[Peace-discuss] Fw: The Long Peace Movement: The Silence of MoveOn

Wed May 27 16:10:26 CDT 2009

Yeah, but Hayden is pretty mild in his condemnation. He writes as if  
believing (or hoping?) Move-On can still be useful for the change "we"  
want and need.  He seems to have lost his fire in becoming the  
"pragmatist radical".  --mkb

On May 27, 2009, at 7:20 AM, unionyes wrote:

> This piece confirms what I suspected fairly early on about MOVE ON.
>
> David J.
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: <moderator at PORTSIDE.ORG>
> To: <PORTSIDE at LISTS.PORTSIDE.ORG>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 2009 1:01 AM
> Subject: The Long Peace Movement: The Silence of MoveOn
>
>
>> The Long Peace Movement: The Silence of MoveOn
>>
>> by Tom Hayden
>> [first in a series]
>>
>> The Nation.com - May 26, 2009
>>
>> http://www.thenation.com/doc/20090608/hayden
>>
>> The most powerful grassroots organization of the peace
>> movement, MoveOn, remains silent as the American wars
>> in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan simmer or escalate.
>>
>> When he met with Obama in February, Jason Ruben,
>> executive director of MoveOn, told the president it was
>> "the moment to go big," then indicated that MoveOn
>> would not oppose the $94 billion war supplemental
>> request, nor the 21,000 additional troops to
>> Afghanistan, nor the increased civilian casualties from
>> the mounting number of Predator attacks.
>>
>> What was MoveOn's explanation for abandoning the peace
>> movement in a meeting with a president the peace
>> movement was key to electing? According to Ruben and
>> MoveOn, it was the preference of its millions of
>> members, as ascertained by house meetings and polls.
>>
>> The evidence, however, is otherwise. Last December 17,
>> 48.3 percent of MoveOn members listed "end the war in
>> Iraq" as a 2009 goal, after healthcare (64.9 percent),
>> economic recovery and job creation (62.1 percent) and
>> building a green economy/stopping climate change (49.6
>> percent--only 1.5 percent above Iraq.) This was at a
>> moment when most Americans believed the Iraq War was
>> ending. Afghanistan and Pakistan were not listed among
>> top goals which members could vote on.
>>
>> Then on May 22 MoveOn surveyed its members once again,
>> listing ten possible campaigns for the organization.
>> "Keep up the pressure to the end the war in Iraq" was
>> listed ninth among the options.
>>
>> Again, Afghanistan and Pakistan were not on the MoveOn
>> list of options.
>>
>> Nor was GuantÃ¡namo nor the administration's torture
>> policies. ("Investigate the Bush Administration" was
>> the first option.)
>>
>> MoveOn is supposed to be an Internet version of
>> participatory democracy, but the organization's
>> decision-making structure apparently assures that the
>> membership is voiceless on the question of these long
>> wars.
>>
>> What if they included an option like "demanding a
>> diplomatic settlement and opposing a quagmire in
>> Afghanistan and Pakistan"? Or "shifting from a priority
>> on military spending to civilian spending on food,
>> medicine and schools?"
>>
>> This is no small matter. MoveOn has collected a
>> privately held list of 5 million names, most of them
>> strong peace advocates. The organization's membership
>> contributed an unprecedented $180 million for the
>> federal election cycle in 2004-2006. Those resources,
>> now squelched or sequestered, mean that the most vital
>> organization in the American peace movement is missing
>> in action.
>>
>> What to do? There is no point raving and ranting
>> against MoveOn. The only path is in organizing a
>> dialogue with the membership, over the Internet, and
>> having faith that their voices will turn the
>> organization to oppose these escalating occupations.
>> The same approach is necessary towards other vital
>> organs of the peace movement including rank-and-file
>> Democrat activists and the post-election Obama
>> organization (Organizing for America) through a
>> persistent, bottom-up campaign to renew the peace
>> movement as a powerful force in civil society.
>>
>> This is not a simple matter of an organizational
>> oligarchy manipulating its membership, although the
>> avoidance by MoveOn's leadership is a troubling sign.
>> There is genuine confusion over Afghanistan and
>> Pakistan among the rank and file. The economic crisis
>> has averted attention away from the battlefront. Many
>> who voted for Obama understandably will give him the
>> benefit of the doubt, for now.
>>
>> Silence sends a message. The de facto MoveOn support
>> for the $94 billion war supplemental reverberates up
>> the ladder of power. Feeling no pressure, Congressional
>> leadership has abdicated its critical oversight
>> function over the expanding wars, not even allowing
>> members to vote for a December report on possible exit
>> strategies. In the end, a gutsy sixty voted against HR
>> 2346 on May 14, but many defected to vote for the war
>> spending, including Neil Abercrombie, Jerry Nadler,
>> David Obey, Xavier Becerra, Lois Capps, Maurice
>> Hinchey, Jesse Jackson, Sheila Jackson-Lee, Patrick
>> Kennedy, Charles Rangel, Lucille Roybal-Allard, Loretta
>> Sanchez, Rosa De Lauro, Bennie Thompson, Jerry
>> McNerney, Robert Wexler and Henry Waxman. (Bill
>> Delahunt, Linda Sanchez and Pete Stark were not
>> recorded.)
>>
>> If there were significant pressures from networks like
>> MoveOn in their Congressional districts, the opposition
>> vote might have approached 85.
>>
>> Appropriations chair David Obey in essence granted
>> Obama a one-year pass to show results in Afghanistan.
>> If the war appears to be a quagmire by then, he
>> claimed, the Democrats will become more critical.
>> Speaker Nancy Pelosi delivered the same message;
>> according to the Washington Examiner, May 6: "There
>> won't be any more war supplementals, so my message to
>> my members is, this is it." Pelosi's words were
>> carefully parsed, saying that the White House would not
>> be allowed another supplemental form of appropriation,
>> which is different from an actual pledge to oppose war
>> funding.
>>
>> This one-year pass means that the grassroots peace
>> movement has a few months to light a fire and reawaken
>> pressure from below on the Congress and president. In
>> the meantime, here are some predictions for the coming
>> year:
>>
>> * Iraq: Will Obama keep his pledge to withdraw combat
>> forces from Iraq on a sixteen-month timetable, and all
>> forces by 2011? At this point, the pace is slowing, and
>> the deadline being somewhat extended, under pressure
>> from US commanders on the ground. Sunnis are
>> threatening to resume their insurgency if the al-Maliki
>> regime fails to incorporate them into the political and
>> security structures. The president insists however,
>> that he is only making adjustments to a timetable that
>> is on track. Prognosis: Precarious.
>>
>> * Afghanistan: Will the Obama troop escalation deepen
>> the quagmire or become a successful surge against the
>> Taliban by next year? Another 21,000 troops and
>> advisers are on their way to the battlefield. Civilian
>> casualties are mounting, causing the besieged Karzai
>> government to complain. Preventive detention of Afghans
>> will only expand. US deaths, now over 600, are sure to
>> increase this summer. Taliban may hold out and redeploy
>> in order to stretch US forces thin. Prognosis:
>> Escalation into quagmire.
>>
>> * Pakistan: US policies have driven Al Qaeda from
>> Afghanistan into Pakistan's tribal areas, where the
>> United States is attacking with Predators and turning
>> Pakistan's US-funded armed forces towards
>> counterinsurgency. Public opinion is being inflamed
>> against the US intervention. Prognosis: An expanding
>> American war in Pakistan with greater threats to
>> American security.
>>
>> * Iran: With or without US complicity, Israel may
>> attack Iran early next year, with unforeseeable
>> consequences in Iraq and Afghanistan. Prognosis: Crisis
>> will intensify.
>>
>> * Global: The United States will fail to attract more
>> combat troops to fight in Afghanistan and Pakistan from
>> Europe or elsewhere, causing pressure to increase for a
>> non-military negotiated solution. Prognosis: Obama
>> still popular, US still isolated.
>>
>> * Budget priorities: Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan
>> will deeply threaten the administration's ability to
>> succeed on the domestic front with stimulus spending,
>> healthcare, education and alternative energy.
>> Prognosis: false hope for "guns and butter" all over
>> again.
>>
>> =====
>>
>> [Tom Hayden is the author of The Other Side (1966, with
>> Staughton Lynd), The Love of Possession Is a Disease
>> With Them (1972), Ending the War in Iraq (2007) and
>> Writings for a Democratic Society: The Tom Hayden
>> Reader (2008).
>>
>> Senator Tom Hayden, the Nation Institute's Carey
>> McWilliams Fellow, has played an active role in
>> American politics and history for over three decades,
>> beginning with the student, civil rights and antiwar
>> movements of the 1960s.
>>
>> Hayden was elected to the California State Legislature
>> in 1982, where he served for ten years in the Assembly
>> before being elected to the State Senate in 1992, where
>> he served eight years.]
>>
>> _____________________________________________
>>
>> Portside aims to provide material of interest
>> to people on the left that will help them to
>> interpret the world and to change it.
>>
>> Submit via email: moderator at portside.org
>> Submit via the Web: portside.org/submit
>> Frequently asked questions: portside.org/faq
>> Subscribe: portside.org/subscribe
>> Unsubscribe: portside.org/unsubscribe
>> Account assistance: portside.org/contact
>> Search the archives: portside.org/archive
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
>> Checked by AVG.
>> Version: 7.5.560 / Virus Database: 270.12.26/2116 - Release Date:  
>> 5/15/2009 6:16 AM
>
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss