Fighting the good fight
I saw a story in the news today and I learned something .... as I hardly ever pay attention to what's going on, this happens alarmingly often. Here's the story - Putting the moves on MoveOn.org. I don't know what's up with this particular issue, but I was intrigued to learn about the organization MoveOn and looked it up on Wikipedia. I have to say, it sounds kind of wonderful ......
******************************
MoveOn started in 1998 as a bipartisan email group. It petitioned the United States Congress to "move on" past the ongoing impeachment proceedings of President Bill Clinton.
After the terrorist attacks of September 11 2001, the founders of MoveOn started a petition against a military response. Eventually, this led to them working on behalf of Eli Pariser's similar 9-11peace.org petition. Pariser later joined MoveOn and serves as its executive director today.
MoveOn later publicly condemned the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Since then, it has supported John Kerry, the Democratic nominee for the 2004 U.S. presidential election and raised millions of dollars for many Democratic candidates.
MoveOn has created pressure within the Democratic Party for what the Washington Post calls "a vigorously liberal agenda" that goes "beyond simple opposition to the Bush administration." MoveOn founder Wes Boyd rejects the advice of "centrists" such as the Democratic Leadership Council who argue that "Democrats must moderate their positions on war, taxes, universal health care and other key issues." Speaking in June 2003 at a "Take Back America" conference, Boyd declared, "The primary way to build trust is to consistently fight for things that people care about." Grassroots America is ready to support a liberal agenda, he said, if only "someone will get out and lead.." ..,,.
MoveOn.org was created by computer entrepreneurs Joan Blades and Wes Boyd, the married cofounders of Berkeley Systems. They started by passing around a petition asking Congress to "censure President Clinton and move on", as opposed to impeaching him. To the couple's surprise, the petition, passed around by word of mouth, was extremely successful -- ultimately, they had half a million signatures. Buoyed by their success, the couple went on to start similar campaigns, calling for more arms inspections rather than an invasion of Iraq (see Popular opposition to war on Iraq); the reinstatement of lower limits on arsenic and mercury pollution, and campaign finance reform ......
MoveOn uses e-mail as its main conduit for communicating with members, sending action alerts at least once a week. According to Joan Neils, a graduate student at the University of Washington who has conducted a study of MoveOn ....... "MoveOn also uses the Web effectively for two-way communications," observes Neils. "One of the most interactive elements of the MoveOn.org site, and one that demonstrates the group’s non-hierarchical organization is the Action Forum. The Action Forum is much like a blog, in which members write in issues they think are important and suggest strategies for action. Members then vote on submissions and the highest ranked issues rise to the top, thereby establishing MoveOn’s priorities. It’s an incredibly fluid, bottom-up approach to decision-making, allowing MoveOn to adapt and change as they go." ......
**********************************
MoveOn was criticized for being vigorously liberal and urged to moderate their positions on war, taxes, universal health care and other key issues, but Boyd replied The primary way to build trust is to consistently fight for things that people care about. I very much agree with Boyd. Compromise has its place, but sometimes the effect of compromise, especially the compromising of ideals, is that we forget that good is good and worth fighting for.
* here's the MoveOn.org website
******************************
MoveOn started in 1998 as a bipartisan email group. It petitioned the United States Congress to "move on" past the ongoing impeachment proceedings of President Bill Clinton.
After the terrorist attacks of September 11 2001, the founders of MoveOn started a petition against a military response. Eventually, this led to them working on behalf of Eli Pariser's similar 9-11peace.org petition. Pariser later joined MoveOn and serves as its executive director today.
MoveOn later publicly condemned the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Since then, it has supported John Kerry, the Democratic nominee for the 2004 U.S. presidential election and raised millions of dollars for many Democratic candidates.
MoveOn has created pressure within the Democratic Party for what the Washington Post calls "a vigorously liberal agenda" that goes "beyond simple opposition to the Bush administration." MoveOn founder Wes Boyd rejects the advice of "centrists" such as the Democratic Leadership Council who argue that "Democrats must moderate their positions on war, taxes, universal health care and other key issues." Speaking in June 2003 at a "Take Back America" conference, Boyd declared, "The primary way to build trust is to consistently fight for things that people care about." Grassroots America is ready to support a liberal agenda, he said, if only "someone will get out and lead.." ..,,.
MoveOn.org was created by computer entrepreneurs Joan Blades and Wes Boyd, the married cofounders of Berkeley Systems. They started by passing around a petition asking Congress to "censure President Clinton and move on", as opposed to impeaching him. To the couple's surprise, the petition, passed around by word of mouth, was extremely successful -- ultimately, they had half a million signatures. Buoyed by their success, the couple went on to start similar campaigns, calling for more arms inspections rather than an invasion of Iraq (see Popular opposition to war on Iraq); the reinstatement of lower limits on arsenic and mercury pollution, and campaign finance reform ......
MoveOn uses e-mail as its main conduit for communicating with members, sending action alerts at least once a week. According to Joan Neils, a graduate student at the University of Washington who has conducted a study of MoveOn ....... "MoveOn also uses the Web effectively for two-way communications," observes Neils. "One of the most interactive elements of the MoveOn.org site, and one that demonstrates the group’s non-hierarchical organization is the Action Forum. The Action Forum is much like a blog, in which members write in issues they think are important and suggest strategies for action. Members then vote on submissions and the highest ranked issues rise to the top, thereby establishing MoveOn’s priorities. It’s an incredibly fluid, bottom-up approach to decision-making, allowing MoveOn to adapt and change as they go." ......
**********************************
MoveOn was criticized for being vigorously liberal and urged to moderate their positions on war, taxes, universal health care and other key issues, but Boyd replied The primary way to build trust is to consistently fight for things that people care about. I very much agree with Boyd. Compromise has its place, but sometimes the effect of compromise, especially the compromising of ideals, is that we forget that good is good and worth fighting for.
* here's the MoveOn.org website
posted by crystal | 11:13 AM
6 Comments:
I'm a Move.On member, and it is a pretty nifty grassroots group.
The thing that's frustrating me right now, though, is that it's become very *partisan* - and I think there's a difference between being partisan and being bold and principled. It should be possible to assert one's principles without ever having to use the word "Republican".
Hi Matthew :-)
I think you're right. There are probably more like minds in both parties than we realize.
I became a member of MoveOn during the movement to stop the war in Iraq, as several of my friends and I were organizing events in Brooklyn. I thought they were a genuine grassroots movement that would be more open in terms of discussing political issues. It became evident pretty quickly, though, that theey were just an arm of the Democratic Party. As Matthew said, they're pretty partisan. If you're looking to discuss issues broader than Democrats and Republicans, or that - God forbid may even challenge Democratic Party orthodoxy, forget it. Like DailyKos, they work hand-in-hand with the Party. Which is fine. But I was looking - and am still looking - for something broader (and deeper) than partisan politics.
And, goodness, they sure fill up your inbox with emails. I finally unsubscribed to all their alerts but one, which I rarely bother to look at anymore. I respect Pariser for coming up with a good way to organize, and I think MoveOn does good work attimes, but they're too predictably liberal for me in the end. Not much nuance.
Personally, I think the Petraeus ad was a pretty stupid move. They could've easily questioned the surge and the message Petraeus was going to deliver without using an adolescent name-calling strategy. Cute and clever won out over intelligence and shrewdness.
Hi William,
I think it's ok for them to be Democrats, but as for being an of the democratic party, the Wiki article said that they were often criticized by the Democraic party for being too liberal and unwilling to compromise.
In a way that's what I admire about them. They are not trying to make everybody happy, not trying to find bi-partisan support or a meeting of the minds, but instead picking their issues and fighting for them without compromise.
Because they are not a party organization, they can do that .... evn make dopey mistakes like the "betray us" ad.
Yes, I get constant emails from everyone - Sojourner's, animal rights organizations, America magazine, even the natural history museum in NY :-)
Crystal, you're right about MoveOn not exactly being an arm of the Democratic Party. A bad description on my part. They're an arm perhaps of the liberal wing. Because, as you point out, they're criticized by other parts of the party. But they are definitely partisan. When I first joined, there seemed to be a broader approach to politics. Greens, Independents, and others being involved. And I'm sure many still are. But the tone of the discussions definitely changed - you couldn't really bring up problems with the Democrats, or talk about alternatives. As with DailyKos, it's a "You're either with us or against us" mentality. Black and White. Yes and No. Us and Them. I think the anti-Iraq War movement was actually what was broader, politically speaking. I mistook MoveOn for being part of that broader thinking. But they were really just a forum where anti-war people came together for a time.
I think I see what you mean. From the perspective of a liberal democrat, that doesn't seem like a bad thing, but I can see how it could be disillusioning if you were hoping for a more inclusive and open minded group of people.
Post a Comment
<< Home