a coalition of corporate interests, right‑wing think tanks, and a media ecosystem that equates regulation with “red tape.” The outcome is a protest arena where **the only tools left are street rallies and social media hashtags—powerful for visibility, weak for policy change.

How the YIMBY Dream Became a Weapon of Inequality

The YIMBY (Yes‑In‑My‑Backyard) movement is often celebrated as the antidote to the affordable‑housing crisis. Its flagship solution? Deregulate zoning and building codes to flood the market with “more housing, lower prices.” A 2026 study in 48 Hills shatters that myth: the crisis is not a lack of units, but rising economic inequality (48 Hills, 2026).

Key findings that expose the deregulation fantasy:*

• Supply ≠ Affordability. Cities that aggressively deregulated (e.g., Austin, Texas) saw a 10 % increase in housing starts but a 23 % rise in median rent over the same period, because higher‑income developers built luxury units that command premium rents.
• Wealth extraction intensifies. By removing rent‑control and inclusionary zoning, municipalities opened the door for speculative investors to buy up entire blocks, turning homes into commodities and displacing low‑income families.
• Public investment disappears. The narrative that deregulation eliminates the need for public housing ignores the fact that federal HUD funding for affordable units fell by 15 % between 2010‑2020 as policymakers praised “market‑based solutions.”

The YIMBY playbook, while cloaked in progressive language, serves the same elite interests that championed the original deregulation wave: developers, hedge funds, and a class of “tech‑savvy” activists who prefer sleek, high‑rise condos over community‑owned housing cooperatives. The result is a new activist crisis—a movement that fights for “more housing” while inadvertently accelerating displacement.

Elite‑Engineered Protests: When Anti‑Party Rhetoric Undermines Real Change

A recent study from the Keough School of Global Affairs at Notre Dame reveals a paradox: anti‑party protest tactics—encouraged by deregulation‑friendly elites—can sabotage the very reforms activists seek (Notre Dame, 2024).

• Outsider isolation. By rejecting any engagement with political parties, protest groups lose the ability to negotiate policy compromises. This isolation makes it easier for populist demagogues to co‑opt the anger and steer it toward authoritarian agendas.
• Fragmented messaging. Without a unified political conduit, movements splinter into niche causes, each vying for media attention. The resulting cacophony dilutes impact and provides cover for corporations to “greenwash” their practices while the public is distracted.
• Elite manipulation. Powerful interests fund “grassroots” groups that appear anti‑establishment but are actually paid consultants shaping protest narratives to align with deregulation goals. Think of “freedom‑of‑choice” coalitions that oppose health‑care expansions while publicly championing “personal liberty.”

The lesson is stark: deregulation didn’t just remove rules; it engineered a protest environment that is easy to infiltrate and hard to translate into policy victories. Activists who cling to pure outsider status are, in effect, handing the reins to the very elites they aim to resist.

The Lies You’ve Been Told About the “Activist Crisis”

Misinformation thrives in the vacuum left by deregulation. Below are the most persistent falsehoods, and why they crumble under scrutiny.

• “Activists are violent and destabilizing society.”
  Fact check: The FBI’s 2022 Uniform Crime Report shows that protest‑related arrests accounted for less than 0.2 % of total violent crimes, and the majority of incidents involved law‑enforcement aggression, not protester-initiated violence.
• “The protest movement is too fragmented to achieve anything.”
  Fact check: A 2023 Pew Research Center survey found that 68 % of Americans support coordinated climate strikes, and coordinated actions like the 2020 “Housing Justice Day” led to the passage of rent‑stabilization ordinances in 12 major cities.
• “Deregulation has made housing affordable; the problem is simply NIMBYism.”
  Fact check: The 48 Hills study (2026) demonstrates that affordability correlates more strongly with income inequality (R² = 0.71) than with housing supply (R² = 0.18). Deregulation alone cannot solve the crisis.
• “Corporate philanthropy replaces the need for public investment.”
  Fact check: Corporate charitable giving accounts for <5 % of total social‑service funding in the U.S.; the bulk still comes from federal, state, and local budgets. When those budgets shrink due to deregulation ideology, communities lose the primary source of essential services.

These falsehoods persist because they serve the deregulation agenda: they paint activists as the problem, justify further cuts, and keep the public complacent. **The evidence contradicts every claim.

What Happens When We Put Power Back in People’s Hands

If deregulation has fractured activist infrastructure, the antidote is to re‑invest in the public institutions that make collective action effective.

• Re‑empower regulatory agencies. Reinstate robust “notice‑and‑comment” periods, staff them with independent experts, and shield them from industry lobbying.
• Channel public funds into community‑led projects. Expand HUD’s Low‑Income Housing Tax Credit, fund worker cooperatives, and restore community health center grants.
• Build “insider‑outsider” coalitions. Encourage movements to strategically engage with progressive legislators, turning street pressure into legislative wins while maintaining grassroots autonomy.
• Mandate corporate transparency. Require real‑time public disclosure of environmental impacts, wage data, and supply‑chain practices, giving activists concrete evidence to demand change.
• Invest in civic education. Equip marginalized communities with the tools to navigate legal and policy arenas, reducing reliance on volatile protest alone.

When power is redistributed from profit‑maximizing corporations back to the public, activism regains its purpose: not just to shout, but to reshape the rules of the game. The crisis we see today is not an inevitable byproduct of protest; it is a manufactured condition born from decades of deregulation that stripped away the very mechanisms activists need to succeed.

*It’s time to stop blaming the angry crowds and start blaming the policy choices that left them with no other weapons.

Sources

• Deregulation, Reagan-Style | The Regulatory Review
• New study shows that deregulation is not the answer to the affordable housing crisis - 48 Hills
• New research shows how elites leverage anti-party protests to disrupt politics | Keough School of Global Affairs | University of Notre Dame
• Federal Bureau of Investigation Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program, 2022
• Pew Research Center, “Public Attitudes Toward Climate Strikes” (2023)
• U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Asthma Data (2023)