The Occupy movement is a much-needed counterpoint to today's elected "progressives"
OPINION Millions of Americans are eager, even desperate, for a political movement that truly challenges the power of Wall Street and the Pentagon. But accommodation has been habit-forming for many left-leaning organizations, which are increasingly taking their cues from the party establishment: deferring to top Democrats in Washington, staying away from robust progressive populism, and making excuses for the Democratic embrace of corporate power and perpetual war.
It's true that many left-of-center groups are becoming more sophisticated in their use of digital platforms for messaging, fundraising and other work. But it's also true that President Obama's transactional approach has had demoralizing effects on his base. Even the best resources — mobilized by unions, environmental groups, feminist organizations, and the like — can do only so much when many voters and former volunteers are inclined to stay home.
For people fed up with bait-and-switch pitches from Democrats who talk progressive to get elected but then govern otherwise, the Occupy movement has been a compelling and energizing counterforce. Its often-implicit message: protesting is hip and astute, while electioneering is uncool and clueless. Yet protesters' demands, routinely focused on government action and inaction, underscore how much state power really matters.
To escape this self-defeating trap, progressives must build a grassroots power base that can do more than illuminate the nonstop horror shows of the status quo. To posit a choice between developing strong social movements and strong electoral capacity is akin to choosing between arms and legs. If we want to move the country in a progressive direction, the politics of denunciation must work in sync with the politics of organizing — which must include solid electoral work.
Movements that take to the streets can proceed in creative tension with election campaigns. But even if protests flourish, progressive groups expand and left media outlets thrive, the power to impose government accountability is apt to remain elusive. That power is contingent on organizing, reaching the public and building muscle to exercise leverage over what government officials do — and who they are. Even electing better candidates won't accomplish much unless the base is organized and functional enough to keep them accountable.
Politicians like to envision social movements as tributaries flowing into their election campaigns. But a healthy ecology of progressive politics would mean the flow goes mostly in the other direction. Election campaigns should be subsets of social movements, not the other way around.
For progressives, ongoing engagement with people in communities has vast potential advantages that big money can't buy — and (we hope) can't defeat. But few progressive institutions with election goals have the time, resolve, resources or patience to initiate and sustain relationships with communities. For the most part, precinct organizing is a lost art that progressives have failed to revitalize. Until that changes, the electoral future looks bleak.
Norman Solomon is founding director of the Institute for Public Accuracy and co-founder of rootsaction.org. A longer version of this piece appears in the Nov. 24 edition of The Nation.
Most Commented On
- Treading water - July 22, 2014
- Nonprofit workers shout down Board of Supervisors meeting, 11 - July 22, 2014
- FPPmELMWTfrgWj - July 22, 2014
- Uber’s secret, “proprietary” insurance policy leaked - July 22, 2014
- Chiu introduces legislation to regulate Airbnb and short-term - July 22, 2014
- Blurry portrait - July 22, 2014
- Police radio dispatch from Alejandro Nieto shooting raises new - July 22, 2014
- Blurry portrait - July 22, 2014
- San Francisco to study dropping speed limit to 20 mph for - July 22, 2014
- Bright future - July 22, 2014