Forum Post: SEIU planned co-option of OWS movement to commense IMMEDIATELY
Posted 13 years ago on Oct. 9, 2011, 2:43 a.m. EST by WorkingClassAntiHero
(352)
from Manchester, NH
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
Mary Kay Henry, the President of SEIU, will either tomorrow or in the following day, announce an endorsement of the OWS protest movement. Following this, SEIU's primary organizing strategy for the coming year, called the Fight For A Fair Economy (FFFE) will begin engaging in strategic and purposeful organizing efforts within OWS actions, for the purposes of co-opting the movement for their own ends.
FFFE is, as described in their current organizers' training courses, an effort to shore up lower and working class support for Barack Obama and the DNC in the 2012 election by mobilizing organizers and the majority of their annual multi million dollar organizing budget towards bringing out the poor vote.
I have received word tonight from a former colleague of mine, who is still employed as an organizer with them in the midwest. SEIU will be making these pushes in all major cities. Protect the political sovereignty of this evolving movement and get word out that SEIU's organizers and members are welcome to LEND THEIR VOICES TO this movement, but that they may not in any manner or on any level CONTROL IT.
yes, now this has come to fruition with their "Occupy Congress" movement and the use of OWS phraseology in their re-elect Obama campaign
http://www.salon.com/writer/glenn_greenwald/
Shifting focus like this would take focus away from the fundamental corruption in our supposed-to-be democracy: the 1% and corporations do the equivalent of ballot box stuffing. I am not saying they absolutely control everything, but they obviously have influence far greater than they should according to their numbers.
It starts with propaganda, then campaign financing, ensuring that only people who are already financially secure can run for office, and control of the media to silence other candidates they do not support. That exerts a lot - a disproportionate anyway compared to what they should have- of control over who even gets on the ballots.
Then there is lobbying. bribery, etc, maybe they are tampering with the aids in the whitehouse etc who knows. And there are other ways that they attach strings to politicians and other people in government to get them to dance to their tune, and also drive people who do not dance to them out of the government.
This is the problem that is mostly what is causing the problems with the economy. Fixing the economy or the tax code or whatever will not fix it.
Furthermore, there is an institutionalization and industrialization of activism and public advocacy that has been playing out since the days of Wilson. Google George Creel and see what you find.
Modern PAC and political actions groups with specific (and generally partisan) goals, wish to take over this movement to further their own ends. This message about SEIU, is simply based on information I gained from a former associate of mine who is involved in this attempted co-option. The remainder of unions and PAC orgs will be or are attempting the same.
These groups' presence and support of the Occupation Movement should be welcomed, however any attempt to control the message or actions thereof need to be opposed entirely. This is a genuine populist movement and should any individual ideological or partisan motivated organization or group take full or even partial control, it will make this no different than the Tea Party co-option by the corporatocracy and its actors such as the Koch brothers.
Secure and maintain the sovereignty of this movement. Support it, do not control it. And if I may, please consider the message contained in the link below as a means to solidify the movement and its factions in support of the core goal of this effort.
http://occupywallst.org/forum/the-central-message-we-need/#comment-54685
Obama has got to go, hes one more problem for us to solve, as are the democrats. Its a bit late for them to co opt since it would seem the general consensus is that the democrats are part of the problem and have protected corporate oligarchy against the interests of the people. We need a new party and to remove ALL dems and ALL republicans from office.
I'll point out again, that in posting this, I welcome SEIU's support OF this movement, but will reject at all stages any attempts to control or co-opt this movement.
I am a strident supporter of organized labor and the working class. I am a unionist. But I believe this movement can and will be great and should a leadership structure form, I say let it be organic and of the movement's OWN design.
SEIU=Service Employees International Union
Has it been determined that the goals of OWS or FFFE are best represented President Obama...?
Do the goals have to be aligned with any presidency?
I think the goals of OWS and FFFE need to go beyond any president,
Isn't this more than just getting Obama reelected.....?
They do seek to create community organizations akin to those of ACORN, whom I will defend to the death if pushed.
However, the primary focus is to shore up enough Democratic party support in the 2012 election to give SEIU enough sway to push for NLRB reforms, and then perhaps some boutique social issues to keep the progressive mainstream happy.
I honestly support all of that and being realistic, if you put a gun to my head and asked me to vote for Obama or Romney/Perry/Cain/Bachmann, I'd vote Obama. But I want more choices than that. I want more opinions than that.
Opinions not bought and sold like commodities on an open market. So for that reason, i reject this attempt to hijack a populist proletariat movement to perpetuate this broken system.
Whoa, I am not perpetuating ANY broken system
I get that you will defend to the death ACORN.
Many years ago I worked for ACORN.....I understand its ideals.
But be careful how you position the populist 'proletariat' movement when most recently ACORN itself was shown to have had fraud within ITS practices.
I don't want that whether its coming from the right or the left .
What NLRB reforms are unable to get done now?
And your comment 'perhaps some boutique social issues to keep the progressive mainstream happy'.......well that sounds patronizing and not well thought out.
This movement for me is greater than the left and right politically speaking..
Thanks, Hero. Education and information is the best medicine for these kinds of manipulators. Keep up the conversation. Shine a light on everything!
Just what the movement needs! A definite brand to it without the strings attached! Woo hoo! Finally we can have a hope of gaining social justice!
No strings attached? I hope you're joking.
What does it matter? So long as the ends justify the means, it's all good! All that matters is that more chaos is brought out so that we can create social change, the added manpower and organizational experience will bring to the movement what it currently lacks: some semblance of focus.
So what if Obama got lots of money from Wall Street? He's a hell of a lot better in terms of creating social change (particularly in his first half of his term, with a democratic majority in congress) than McCain would have been! We have to use the system to change it for now, gradually taking steps in the right direction to get there.
You realize that these corporate unions are only working to ingratiate themselves with what they hope to be a winning party, yes? I mean that nothing will change in the long term or in general if they get their way, outside of a few NLRB rules.
SEIU isn't fighting for social justice, its fighting for its life. Its accepted a 1980's style corporate conservative as its patron saint in Barack Obama, who himself didn't even have the courage to come out against Scott Walker with any zeal.
I love the labor movement, but the massive corporate union machine which is SEIU and its ties to partisan politics, rather than member based populist action is exactly what has brought labor to its knees.
They will use this movement to win an election for a man who in all likelihood will win anyway against one of the three non-threatening opponents, and when they have, they will file the names all into voter outreach files for their next election push and that'll be the end of it.
The entire Wall Street Occuption will serve to reelect a corporatist government and we'll all pat ourselves on the back for just having shown up, right?
Here is some perspective, Alinsky taught to use the system then change it from within, if we can be as effective for the 2012 election as the Tea Party was for the 2010 election, we will once again have a golden opportunity to influence social change through the system, and then we can use that change to solidify power for the future to take it one step closer to our goals, as divergent as they are for now, since we can't agree on a focused set of goals.
If we can get a democratic congress and president for another term, we can add onto the many things Obama already gave us, namely a path to Socialized Medicine in the U.S., sure it'll take 10 years to starve out most of the private insurance companies out there, but real sustainable change does not happen over night. We are here to agitate and to usher in a new era of social justice.
We can all just hold hands and sing kumbaya or we can get serious about doing something. Obama isn't ideal, but with his background, he's probably light years ahead of where Hillary would have been by now.
Let's face it, even though we claim to be the 99%, without moderates, we could not solidly elect liberals. It takes time for the schools to manipulate students over time and convince them to fall in line with us. Patience is key.
You speak of Democrats as though they were a liberal party. We are currently faced with a hard right and center right decision. As I said above, if my feet are to the fire between Obama and any combination of Romney/Perry/Bachmann/Cain, I'll vote Obama. Lesser of two evils.
But I will not tolerate such a massive and powerful populist proletariat expression to be hijacked for status quo partisan purposes. The supposed progressive Democratic party sold out on nearly every step it took, except for inexpensive and comparably irrelevant boutique issues.
This has the potential to be real. Original activism and original radicalism was born of situations like these. This industry, between the unions, the pacs, superpacs and consultancies has spoiled the republican traditions and replaced them with commercial dog and pony shows.
So enough academic theorizing on how to change the system with systems that have failed consistently. The problem in politics is money and influence. Were SEIU to take a stand against that, I'd happily watch them take this over from the sidelines. However they're playing in and for the same game as the corporate interests they oppose.
I Love Labor. Love it and support it unequivocally, except here. I've witnessed SEIU fuck workers over. I've witnessed and experienced them fucking their own people over. I know that they will kill this movement if they take control.
The same objections you have over the SEIU, many people have a similar opinion of many other public sector unions.
If academic changes to the system have failed so much, how do you explain the constantly growing social safety net and the further spread of government? It is intrinsically a gradual process: unfreeze, move, refreeze. Eventually, certain opposing opinions become obsolete, look at the right vs. the LGBT community, you have plenty of people loud and angry enough to shout down the competition for an extended period of time, and things eventually change. Do you think that incremental changes amount to nothing? What do you propose is the real answer if we cannot use the current political system even slightly to our advantage? There is none at this point, if you truly believe that OWS on its own merits will incite the social change we want without the government machine, you may be in for a bitter pill of reality.
Democrats are indeed the lesser of two evils party, but as more liberals gradually pull the party left, the better quality social changes we can expect in the future. How do you think the whole social security thing started? The progressives of that era seized a crisis as an opportunity to implement a compulsory system to redistribute wealth, and it has gone without a serious challenge for over 75 years, and has inadvertently become a 3rd rail in US politics. The same could be said of medicare and medicaid, along with many of LBJ's "great society" initiatives passed by that era's progressives. We can get mad at the system, or manipulate it to our benefit.
I personally think that Labor used to be great, but now it's just as dirty as corporations, fat cat bankers, and millionaires. They've outlived their usefulness in terms of affecting national policy except if you were to look at it from a campaign finance perspective for democrats, but you don't see democrats as a true fountain of social change, so that wouldn't matter. Unions are great for professions that require very skilled workers, to protect their abilities and their marketability, that is what they were supposed to be about: protecting the little guy. Now they just line their pockets and participate in crony capitalism just like those we hate.
To address the first point, I single SEIU out first, because I have been given specific information regarding their intent to co-opt the movement. Any corporate union of any variety (and by corporate, I mean in their structure and practice, not so much the sectors they organize in) is bad for the labor movement in general.
Now as far as the Democratic party being pulled left, that simply isn't happening. They're pulled left at the outset of elections, then gravitate towards a comfortable and safe centrist position for the majority of the election cycle, then once in office, depending on branch, almost immediately begin horse trading with donors for finances, compromising ideals they ran on in order to attain political expediency or media points and ultimately forget that they are supposedly liberals, as much as conservative politicians do when elected on small government platforms, then grow the government to "secure our safety and traditions, etc, etc, etc..." I'm not saying they're particularly evil or wretched, just generally wretched as their opponents are. Difference being when it comes to corporatism, the DNC tries to hide it while the GOP in general flaunts it under their bullshit free market, dog-eat-dog world banner.
Unionism in labor markets is not only a good thing, but a vital thing. As a former organizer, I firmly believe still that every worker deserves representation and power in their workplace and that collective bargaining is essential to a robust workforce, middle class and economy. However, I'm not involved as a union organizer in this. I welcome labor's support for the movement, but reject the senior leadership's direct intent to co-opt the movement as a whole to further partisan ends that will go nowhere.
Socialism = Removal of incentives = mediocrity = entropy.
Its safe to say its already begun, while we need their men and support on the floor we dont need them to co-op this movement.
Dont underestimate them, they are very good at what they do. Stay strong