No To Co-Option: MoveOn Is The Opposite Of The Occupy Movement

[BridgeTheGap]

(Apologies, if this has already been posted - btg)

While most of the comments about my article on Van Jones and our General Assembly's call for independence from the Democratic Party and Democratic Party front groups were positive, a few people don't seem to know the history of MoveOn.

Please do not misunderstand my criticisms of MoveOn and other organizations in this article as criticism of the many good people in these organizations. We have some people from MoveOn and other groups working with us at Occupy Washington, DC. It is the leadership of these groups that misdirects people into the Democratic Party, supporting Democratic candidates and weak and often counterproductive Democratic Party positions. We welcome MoveOn members to the Occupy Movement, but we do not want their leadership misdirecting the movement into the Democratic Party which is dominated by Wall Street and other big business interests.

Many occupiers are growing increasingly concerned about the attempted co-option of the Occupy Movement by Democratic Party operatives. I focused on Van Jones because he has been appearing in the media talking like he is occupying somewhere. I don't think he is sleeping in a tent in any Occupy, but he sure gets a lot of attention from the corporate media as if he were an occupier. The corporate media seems to want to anoint him as the leader of the Occupy Movement. And, his Rebuild the Dream website makes it look like it was the Occupy the Highway Movement, even though no one from Rebuild walked the 220 mile journey from New York to Washington, DC.

But, I am equally concerned about groups like SEIU – a union that has already endorsed President Obama – and has been described by Glenn Greenwald as attempting to co-opt the Occupy Movement. Also of concern is Campaign for America's Future which holds annual conferences that seek to spotlight Democratic candidates and get people to spend their time and resources electing Democrats. If therir strategy is to elect Democrats that is fine, just do it somewhere else. The Occupy Movement is the opposite – we are independent of the two parties. We the system as corrupt and working to elect people in that system as joining the corruption rather than stopping it.

http://www.countercurrents.org/zeese281111.htm

[polichick]

1. Will most Occupiers vote? I've been an Occupier and always vote but...

...I can't help wondering if the movement will try to influence both parties but not bother to vote in large numbers.

[Zorra]

15. I always vote, and I'm an Occupier also. nt

[polichick]

17. I hope that thinking applies to the majority of young Occupiers...

...since they're rightly fed up with both parties.

[proud2BlibKansan]

2. Occupy needs to give this a rest. MoveOn is not trying to steal their movement.

This is tin foil hat nonsense. And it just causes people to walk away from the Occupy movement. Both MoveOn and Occupy are perfectly capable of functioning without stealing, co-opting or stepping on the toes of the other group.

[inademv]

4. Vigilance is the only solution

Grow complacent with their attempts to co-opt the movement and it will be like every other situation which has led to our lousy situation in the world today. How did the tax situation get where it is? How did the corruption in politics get where it is? People stopped keeping watch and the people who could do anything about it became complacent with how things were and what was happening around them.

[proud2BlibKansan]

8. Vigilance for what?

MoveOn hasn't tried to take anything away from OSW. Like I said this is conspiracy silliness that serves no positive purpose.

[groovedaddy]

29. It may represent a distrust in the 2 party system, which, after all, got us to where we are. imho

it comes down to whether or not you think change can be generated from within the existing system or the change needs to come from outside it. I do think that the Occupy movement needs to steer clear of party politics for the time being. When there is clarity of where the occupy movement wants to go, then the "how to" will also start to get clearer.

The corruption in our current system is bi-partisan and that fact turns many, many people off. Me and many other Democrats, back in the 90s, tried to persuade the party to swear off special interest money (corporate in particular because that's where most of the money is coming from). The pat answer was: "we'll never get anyone elected!" Well, the repubs had it all from 2001 - 2007 and they damned near wrecked the country. Yet so many Americans all willing to keep electing them. Maybe there will come a time when the Democratic party will be the clear establishment party and there will be another, more progressive party as an alternative. The repubs should go the way of the whigs - extinct!
That said, it never ceases to amaze me how progressive the Dem party platform is. I think the corruption endemic in the system is what keeps the party platform from being implemented to a much greater extent.

[Arctic Dave]

6. You are incredibly wrong.

From day one political parties on both sides and special interest groups have been trying to use the occupy movement to their advantage. IMHO this why DC doesn't care that the mayors/police are forcefully destroying the OWS sites across the nation, they don't control it.

[proud2BlibKansan]

11. That is your opinion

I obviously disagree.

Here in my city, some in the Occupy group have been accusing MoveOn of co-opting from the beginning. But I know the local activists who lead MoveOn events and they not only have not participated in Occupy events, they have yet to send out an email telling their members to support the Occupy movement.

But some in the Occupy group continue to make this accusation and stir folks up. It's ridiculous and serves no purpose but to limit the growth of our local Occupy group.

The same ones making this accusation are also slamming unions and asking that they not co-opt either. Hence, very few from the local labor movement have been involved.

So all this does is push people away.

[Starry Messenger]

16. Thank you.

Turning this into the cool kids club will not help the movement. The anti-union stuff bugs me too.

[nadinbrzezinski]

38. And here in my city the national day of action

Of nov 17, drew people to the event from a mail blast from move on or a second one from the unions.

Perhaps your city is an exception, but national and local move on are pare of this. Locally it's a working relationship.

[Arctic Dave]

41. It is very different then.

If people wish to participate then they should come but no one should be allowed to think this is their personal political tool. Doing so does not "push people away" but pushes away irrelevant political parties.

[EFerrari]

27. Yep. And Van Jones has been particularly nauseating in this regard.

He's build entire presentations out of co-opted phrases and metaphors. I always thought he sold snake oil and now I'm sure of it.

[joeglow3]

9. Let me introduce you to the newest wing of the Republican Party - the teabaggers

[proud2BlibKansan]

13. So now MoveOn = tea party??

LOL

[joeglow3]

19. Come on, really?

You can't see the comparisons? Hell I went to the first ever Tea Party Rally they had here. Initially, we were pissed about the banks getting bailed out. Shortly thereafter, right wing groups began co-opting it and they quickly delivered the group into the waiting hands of the Republicans.

It is COMPLETLEY reasonable for those of us involved with the Occupy movement to be skeptical of other groups suddenly saying, "uh....yeah. We are aligned with this group that has risen out of nowhere and is extremely popular. Support us too." We are 100% right in questioning if they give a shit about our movement or are interested in their allegiances to the Democratic Party first and foremost.

[proud2BlibKansan]

21. How does OSW expect to grow without adding new followers?

Pushing other groups away only DECREASES the numbers.

I understand your comparison. Thanks for the added explanation. But until MoveOn pulls up to OSW with a big bus, it's just a fantasy.

[EFerrari]

34. It sounds like MoveOn is having actions using the language of OWS

on days that conflict with actual OWS actions. That is a big bus, isn't it?

There's no reason the two groups shouldn't work together except MoveOn sucks at working "with" anybody.

[proud2BlibKansan]

39. Not where I am

[EFerrari]

48. Well, that's good to hear. nt

[inademv]

3. I welcome the advocacy of people with influence

But they need to know they speak in support of, not in the name of, the Occupy movement.

[mmonk]

5. I get emails from them everyday about doing a "99% action" they come up with in my community.

I generally look to the local Occupy for such matters.

[frazzled]

7. How can something that claims to have no leadership or ownership

... that is to say, that is open to everyone .... be "co-opted"?

Everyone gets to have a voice in the OWS movement, I should think. Even MoveOn. Or is this really a more exclusive club than we thought?

[mmonk]

10. Then why don't they coordinate rather than supplant actions?

[proud2BlibKansan]

12. Exactly

[EFerrari]

24. No, MoveOn is not a person. It is a couple of rich people

with a bunch of followers. It's not even a democratic organization. If Joan and whatshisname want to stand in line like everyone else, I'm sure they're welcome. But MoveOn has no privilege there.

[freshwest]

45. +1. It's supposed to be educating the public and inclusive.

[groovedaddy]

66. I did notice at our local occupy that noisy street people were not encouraged to stick around though

they were allowed to feed themselves.

[Tippy]

14. This does not sound good......MoveOn and the Occupy Movement

Are made up of good people...they need to work together...United We Stand....and you know the second part...

[dkf]

18. OWS is anti politics, not pro Democrat.

They want to remake the system but not through voting. I have no idea where they think their moral authority comes from if not through voting. That is what has always puzzled me about OWS.

[boston bean]

20. voting is only 1/2 of it. Change comes when politicians change their ways.

And you don't have to vote them in or out to make that happen.

[dkf]

23. But protesting in the streets is always a minority of the population.

Voting is the only thing that represents participation of a large swath of the people.

It's not only half. It's the whole shebang.

And change needs to come out of consensus or at least majority rule. Otherwise you replace obtuse and self interested politicians with what, the self interested and unelected?

[boston bean]

32. You are thinking about this the wrong way. OWS might only have so many people out in the streets,

but the sentiment flows through what 72% of the population.

Political pressure stemming from social unrest is what will cause the change. And I think it's really the only way.

yes I will vote, but my vote doesn't mean much if they aren't doing what the majority would like.

[polichick]

42. It's critical that OWS votes in big numbers - otherwise, the politicians will...

...ignore the movement and write the "social unrest" off to a few malcontents.

[freshwest]

46. I wish there was an OWS party. They'd get my vote everytime.

[polichick]

49. Well, there's this guy - looks like he's adopting OWS principles...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=823773&mesg_id=823773

[Proud Liberal Dem]

25. Yeah. How is OWS going to remake the system without voting exactly?

They can protest and tell everybody what they want but I don't know how they're going to influence the political process (i.e. getting their agenda signed into law) without voting. I'm not going to say that they should be a pro-Democratic Party movement but unless they vote for candidates, presumably those whom support their agenda, how do they hope to accomplish anything? They've gotten people to notice them and start to listen to their grievances (people are now talking about the 99%) but their activism is eventually going to need to be translated into political action- either by trying to get lawmakers to support their agenda or supporting candidates that do- before anything can fundamentally change IMHO.

[boston bean]

31. Pressure. Political Pressure caused by social unrest. It is a proven tactic.

voting is a small part of the equation when talking about significant change.

edit to remove nt.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

43. Pressure is important

On a few key issues it may be enough to flip a vote or get something odious shelved but it's not going to be enough IMHO to simply pressure existing politicians, particularly those whom are completely unsympathetic to the cause (i.e. Republicans), into supporting the cause over the long term without organizing to vote out the rascals and get some new people in place that are actually going to support the cause and get bills passed.

[hack89]

44. OWS has not demonstrated the ability to exert that kind of pressure

in most places it is nothing more than a harmless novelty - and at the moment they appear to be getting weaker by the day.

[BridgeTheGap]

50. The anti-war movement during the Vietnam war started the same way, going through fits and starts.

Same with the Civil rights movement. When people get fed up, they need some place to go and vent.

[hack89]

54. The difference is that an uptick in the economy

is all it will take to deflate OWS. They are a product of the economy - they will grow only as long as the economy sucks. When the economy stops sucking OWS will wither away.

[BridgeTheGap]

64. I think you may be right but I wouldn't bet on the economy taking off any time soon. What's

happening in Europe right now still has us on the brink.

[dionysus]

52. flash mobs at walmart. really.

:rofl:

[truebrit71]

22. Yeah, not so much...MoveOn holds (or at least tries to hold) TPTB in the Dem party accountable...

...for their actions, up to and including criticising the Dems for support for bank bail outs etc etc...

I agree that OWS is NOT a 'Democratic' party offshoot, nor should it be, but I think that suggesting that cooperation between OWS and MoveOn.org results in people being directed to the Democratic party is wide of the mark..

[undeterred]

26. Last Saturday we were having an anti-Walker rally at the Capitol

in Madison and MoveOn was planning a 99% event there. I wrote and told them to please not do this- we only need one event at a time, thank you, but nobody answered me. They just do what they do.

[EFerrari]

28. Nobody ever answers because their communication is all in one direction.

That's is just what they do and they have no interest in doing anything differently.

[undeterred]

33. Well, thats a problem.

[EFerrari]

35. Yes, it is and for a lot of reasons. They don't teach people to be active

but to be more actively passive, to take orders well.

[undeterred]

58. Every time I've been involved in a MoveOn activity its a

completely different set of people. And from what I've heard from other people, that's just the way it is- no continuity at all. A lot of us know each other from other groups anyway, and once in a while MoveOn has an idea worth following through on but there is nothing cohesive about the group on a grassroots level. No identity at all.

[EFerrari]

59. It is what it is. Corporate culture that two people tried to turn

to a good purpose but they limit themselves and everyone who follows them. But, they have done some good things and will likely do more. It's a closed system, though. If you know that going in, that might mitigate disappointment.

[undeterred]

62. They have a very impressive email list full of people

with a very thin commitment to their organization, FWIW.

[EFerrari]

63. Yep. And that list is only good for the actions that are handed down

and we don't know the turn over on the list. It is what it is. :)

[slipslidingaway]

30. Good article - Occupy scores victory against Republicans

Posted here ...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=823765&mesg_id=823765
by kos

"Republicans in the U.S. Congress on Tuesday threw their support behind a payroll tax cut extension, trying to blunt charges ahead of 2012 elections of favoring wealthy Americans over middle-class workers..."


From the OP link and remember how the word Medicare was used to describe the "public option"

"...Using non-profit front groups to undermine progressive movements is consistent with the tactics of the Democratic Party. In return for big funding from Democratic Party donors these groups are told what they can do and say by Democratic Party operatives. During the health care reform debate MoveOn was part of a coalition called Health Care for America Now. The name of the coalition was eerily similar to the long-established single payer advocacy group, Health Care Now. But rather than advocating for an end to insurance-dominated health care as single payer would do, the well-funded Health Care for America Now (spending at least $50 million to support ObamaCare) advocated for the Obama health law, which more deeply entrenched insurance industry domination of health care. A law that even forces Americans, for the first time in history, to buy a corporate product and in this case a seriously flawed product..."

[slipslidingaway]

36. Endorsing Obama, SEIU says president for 99%

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/11/16/endorsing-obama-seiu-says-president-for-99/

"One of the nation's largest labor unions gave an early endorsement to Pres. Barack Obama Wednesday, using lingo from the Occupy movement to describe the incumbent president as standing with the 99%, rather than millionaires and corporations in the 1%.

"As Americans we face stark choice," Service Employees International Union president Mary Kay Henry said Wednesday. "Do we want leaders who side with rich corporations, the 1% who are prospering, or leaders who side with us, the 99 percent?"

...But in an interview, Occupy DC spokesman Sam Jewler denied any alignment with the union.

"We certainly have not endorsed President Obama or any other politicians," Jewler told CNN during an interview Wednesday at an impromptu tent city a few blocks from the White House.

He said from his perspective, "the whole system has problems, so there's no single politician who's able to fix the money and politics, the growing wealth disparity. None of them can answer to that, because all of them are taking money from the corporations and the wealthy."

[groovedaddy]

37. Too many 1%ers in the oval office to suit my leanings. Of course the republicans would be load the

place like they usually do.

[slipslidingaway]

61. Too many for me as well. n/t

[GreenTea]

40. Stupid fucking article & analysis-Divide & Conquer-Republicans are masters-Same with these assholes

Blaming MoveOn or even Van Jones - seems like the usual suspects, suspiciously unhanded republicans sabotage tactics....perhaps they'll be able to connive & manipulate & convince OWS that it's also in their best interest to hook-up with the uninformed moronic imbecile tea-baggers too. - republicans always making sure just NOT with the democrats.

BTW - DU is a democratic forum!

What a complete pile of bullshit is this article.

People who don't perhaps physically occupy can still agree with OWS and support the effort in many different ways as well as speaking out about the same exact things the OWS occupiers are against, all compassionate thinking progressive people are against. - Each OWS person has their individual thoughts and freedoms.....to assume differently, then lie about them being swayed or taken over one way or another is bullshit and a complete insult to each OWS individual intelligence & commitment, as well as all who care about the absolute corporate fascism and their rich bastards backers....Stop pointing your finger at people on the same side speaking the same message....MoveOn can walk and occupy among you and are in 100% agreement as well. - Again, complete divide & conquer tactics!

Shameless manipulation.

[freshwest]

47. Yes, by not participating, people enabled Wall Street to fill the power vacuum.

[groovedaddy]

65. The real issue here is whether this guy's point of view is prevalent or an anomaly. But I do hear

what you're saying. I don't put ANYTHING past the repubs. I consistently post favorable items re: Occupy on FaceBook. The comments that follow are interesting, some predictable some not, based on a person's political bent. How many people are angry at what's happening but don't have a political bent, or, at least they don't self-identify as having one.

[KoKo]

51. Kick...

[dionysus]

53. let's see what gets more change... legislation or flash mobbing a walmart...

[hfojvt]

55. yes, sure, what a terrible thing it is to elect Democrats.

"the system"

yeesh. I am having a flashback to the 70s.

[ecstatic]

56. Working to elect people is "joining in the corruption?"

What a joke! Sounds like one nut is trying to speak for the entire group.

[gkhouston]

60. Depends on the candidate. n/t

[dionysus]

57. dissing moveon, van jones, the dems, unions.. douche greenwald.. wow you hit all the bases...

:rofl: