American Leftist is running a comprehensive series of posts on the sellout by Democrats of the antiwar movement and how MoveON.org supports the war while pretending to oppose it.
In fact, MoveON.org, to cite Noam Chomsky, manufactures consent within the boundaries established by Pariser, Joan Blades and their allies within the Democratic Party. It is the political equivalent of an astroturf group, a fake grassroots organization created by a corporate lobbyist or public relations firm to create the impression that the agenda of their client has broad based public support.
The Democrats just voted to fund the war, making a mockery of their toothless pullout vote, and MoveON is a PAC that exists to raise money for mainstream Democrats. Any questions?
Peter Camejo explains the process in the always-relevant Avocado Declaration.
When social justice, peace or civil rights movements become massive in scale, and threaten to become uncontrollable and begin to win over large numbers of people, the Democratic Party begins to shift and presents itself as a supposed ally. Its goal is always to co-opt the movement, demobilize its forces and block its development into an alternative, independent political force.
The Democratic Party is different. They act as a “broker” negotiating and selling influence among broad layers of the people to support the objectives of corporate rule. The Democratic Party’s core group of elected officials is rooted in careerists seeking self-promotion by offering to the corporate rulers their ability to control and deliver mass support. And to the people they offer some concessions, modifications on the platform of the Republican Party. One important value of the Democratic Party to the corporate world is that it makes the Republican Party possible through the maintenance of the stability that is essential for “business as usual.” It does this by preventing a genuine mass opposition from developing.
An independent people’s movement is what will end the war, not donations to self-perpetuating fundraising organizations who exist to support the status quo and their own power base and not by pleading with Congress to end the war when the repeated votes have shown they’ve no interest in doing so. The recent vote by the House to bring the troops home is a perfect example of what Camejo is talking about. It pretends to oppose the war, but offers no means to do so and is not binding on the president. So, by doing nothing, the bill instead tacitly supports the war. This is precisely what Democratic leadership wants to do, co-opt the dissent and render it harmless. Ditto for MoveON.
Remember that the two-party system is intended to co-opt ALL independent political activity. The GOP does the same to the Right. The co-opted movement may influence the party, as evangelicals have the right and anti-war the left, but in the end, the goal is to keep all power firmly in the grip of two predictable groups, and this it does with incredible efficiency. As long as there are only two positions (no matter how ridiculous one or both may be), no one else can get a word in.
Funny how when on occasion a third voice arises, people start talking about how voting for anyone outside the two is “throwing your vote away”…
And I love it, and get furious, when people say, “oh, maybe it is time to start a third party.”
You fool, there already are many third parties. Join one of those and help build it –you don’t have to start another!