Forum Post: Sorry OWS but you hijacked MoveOn.org's narrative, not the other way around.
Posted 13 years ago on Oct. 19, 2011, 1:01 a.m. EST by booshington
(397)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
Their site is full of posted articles talking about all the things OWS is talking about now.
How can you possibly say they are hijacking YOUR narrative?
Have a look. http://front.moveon.org/category/economic-fairness/page/7/
MoveOn.org's narrative is strictly democratic. OWS movement takes all points of view into consideration. Not just one.
Not really. There are some clear cut demands from OWS that pop up all over the place that are aligned with the democratic party.
And that's because the Democratic Party feels a need to pretend that it shares objectives with OWS -- though if you think about it, it's a little bit of a non-starter. For one thing, Obomber is raising drone-loads of bucks from the same investment banksters who brought the world economy to its knees -- instead of prosecuting them.
For this election cycle Obama has the least amount of donations from Wall St. That's because of his open criticism and attempts to regulate them.
Those are the facts.
Obama is still surrounded by Goldman Sachs banksters, and Goldman Sachs is helping him to get to his announced goal of reaching $1billion for his re-election. Obama has tried to force state attorneys general to accept a sweetheart deal with investment banks that have fraudulently dispossessed millions of homeowners. Obama is still way in bed with these crooks, and you know it.
Could you cite some sources of these claims?
"Attorney General of N.Y. Is Said to Face Pressure on Bank Foreclosure Deal" http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/22/business/schneiderman-is-said-to-face-pressure-to-back-bank-deal.html?pagewanted=all
"Obama's Wall Street cabinet" http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=13208
"A series of articles published over the weekend, based on financial disclosure reports released by the Obama administration last Friday concerning top White House officials, documents the extent to which the administration, in both its personnel and policies, is a political instrument of Wall Street."
"The Obama-Clinton Cabinet? We Voted for Change, Not Recycling" http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rob-kall/the-obama-clinton-cabinet_b_141950.html
"A List of Goldman Sachs People in the Obama Government: Names Attached to the Giant Squid’s Tentacles" http://my.firedoglake.com/fflambeau/2010/04/27/a-list-of-goldman-sachs-people-in-the-obama-government-names-attached-to-the-giant-squids-tentacles/
"Goldman Sachs May Be Obama's Enron" http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/peter-roff/2010/04/20/goldman-sachs-may-be-obamas-enron
YES! NY AG Schneiderman is on our side. He is very aggressive and trying to resist the pressure to let BOA slide.
buuwahaha!!! What a load of crap!
Obama is just a continuation of NWO policy, going back to Bush 41. He's Goldman Sachs bitch. We are now in more wars of aggression, on his watch, murdering people all over the freaking world! We're building more drone basis in Africa, ffs.
MoveOn are nothing but party hacks racking in money. They're part of the problem, not the solution.
So uh, VOTE RON PAUL 2012 and all that right?
No. I will be voting for Ron Paul but that has nothing to do with you or anyone else. Lots of peeps in OWS have given up on voting, altogether. Other than the party shills and MoveOn people, I've seen damn few saying they support a Wall Street owned war monger. If RP doesn't get the nomination, I'll vote third party as I have for years. I don't vote for the lesser of evils.
Lesser-of-two-evils is the fuckin dumbest thing to ever enter an election though process.
Good for you man!
yeah, the parties have brainwashed the people with that crap about "wasting your vote" for far too long. If we had all voted our conscience, over the decades, these we would be in a different America.
The lesser of two evils is still evil.
Bingo
Hey, its still early. And what about the last election cycle?
There are also some "clear cut" demands from OWS that pop up all over the place that are aligned with the republican party. As well with liberal, and libertarian parties.
That the Democratic party gives lip service to.
Moveon is a Democratic Party front group. The Democratic Party is in bed with the same Wall St. investment firms that are the subject of OWS protests. If Moveon is talking about the same things that OWS is, it's because the Democratic Party is scared shitless and has decided that it's best to pretend that it's aligned with OWS. This is typical political opportunism and hypocrisy.
I totally agree. moveon is a reprehensible organization.
Some of them are, some of them aren't. It's foolish to demonize the entire party. Same goes for republicans.
Who cares 'who's narrative' it is?
OWS... MoveOn... Whatever...
I just want to see something get accomplished for a change and the Democrats aren't making it happen.
We need to roll back 30 years of regressive legislation.
I'm a Democrat, a member of Moveon (since 2003 before the Iraq war began), and a staunch supporter of OWS. I think everyone's trying to accomplish the same thing and we're all in agreement on most of the issues. Taking time to dispute over semantics is a waste of time. Let's focus on constructive dialog aimed at strengthening this movement.
Exactly. It makes no sense to tell an organization that has been making economic and wealth issues one of it's top priorities just because they explicitly support one of the parties.
MoveOn could be a powerful ally if the relationship were built correctly.
MoveOn has not made economic fairness one of its top priorities. It has made it one of its top "sound bites".
What has come out of OWS aside from sound bites?
MoveOn has been around for 13 years, OWS for a couple months.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_MoveOn.org
Hey wait a minute democrates are getting all thier whores and limos, and jet planes paid for by the fat cats on wall street. why would they need a pretend they support a bunch of poor americans that cant even afford to sleep in a hotel. goldman and sacs have two things in common, one they are they biggist investment bank in the world, and two they are the biggest contributor the the Obama campain, so do you all think Obama would shit in his own messkit ?
OWS Organizers Blast MoveOn
David DeGraw – one of the primary Wall Street protest organizers – just sent me the following email:
DeGraw - who is wholly non-partisan [like the writers at Washington's Blog] - tells me that about half of the protesters are liberals, but the other half are libertarians (and see this.)
This mirrors what one of the original organizers of the "Occupy Trenton" protest told me: MoveOn attempted to set the agenda and pretend it was their event.
more - http://www.readersupportednews.org/news-section2/318-66/7898-focus-ows-organizers-blast-moveon
Yep.
Honestly my opinion this is simple. Who cares who came up with the idea first? The issues being talked about are too many in number, and too great to try and take credit as the founder or the first. All of us had these ideas floating in the back of our heads for days weeks months or even years before OWS. It just took this moment in time for this collective consciousness to bubble to the surface.
That's precisely my point. There is no reason to spew all this hatred at an organization that has basically been saying the same thing all along. It looks really bad.
Who is "you"?
You.
But I'm not one of the protesters.
Touche
Probably a good thing at this point.
But I'm supporting them with lots of money and food and clothing contributions.
That's kind of you.
I just believe in what they're saying. I've been saying the same thing ever since the "Arab (or Egyptian) Spring". In fact, I predicted that it would spread world-wide in less than a year. The "Arab Spring" started on Dec 18, 2010. It's less than a year.
The things I've heard the most like pointing out the distribution of wealth, and shady banking practices, and money in politics are all good things to be talking about. Early on I spread a lot of it on Facebook and still do occasionally.
Lately though a large part of the online presence has gotten pretty extreme. This MoveOn business is a bunch of self-righteous nonsense that makes everyone look bad and it appears to be the majority opinion on things.
Sorry, I don't know what you mean by the "MoveOn business".
But online is normally extreme in an unmoderated format. I think some of the participants view it kind of like a video game for words where they just spew the first thing that comes to mind if they think it can help them win the game.
If you want to see REALLY extreme you should go visit youtube and read through the comments. You'd be amazed out how abusive people can get over some stupid video.
Very true and good points.
The MoveOn business was me referring to the amount of hatred sent their way for supporting the cause. Almost to the point of paranoia.
Ah, I guess I wasn't really aware of it but I know that right wingers have made the name "MoveOn" sort of like a dirty word just like they made "liberal" a dirty word. It's really sad because my father is a very devout Catholic yet he would be considered a "liberal" by most people today yet he refuses to call himself a liberal because people (Like Herman Cain) say things like, "Liberals killed Jesus" and turned it into a dirty word.
I used to be a Libertarian so I never identified myself with either liberal or conservative but I think too many Libertarians today have identified themselves as conservatives so I quit the party. They also seem to have taken on what I would consider corporatist values rather than "conservative" values.
As a Libertarian, I believe in small, unobtrusive government except for the solemn duty of keeping the power of corporations in check (though my definition of unobtrusive and theirs has diverged).
I admit though, I think I was wrong about social welfare (and that's why I quit). I no longer believe charities and voluntary contributions are sufficient to take care of the under-privileged but I've come to believe we have a duty as citizens of a free society to contribute to them. I know even I would never voluntarily contribute as much as I owe after seeing the phenomenal amount that my father has contributed (above and beyond his taxes).
Sounds like you've landed in a pretty solid spot to me and actually a fairly similar to my own experiences with politics.
Thanks for sending supplies down to those on the streets.. winter is comin'.
My pleasure! I've got a few spare winter coats, sweaters and gloves I'm going to be bringing them soon too.
[Removed]
MoveOn.org is a threat and we do not need their money: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=lW4J1e2WW68
Wrong.
The capitalist parties--in this case the Democrats--still have the power. MoveOn may be talking OWS stuff now, but it's only to accomplish its main goal: to preserve a capitalist government with a Democratic leadership. This has nothing to do with the anti-capitalist aspirations of the vast majority of OWS people.
They've been talking OWS stuff for years. Literally.
They could be a valuable ally yet people spew hatred constantly.
MoveOn has never done anything other than pay lip service - while they're busy amassing money. They're exactly like the war party they front for. No different than the Repukes. They're a bunch of neolib elitists. My God, that link you gave has an article from Katie Curic, a total establishment whore (and bimbo!).
I think many who are critical of MoveOn may just have a visceral reaction to anyone connected with the Democratic party, no matter how much we may agree on nymerous issues. That's a self-defeating attitude. You're hardly going to represent 99% of the populace if you exclude anyone who's ever supported a Democratic candidate. Small government libertarians and MoveOne liberals disagree about many things, but why not work together on what we do agree on? MoveOn is supported entirely by small donations from members and its agenda is set by member input. MoveOn members petitioned and marched by the millions against the war in Iraq, in spite of the fact that many Democrats in congress (and nearly all Republicans) supported it. MoveOn has attempted to influence the two-party system, corrupt as it is, and has accomplished some good over the dark days of the past decade. They harnessed opposition to the authoritarian policies of the Bush adminstration and have been vocal in their opposition to President Obama's continuation of the same policies. Many libertarians have been fighting for the same things over this time. Only an idealogue would reject the addition of millions of like-minded MoveOn members to the struggle. LOTS of the participants at OWS demonstrations around the country are members of MoveOn. Do you want them all to go home?
You misunderstand me. I want all comers, and I agree, various groups share many of the same concerns. I think that the agendas of other organizations need to be left at the door and that we all need to come as individuals, willing to put aside other associations in order to find common ground. Bringing baggage from anyplace else will only be divisive.
Imagine, if you will, two OWS folks having a discussion about being committed to ending these insane wars. They both are in complete agreement. Then they find out that one is a Ron Paul supporter and the other with MoveOn. That's a wonderful opportunity for these people to discover what they have in common - something extremely important. Now, imagine they come in as MoveOn and Ron Paul 2012, first. They may not even talk. That's my point. Come naked ;-)
Thanks for the clarification, EndTheFed. I actually find it really exciting to connect with people that I disagree with and talk about the issues we DO agree about. That's one of the most inspiring aspects of the whole OWS phenomenon. It's been clear to me for a long time that Americans across the political spectrum are firmly united in their anger at corporate overreach, and I've been pushing that idea of the things we have in common to my conservative friends for a long time. I actually think that I can know that someone supports Ron Paul and realize that that means we probably will disagree about a lot of things, but agree about a lot of other things. I don't think you necessarily need to give up your affiliations to participate. By the way, the MoveOn video site has lots of great clips about OWS, and has been spreading the word about it like mad. They're at least partly responsible for the positive press OWS has received (such as it is). (The Katie Couric vid is a little treacly, but actually features a spectrum of prominent women talking about how to encourage girls to excel at something other than sexiness – check it out and see what you think.)(Or not.)
I, too, feel very positive about coming together with people who don't share all of my views. Hell, that's how it is in my family, lol. I started out as a Democrat, a very long time ago, and now I'm a Paul supporter, so I know the issue we have in common. What I find to be the really interesting challenge is helping each get what we want that we do not agree on. I think that's fully possible, as well. That's a bit more down the road, though.
Yeah buddy!