Click Banner For More Info See All Sponsors

So Long and Thanks for All the Fish!

This site is now closed permanently to new posts.
We recommend you use the new Townsy Cafe!

Click anywhere but the link to dismiss overlay!

Results 1 to 1 of 1

  • Share this thread on:
  • Follow: No Email   
  • Thread Tools
  1. TopTop #1
    zenekar's Avatar
    zenekar
     

    Obama needs a protest movement

    Obama needs a protest movement

    by Frances Fox Piven

    The Nation - 11/15/08
    this article appears in the Dec. 01, 2008 issue

    https://www.thenation.com/doc/20081201/piven

    The astonishing election of 2008 is over. Whatever else
    the future holds, the unchallenged domination of
    American national government by big business and the
    political right has been broken. Even more amazing,
    Americans have elected an African-American as
    president. These facts alone are rightful cause for
    jubilation.

    Naturally, people are making lists of what the new
    administration should do to begin to reverse the
    decades-long trends toward rising inequality,
    unrestrained corporate plunder, ecological disaster,
    military adventurism and constricted democracy. But if
    naming our favored policies is the main thing we do, we
    are headed for a terrible letdown. Let's face it:
    Barack Obama is not a visionary or even a movement
    leader. He became the nominee of the Democratic Party,
    and then went on to win the general election, because
    he is a skillful politician. That means he will
    calculate whom he has to conciliate and whom he can
    ignore in realms dominated by big-money contributors
    from Wall Street, powerful business lobbyists and a
    Congress that includes conservative Blue Dog and Wall
    Street-oriented Democrats. I don't say this to
    disparage Obama. It is simply the way it is, and if
    Obama was not the centrist and conciliator he is, he
    would not have come this far this fast, and he would
    not be the president-elect.

    Still, the conditions that influence politicians can
    change. The promises and hopes generated by election
    campaigns sometimes help to raise hopes and set
    democratic forces in motion that break the grip of
    politics as usual. I don't mean that the Obama campaign
    operation is likely to be transformed into a continuing
    movement for reform. A campaign mobilization is almost
    surely too flimsy and too dependent on the candidate to
    generate the weighty pressures that can hold
    politicians accountable. Still, the soaring rhetoric of
    the campaign; the slogans like "We are the ones we have
    been waiting for"; the huge, young and enthusiastic
    crowds--all this generates hope, and hope fuels
    activism among people who otherwise accept politics as
    usual.

    Sometimes, encouraged by electoral shifts and campaign
    promises, the ordinary people who are typically given
    short shrift in political calculation become volatile
    and unruly, impatient with the same old promises and
    ruses, and they refuse to cooperate in the
    institutional routines that depend on their
    cooperation. When that happens, their issues acquire a
    white-hot urgency, and politicians have to respond,
    because they are politicians. In other words, the
    disorder, stoppages and institutional breakdowns
    generated by this sort of collective action threaten
    politicians. These periods of mass defiance are
    unnerving, and many authoritative voices are even now
    pointing to the dangers of pushing the Obama
    administration too hard and too far. Yet these are also
    the moments when ordinary people enter into the
    political life of the country and authentic bottom-up
    reform becomes possible.

    The parallels between the election of 2008 and the
    election of 1932 are often invoked, with good reason.
    It is not just that Obama's oratory is reminiscent of
    FDR's oratory, or that both men were brought into
    office as a result of big electoral shifts, or that
    both took power at a moment of economic catastrophe.
    All this is true, of course. But I want to make a
    different point: FDR became a great president because
    the mass protests among the unemployed, the aged,
    farmers and workers forced him to make choices he would
    otherwise have avoided. He did not set out to initiate
    big new policies. The Democratic platform of 1932 was
    not much different from that of 1924 or 1928. But the
    rise of protest movements forced the new president and
    the Democratic Congress to become bold reformers.

    The movements of the 1930s were often set in motion by
    radical agitators--Communists, Socialists, Musteites--
    but they were fueled by desperation and economic
    calamity. Unemployment demonstrations, usually (and
    often not without reason) labeled riots by the press,
    began in 1929 and 1930, as crowds assembled, raised
    demands for "bread or wages," and then marched on City
    Hall or local relief offices. In some places, "bread
    riots" broke out as crowds of the unemployed marched on
    storekeepers to demand food, or simply to take it.

    In the big cities, mobs used strong-arm tactics to
    resist the rising numbers of evictions. In Harlem and
    on the Lower East Side, crowds numbering in the
    thousands gathered to restore evicted families to their
    homes. In Chicago, small groups of black activists
    marched through the streets of the ghetto to mobilize
    the large crowds that would reinstall evicted families.
    A rent riot there left three people dead and three
    policemen injured in August 1931, but Mayor Anton
    Cermak ordered a moratorium on evictions, and some of
    the rioters got work relief. Later, in the summer of
    1932, Cermak told a House committee that if the federal
    government didn't send $150 million for relief
    immediately, it should be prepared to send troops
    later. Even in Mississippi, Governor Theodore Bilbo
    told an interviewer, "Folks are restless. Communism is
    gaining a foothold. Right here in Mississippi, some
    people are about ready to lead a mob. In fact, I'm
    getting a little pink myself." Meanwhile, also in the
    summer of 1932, farmers across the country armed
    themselves with pitchforks and clubs to prevent the
    delivery of farm products to markets where the price
    paid frequently did not cover the cost of production.

    Notwithstanding the traditional and conservative
    platform of the Democratic Party, FDR's campaign in
    1932 registered these disturbances in new promises to
    "build from the bottom up and not from the top down,
    that put...faith once more in the forgotten man at the
    bottom of the economic pyramid." Economic conditions
    worsened in the interim between the election and the
    inauguration, and the clamor for federal action became
    more strident. Within weeks, Roosevelt had submitted
    legislation to Congress for public works spending,
    massive emergency relief to be implemented by states
    and localities, agricultural assistance and an
    (ultimately unsuccessful) scheme for industrial
    recovery.

    The unruly protests continued, and in many places they
    were crucial in pressuring reluctant state and local
    officials to implement the federally initiated aid
    programs. Then, beginning in 1933, industrial workers
    inspired by the rhetorical promises of the new
    administration began to demand the right to organize.
    By the mid-1930s, mass strikes were a threat to
    economic recovery and to the Democratic voting
    majorities that had put FDR in office. A pro-union
    labor policy was far from Roosevelt's mind when he took
    office in 1933. But by 1935, with strikes escalating
    and the election of 1936 approaching, he was ready to
    sign the National Labor Relations Act.

    Obama's campaign speeches emphasized the theme of a
    unified America where divisions bred by race or party
    are no longer important. But America is, in fact,
    divided: by race, by party, by class. And these
    divisions will matter greatly as we grapple with the
    whirlwind of financial and economic crises, of
    prospective ecological calamity, of generational and
    political change, of widening fissures in the American
    empire. I, for one, do not have a blueprint for the
    future. Maybe we are truly on the cusp of a new world
    order, and maybe it will be a better, more humane
    order. In the meantime, however, our government will
    move on particular policies to confront the immediate
    crisis. Whether most Americans will have an effective
    voice in these policies will depend on whether we tap
    our usually hidden source of power, our ability to
    refuse to cooperate on the terms imposed from above.

    Copyright c 2008 The Nation

    [Frances Fox Piven is on the faculty of the Graduate
    Center of the City University of New York. She is the
    author, most recently, of Challenging Authority: How
    Ordinary People Change America ].

    _____________________________________________
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  2. Gratitude expressed by:

Similar Threads

  1. Obama Voters Protest His Switch on Telecom Immunity
    By Zeno Swijtink in forum WaccoReader
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-02-2008, 04:34 PM
  2. What the next great progressive movement must look like
    By Zeno Swijtink in forum WaccoReader
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-30-2008, 07:04 AM
  3. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-10-2006, 04:11 PM

Bookmarks