"On Saving the 'Soul 'of Occupy"/Activist Dann Schecter Counters AdBuster's Recent Commentary

[KoKo]

On Saving the 'Soul' of Occupy
by Danny Schechter

Perhaps my problem is that I live in too many worlds at the same time, while many political eras live in me.



That may be why I responded so negatively to a recent polemic wrapped up in a poetic communique from AdBusters, the culture jammers in Canada, who do so much good work (and often so creatively) battling the consumption virus promoted by big corporations many of us have grown to despise.

I respect their magazine and marvel at the impact they have had in helping to stir Occupy Wall Street into existence. They clearly feel a sense of ownership in the movement and act not just as the midwife that promoted the occupy idea, but as the guardians of their version of the movement's essence, as if they own the copyright and have to defend it aggressively in the court of public opinion.

Their latest communiqué, directed to "jammers, occupiers and Springtime dreamers," is offered up almost like a new commandment from the mountaintop of political purity, warning one and all that a new enemy is in their midst that is "threatening to neutralize our insurgency with an insidious campaign of donor money and co-optation."

That may be why I responded so negatively to a recent polemic wrapped up in a poetic communique from AdBusters, the culture jammers in Canada, who do so much good work (and often so creatively) battling the consumption virus promoted by big corporations many of us have grown to despise.

I respect their magazine and marvel at the impact they have had in helping to stir Occupy Wall Street into existence. They clearly feel a sense of ownership in the movement and act not just as the midwife that promoted the occupy idea, but as the guardians of their version of the movement's essence, as if they own the copyright and have to defend it aggressively in the court of public opinion.

Their latest communiqué, directed to "jammers, occupiers and Springtime dreamers," is offered up almost like a new commandment from the mountaintop of political purity, warning one and all that a new enemy is in their midst that is "threatening to neutralize our insurgency with an insidious campaign of donor money and co-optation."

-----

They ask:

Will you allow Occupy to become a project of the old left, the same cabal of old world thinkers who have blunted the possibility of revolution for decades? Will you allow MoveOn, The Nation and Ben & Jerry to put the brakes on our Spring Offensive and turn our struggle into a "99 percent Spring" reelection campaign for President Obama?

Is this really what is happening or is it more like a conspiratorial fabrication? Is this type of insulting language really appropriate for a movement that claims to be democratic and inclusive?

MUCH MORE of this ARTICLE AND HIS REASONING AT......

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2012/04/17-0

[Leopolds Ghost]

1. Although I sometimes don't like the tone AdBusters takes, for a group that claims

(or rather doesn't claim, lol) to have been working with Anonymous, which takes the opposite tack towards its involvement (supposedly, although we've seen what happens with anons who aren't really anonymous at all but in fact minor Internet celebrities)

But I agree with what Adbusters is saying with this criticism.

I for one am considered to be pretty radical on a few issues but I am tired of being lumped in with the same tired old left professional activists -- many of whom are using Occupy to push for the same unchanged dogmas they've always been pushing for -- i.e. without thinking they have anything to learn from the new Movement, but seeking to have the Movement conform to a doctrinaire left stereotype. (Thomas Frank would have pointed out that it's not about left and right, it's about the need for a radical populist movement in this country that is not authoritarian in nature as we have given populism over to the authoritarians and xenophobes, and that was an organizing principle of Occupy, I thought). If we witness Occupy become a tool of the organizational left -- groups that have established themselves in a narrow and unchanging minority oppositional niche for decades -- it will be the same thing that happened to the Populist Party 100 years ago.

This is especially telling when such critiques come from commondreams, an online publication that sometimes seems to specialize in narrow oppositional niche leftism and not populist movement building per se.

I'm tired of being called nuts for my opinions, beliefs and worldview and it doesn't help if any cause I attach myself to gets sucked back into the maw of the old left that hasn't made any headway in developing a popular narrative that everyday people are willing to embrace (or been willing to reach out to such non-activists) in fifty years.

For one thing, the Health Care bill is an excellent example... much of the Michael Moore / conventional politically active left has no problem with stuff like the Individual Mandate and fails to see how their own ideology has been jerked around over the years into an untenable position -- like the British left of the early 80s -- just far enough left to be unpopular with 80% of the public but not far enough left on economic or social-justice issues to present a credible game-changing alternative. Which is what populism offers.

[KoKo]

2. Thanks for your input, Leo. I was hoping to hear from you.

About Danny Schecter, though. He isn't a tool of Common Dreams.

And, "Common Dreams" has always been pretty Radical Left..

But, I understand where you are coming from and what you are saying. I've been concerned myself about Co-Opting Occupy...but, come down more on "inclusive" than you might be feeling, now. Still...I have my worries. However,that said, it would be self-defeating to write off many of the older folks you need to support OWS...who can't camp in the parks and who find the GA "cool" and a wonderful new tactic...but, who just want something to do...to help and the "MicCheck" takes too long for them to deal with.

Yet...there will always be the "Infiltrators" and even those you think are strong OWS Advocates who might be working against the movement by telling the Original OWSers ..to "BEWARE THE BAD FOLKS" who will co-opt you. Those might have their own agenda, also.

I loved the "YOU CAN'T EVICT AN IDEA" Slogan Though. And, I hope the IDEA is the one that can be worked on and carried through with.

Just saying...and you know I respect your opinion...so thanks for that input. :hi:

[Leopolds Ghost]

3. My worry is we can't be inclusive if groups we're most welcoming of are themselves not embracing

The inclusive values of Occupy but are instead insisting on the same us vs. them left-right paradigm of 53% vs. 47%.

Pony people have a similar problem, heheh. If a central value is to love and tolerate those who are different from you, how do you deal with folks claiming to be part of your community who do not share your central values but instead try to redefine it to mean whatever they already hold to? Every community needs to have some sort of sense of shared purpose that extends to the audience they are trying to attract, even if they are extremely broad and consensus driven. Another issue is that if a community has values and shared purpose that is crowd sourced and consensus driven (as Anon is said to advocate) well, then that is a noble ideal but it means that, as with the problem in general of applying democracy to a self-selected group -- the make up of the group can change and the changing make-up can produce a self-selected, self-limited audience as the professed objectives of the most active participants change. (Consensus helps with this, that's why I encourage folks to use consensus whenever I'm involved in a self-selected group that wants to be democratic. If a self-selected group does stuff by straight up or down vote of whoever is currently most active, they can vote in more people like them and vote out those who disagree. This almost happened with Pacifica Radio, the only "left of center" radio network left on the dial.) I've seen this on a quasi-activist project I work at, where one of the senior folks is subtly discouraging activists out of a sense of not wanting to alienate the non-activists but cater to the prevailing values of the community which are seemingly hostile to activism (despite it being a very liberal community).

[No Elephants]

4. My sig line has said the same thing about R v. D for years now.

However, it's news to me that Michael Moore has no problem with the individual mandate. He was advocating for the Canadian and Cuban models.

[Leopolds Ghost]

6. I'm not impressed with Michael Moore, frankly. I'm sure he supports single payer though

But he blows with the wind when it comes to calling on his fans to rally round the flag of whichever candidate he's currently supporting.

[No Elephants]

7. Now you've confused me

You said:

For one thing, the Health Care bill is an excellent example... much of the Michael Moore / conventional politically active left has no problem with stuff like the Individual Mandate

and also said that you are sure Moore supports single payer.

The two seem mutually exclusive.

[Leopolds Ghost]

10. I'm talking about the casual "fan club" of filmgoers

I once attended a showing of one Moore's more recent films and Moore was in attendance. I got to ask him a question about unions vs. management and he (and the audience) derided me for it. Basically saying unions would never be allowed to operate without management, or management opposition. we have always been at war with the bosses, we will always be at war with the bosses. Never mind that one of the reasons unions work in Europe is because everyone can join. A lot of people in the "committed activist" group of Moore supporters (some of whom are my friends) seem set in their worldview... but they don't see how they are being influenced and jerked around by the mainstream media (opposing one thing today, something else the next) and when all their friends say that Individual Mandate is under attack from the GOP, then by golly individual mandate must be a good thing. I remember when Moore made a similar argument during the health care debate, he was waffling back and forth on the issue trying to find the position where he could stand most in opposition to the GOP, rather than finding a principled position and sticking to it. I respect his films, and his willingness to take on Bush's "un-involvement in preventing" Fahrenheit 9-11, but when he injects a specific thesis into his films I often find his position to be a mix of truisms and whatever position is conveniently "oppositional" to the status quo. Just my personal opinion. :blush:

[No Elephants]

11. Well written, LG. Not only am I no longer confused, but we probably agree.

I do believe Moore's heart is in the right place most of the time, but he has to make money and he may believe that he has to back and protect "the lesser of two evils" because the "only" realistic alternative is even worse.

IMO, most of the left currently is divided between that position and simply low info.

[KoKo]

13. I think we expect MM to be some hero who will lead an army....

and we expect too much.

I'm a huge fan of him...because he dared to make a movie about 9/11 at a time when most Americans were still in grief and questions about it were only in certain places around the internet. DU being one of the places where there was active discussion..at that time.

He put himself on the line for controversial films. He would probably have had an "unfortunate accident" if he'd told folks what HE REALLY THOUGHT. So, I give him credit for going as far as he could with his films and his activism. He's gone farther than many others. John Pilger and others have done documentaries but only get shown on You Tube or in really out of the way Indie Theaters in places most Americans can't have access to.

I guess I'm one of the only folks left now on DU who still appreciate what Cindy Sheehan and Michael Moore did for us during the Bush years. I seem to see their contributions differently from most Democrats here on DU. I think that they courageously did what they could in a dangerous time when public opinion was not in their favor. They are heroes to me because they tried. But, as we can see....without huge backing from Think Tanks and Big Money you are never going to be able to make the changes you hope to.

They Tried...and did what they could.. I'm grateful for that. Would that we had had so many more who put themselves on the line and had gotten a movement started...but the time was not ripe for that..yet....yet. Things would have to get much worse.

Notice how the Repugs always support "their own," while we Dems have a tendency to "turn on our own" and throw them "Under the Bus" then run over them a couple of times. Perhaps we Dems are too idealistic whereas the Repugs are Pragmatists backed by BIG MONEY AND POWER. We just depend on ethics and idealism to do it all for us. And, I'll add Julian Assange, Bradley Manning and a host of Voting Rights Advocates who worked for years to get Verified Paper Ballots and the courageousVeterans for Peace and others who served who came back and told their truths and who worked to get us out of these wars. So many people, now forgotten, who were HEROES at one time or another on Daily Kos, Buzzflash, Democratic Underground and the Lib Bloggers sites that were around at that time.

Just saying...

[No Elephants]

5. I met Schecter once. I was not impressed.

[Zorra]

8. My litmus test for 99% Spring is support for the General Strike on May 1.

So far I haven't seen or heard of them supporting the Strike.

I can appreciate that some folks can't get out and sleep in parks or spend cold evenings at GAs etc.

And I'm all for allies, the more the merrier. But not "allies" like the kind of allies the DLC, Al From, and their 1% employers were for the Democratic Party...

"Hi!:hi: We're from the 1%, and we're here to help!"

Actions speak louder than words. If 99% Spring can't, at the very least publicly get behind a major direct action that that has been in the works for a long time, and that could have the very profound effect of illustrating the power of the solidarity of the 99% to the global general public and the 1% as well, then something is seriously wrong. Maybe older folks can't sleep in the park, but they could certainly support our strike in many ways, even if they are retired.

Maybe 99% Spring will actually come through and declare solidarity with Occupy and get behind the strike, but time is growing short, the strike is 2 weeks away. It appears that they are not even acknowledging the strike - completely ignoring it, in the same way that the media ignored Occupy for so long at first, and that's a really, really bad sign. There appears to be little or no mention of the strike at 99% Spring "training sessions".

That in itself should elicit a huge WTF from back in the day old school activists and every other real progressive/liberal/lefty as well.

I am very concerned that 99% Spring is an energy pit, a way for some folks to feel like they are doing something when they are in reality just wasting their time and energy on benign feelgood activist woo that never manifests into any type of constructive action.

"There must be some kind of way out of here,"
Said the joker to the thief,
"There's too much confusion,
I can't get no relief.
Businessman they drink my wine,
Plowman dig my earth
None will level on the line, nobody offered his word.

"No reason to get excited,"
The thief, he kindly spoke
"There are many here among us
Who feel that life is but a joke
But you and I, we've been through that
And this is not our fate
So let us not talk falsely now, the hour is getting late"

All along the watchtower
Princes kept the view
While all the women came and went
Barefoot servants, too

Outside in the cold distance
A wildcat did growl
Two riders were approaching
And the wind began to howl...
Bob Dylan

Solidarity!

[KoKo]

9. I agree, Zorra. I thought there would be more news about May 1st.

At the very least shouldn't some of the Unions announce "work slowdowns" in solidarity? That would have a big impact and get some press that is needed. Just not showing up for work, keeping your kids out of school and not buying or charging anything that day by random citizens all across the country won't have the power of a sold union collaboration to do a work slowdown.

I have yours, Leo's and others concerns...but let's see how they handle this. Maybe there will have to be two groups. Activists who set their own targets through "GA's" and then the "99 Spring" doing some "feel good work" but activities/training that hopefully gets more people engaged that wouldn't have gone the "OWS..Occupy" route, for whatever reason. :shrug:

[KoKo]

12. Sorry ...wrong thread...OOPS!

[No Elephants]

14. +1