« stand by | Main | the view from above »
moveon.org needs to getreal.now
August 17, 2006
years ago, i was turned on to moveon.org, an extraordinary grassroots effort to inform and mobilize political responsiveness in an apathetic populace. while the organization was undoubtedly liberal, they originally appeared to be more non-partisan, and more concerned with spreading truth and encouraging action.
over the past few years, though, i've watched with disgust as they've become no better than the administration that they've come to base their entire existence on fighting, going beyond spin and straight into gross misrepresentation.
the latest?
an August 15 email titled "We Can Stop The Politics of Terror." the email focuses on comments made by Dick Cheney regarding Joe Lieberman's recent loss in Connecticut. I agree, and even believe it's a matter of fact rather than opinion, that Cheney and the administration are "politicizing" terrorism. this is certainly nothing new, either.
but the facts are not enough for moveon anymore. the first paragraph says, "Dick Cheney even said Connecticut voters were supporting Al Qaeda."
one of the strengths of moveon's emails is that they provide links to their sources, which used to give them credibility. now, they often only reveal the spin or outright disinformation being applied. here, a link is provided to a transcript of Cheney's actual remarks.
Cheney is definitely methodically going about the task of politicizing terrorism, and that must be resisted. he definitely intimates that he thinks Lieberman's defeat evidences the continued fracturing of the Democratic party (uhh... OK, he's right on that one), and that creating that sort of divisiveness is exactly what al Qaeda and terrorist organizations want, which is obviously true.
but he does not say that Connecticut voters were supporting Al Qaeda when they voted Lieberman out. he's not stupid enough to say something damaging like that. he's not donald rumsfeld.
the email also goes on to say that since 9/11, the Republicans have made us less safe, when a look back over the past few years would show that democrats have not exactly done a lot to help - they've jumped on the homeland security porkbandwagon as much as anyone has.
more and more, i talk about "the liberals" as some other group that i want nothing to do with, no matter how liberal my own views are.
a few weeks ago, i met up with a friend of mine and several of her friends for pub quiz at mother egan's. it fills up quickly and early these days, and we were fortunate to get a table out on the covered patio.
the temperature had climbed into the low hundreds the previous couple of days, and then someone was attributing it to... global warming. al gore was mentioned in the tone of the wise village elder who had foreseen the apocalypse, and there was a lot of reverent nodding.
i've been to parties with these people before, and got to where i felt apprehensive around them, so i knew better than to open my mouth. these people are all warm and wonderful folks, but some (many) of these are also people who seem to like their lifestyle firmly established by the dictates of kgsr and emails from moveon.org. talking to them is the liberal equivalent of discussing politics with my rush limbaugh-lovin' stepdad, complete with the bullying tactics and anger.
i just can't seem to shut the hell up, sometimes. i spoke up and said that while global warming is an inarguable reality, and the process is well underway, that one can't point to one, two, or a handful of hot summers and make the correlation to global warming.
the immediate and primary counter to this was not some argument about statistics or the scientific method, but the fact that i had not yet seen "an inconvenient truth." i was told repeatedly that i needed to see it, that it would change my mind and eliminate my resistance to the fact of global warming.
it was sort of like being in an old star trek episode, where i had beamed down to a planet of kindly, but brainwashed people - "come, you must speak to Landru! he will show you the light!"
i turned to one of the women there and tried to explain that my problem is that the facts are there, the truth is bad enough, and people need to address it intelligently, not just jumping to whatever conclusion is politically expedient and consistent. she was completely unmoved by that argument, saying that it's just the way people were, and there was no changing it. she then said that the conservatives do it, too - that all these movies coming out about 9/11 were just propaganda to support the war.
wow. how can you argue with that? something, perhaps the start of the trivia quiz, thankfully interrupted my dumbfoundedness at this point, and it was dropped. i still felt like a couple of people didn't trust me, probably because i'm clearly a bush administration propagandist or spy. i felt bad for my friend - i think it was the fastest possible alienation of a group of people without mentioning a passion for eight year-old boys. since i have no passion for eight year-old boys, nature has instead given me an inability to unquestioningly toe the democratic party line.
once again, we come back to the problem that people seem to only find comfort and security occupying the extremes on many issues. we feel that anything less than absolute adherence to dogma weakens our point, and our ability to be self-righteous. and so, it seems that it is not a desire for truth, but rather cowardice and ego that motivate discourse in this country, whether political or social. we're the home crowd booing every call that goes against our team, no matter how clearly correct and egregious it is.
for the republicans, for moveon, for faux news, for pro-life and pro-choice organizations, for religions, for rush limbaugh or michael moore (two sides of the same coin, with even equal mass to keep the universe balanced in every way), it's all a calculated exercise to exploit this weakness. mischaracterization, misinformation, disinformation, are all valuable tools for leadership. the organization in question just has to decide how much loss of integrity and credibility is worth winning the unquestioning hearts and minds of their target markets.
i suffer the same weaknesses, i feel those same pulls, i think we all do. my beliefs are strong, and they are liberal. but i want the side i'm on to be better. i'm not willing to win playing by the same dirty tactics employed by the other side.
this pains me more than almost anything else about us as humans - when are we going to ditch all that and really demand truth, and shape our beliefs and actions on truth, rather than try to create truth to match our beliefs and actions? when will we get that it is, at the end of the day, about exercise the compassion and intellect and integrity that we accuse our opposition of lacking?
until we do, we will not see real change, just sharp and jarring swings of a pendulum that will continue to lay waste to any humanity caught in its path. and the said thing is, we will deserve what we get.
Posted by Rob at August 17, 2006 09:15 AM
Comments
I have heard it said that the difference between republicans and democrats is like the difference between syphilis and gonorrhea. This resonates very well with what you just wrote about. The left and right both use fear to try to control your vote and your life. They both want to force you to live by their standard of ethics. Where is the middle ground? Where are the “moderate” choices? Where is the Freedom?
I am strongly pro-choice, pro-gun and pro-environment. So, who can I vote for without puking? Almost always, no one. My choice is between syphilis or gonorrhea. That sucks. Good post and good observations Rob.
Posted by: I am Cornholio! at August 21, 2006 11:44 AM
soon your website should be called moveon.org. i mean, you're flirting 1 week of staleness.
Post a picture, a link to Daily Dilberts... something!
Posted by: Wiley Mike at August 22, 2006 10:48 AM
yeah, i know, i know. i've been busy, and even time at work where i might do it has been busy with other stuff. just, like, chill.
besides, i wanted my pissiness about moveon.org to really sink in.
i'm also disappointed that no one has asked about the latin phrase in the header.
Posted by: rob at August 22, 2006 10:52 AM
"Aio, quantitas magna frumentorum est." =
Yes, that is a very large amount of corn.
Is this a commentary on your writing?
Posted by: Morgan at August 22, 2006 11:24 AM
DING DING DING! sweet! thank, you morgan.
yes, i think it's a very apt quotation.
actually, there's this dude at work that is sort of a blowhard, and he put a latin phrase that meant "let them hate, so long as they fear."
the corn phrase was the best response i could find.
Posted by: rob at August 22, 2006 11:27 AM