claw back political contributions

[Ostap]

This is why, as cops brutalize marginalized Americans and those Americans collectively resist, there will be plenty of vague calls for inclusion from corporate PR departments but very few threats to claw back political contributions or demands on political leadership to carry out necessary measures like the defunding of city police departments gorged on Rambo-esque arsenals of military-grade hardware.
link

Hello, what does "claw back political contributions" mean here, and is the object of "claw back" political contributions only, or demands too?

 

[teechar]

This is why, as cops brutalize marginalized Americans and those Americans collectively resist, there will be plenty of vague calls for inclusion from corporate PR departments but very few threats to claw back political contributions or demands on political leadership to carry out necessary measures like the defunding of city police departments gorged on Rambo-esque arsenals of military-grade hardware.
link

Hello, what does "claw back political contributions" mean here,

It means reclaim (take back) financial contributions from politicians.

and is the object of "claw back" political contributions only, or demands too?

only "political contributions".
"... there will be ... very few ... demands ..."

 

[Ostap]

It means reclaim (take back) financial contributions from politicians.

Am I right that the idea here is that corporations that are lobbying their interests through politicians (by paying them) are not going to put an end to this practice?

 

[Tarheel]

You don't lobby interests. You lobby politicians.

 

[Ostap]

You don't lobby interests. You lobby politicians.

Corrected:

Am I right that the idea here is that corporations that are lobbying their interests through politicians lobbying politicians to back their (corporations's) interests (by paying them) are not going to put an end to this practice?

 

[teechar]

Sorry, I've probably worded my reply in post #2 in a somewhat ambiguous way!
I meant:

There will be very few demands to reclaim (take back) from politicians any financial contributions given to them.

Does that help?

 

[Ostap]

Sorry, I've probably worded my reply in post #2 in a somewhat ambiguous way!
I meant:

Does that help?

I tried to rephrase it to make sure if I understood the idea. Maybe I confused things by turning "very few" into a negative statement to simplify it. (I thought it would not affect the whole meaning much).

Here is the preceding sentence from the article:

Big companies discriminate, union-bust, underpay their employees, and generally treat America’s vast and diverse working class like shit. Behind the woke smokescreens of Big Philanthropy and intersectional HR pablum, their corporate political action committees pour contribution after contribution into the coffers of establishment politicians, Democratic and Republican alike, who uphold a morally indefensible status quo, while their armies of lobbyists and consultants ensure that no one’s need for health care, housing, or basic dignity ever transgresses against the bottom line.

So the phrase "There will be (.....) very few threats to claw back political contributions." means that the corporations are happy with the status quo and are going to keep pouring contributions to politicians to keep the current state of affairs.

Do I understand correctly?

 

[5jj]

The words 'claw back' mean 'reclaim (take back)', as teechar said.

We can guess that they will continue with the contributions, but that's not what the words mean.