Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Is it a Movement? Or is it Marketing? And What Should We Be Doing?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
ElsewheresDaughter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-01-08 12:19 PM
Original message
Is it a Movement? Or is it Marketing? And What Should We Be Doing?
Edited on Sat Mar-01-08 12:20 PM by ElsewheresDaughter
A Black Agenda Radio commentary by Bruce Dixon



Is the Barack Obama campaign actually what it claims to be - the heir to and continuation of an historic and broad-based transformative movement for social change? What exactly are the differences between a social movement, a political candidacy, and a marketing campaign? How do we begin to unravel how much of Obamarama is movement and how much is marketing, and where will the promised and hoped-for "change" actually come from, if it comes at all?

listen to the audio here: http://www.blackagendareport.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=546&Itemid=1

"The Obama 'movement' demands nothing from the candidate except to get elected."

When you visit barackobama.com on the web, the button in the lower left corner says “join the movement”. The Obama campaign frankly claims to be the direct successor to and the current incarnation of the movement for justice and human rights which won Black voting rights and an end to Jim Crow. Unprecedented numbers of young people have been put in motion, the corporate media breathlessly tell us, by “the Obama movement” and Hillary Clinton's staffers have publicly wrung their hands in dismay at the futility of running against, not a rival campaign, but against a “movement.”

While there many similarities between a well-executed twenty-first century US presidential campaign, and a successful multimedia and viral marketing campaign, there are many important differences between both of these and a transformative movement for social change.

All three, to be successful, must tap into widespread, deeply held beliefs in their target audiences, and take full advantage of horizontal, person to person communications inside those audiences to push their message, a process marketers call “viral marketing.” But the content of marketing and political campaign messaging is dictated from the top. Though the masses are passive consumers and sometimes the transmitters of marketing and partisan political messaging, they are seldom or never its originators.

By contrast the goals, the messages, the plans, and the tactics of the mid twentieth century movements for civil and human rights did not come from the top down, they came from the bottom up. They came from union halls, student dormitories and church basements. They came from meetings in the back rooms of restaurants and at kitchen tables across the South and around the country.

"Mass social movements aim to alter relations of power. They are impolite and sometimes operate outside of or in defiance of the law."

The greatest difference between the top-down messaging of marketing and political campaigns and the messages of mass movements for change is in the scope of what they demand, and who they demand it from, and how those demands are backed up.

The goal of marketing campaigns is to get large numbers of people to change or affirm habits of consumption. Political campaigns need to get out their vote and win the election for their candidates. The objectives of marketing and political campaigns are time-limited, respectful of authority and strictly inside the bounds of law and decorum, whether shopping, registering voters, canvassing, calling house meetings, or getting out the vote.

Mass social movements aim to alter relations of power. They are impolite and sometimes operate outside of or in defiance of the law. They make impossible, reckless, irresponsible demands, like respect, human rights and the vote to people who didn't have them - like stopping an unjust war, halting foreclosures and gentrification, like guaranteeing the absolute right to organize a union, to strike and to win a living wage. But the Obama “movement” demands nothing from the candidate except to get elected. There are no yardsticks, no demands placed upon Obama by his constituents, no goals that have come from independently organized meetings or other processes in Black America.

Activists are saying that Obama can and will be held accountable eventually - after he is elected. But how realistic is that?

Unless activists both inside and outside the Obama campaign are organizing their own meetings, raising their own demands, and building their own networks apart from those of the campaign's they won't even have the names, or the phone numbers or the email addresses of the thousands of young and old people eager for change who have come forward to work on the campaign. The day after the election the “Obama movement” will be just like those “movements” that elected Black mayors in cities across the land. Over. And another precious organizing opportunity will have been missed.

For Black Agenda Radio, I'm Bruce Dixon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
msongs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-01-08 12:24 PM
Response to Original message
1. hush now. shhhh! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-01-08 06:16 PM
Response to Reply #1
46. Marketing?
:rofl:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sojourner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-01-08 12:32 PM
Response to Original message
2. for real. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flyarm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-01-08 12:32 PM
Response to Original message
3. great marketing to the youth of America..
sad thing is ..most of them have never paid for health care or heating bills.......and yet they have deemed this man our knighted one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tekisui Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-01-08 01:50 PM
Response to Reply #3
29. Youth like Kennedy, Feingold, Dodd, and over 10 million voters so far?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tabasco Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-01-08 03:22 PM
Response to Reply #29
42. Don't bother them with facts.
If it was a "movement" for Hillary they would be oh so happy.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ContinentalOp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-01-08 12:46 PM
Response to Original message
4. This distinction between movements and marketing is BS
All politics are marketing. Candidates who refuse to acknowledge that or don't even realize it are rightfully doomed to irrelevance. Using his definitions, I don't think there has ever been a successful presidential race in modern times that was based on a "movement."

That's also why the criticisms of Obama's "plagiarism" are ridiculous. If you want to see progressive ideas make their way up to the national political stage, the only way to accomplish that is to take the best ideas from grassroots movements and package them together with a marketable candidate. This is the highly successful approach that Republicans have taken for the past 30 years. If you're going to wait for a candidate to come along who is electable, highly experienced and has lots of brilliant original ideas then you are going to be waiting for an awfully long time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Johnny__Motown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-01-08 12:53 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. Agreed,. Marketing is a huge part of Politics. "The Come Back Kid" pure marketing
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-01-08 12:56 PM
Response to Reply #4
8. only to the uninformed who want to live in an Obamabubble.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ContinentalOp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-01-08 01:06 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. Cute.
Edited on Sat Mar-01-08 01:07 PM by ContinentalOp
Maybe you're the one living in a bubble where the Nixon/Kennedy debates never happened, the Republicans didn't enjoy a massive national resurgence on the back of an actor, the current governor of the largest blue state isn't another republican actor, and Democrats haven't been losing elections by running dull policy wonks. I take it that in your little bubble, the American public consistently votes for the most intelligent, most experienced candidate with the most logical, reasoned stances on the important issues of the day? I'd like to join you in there. It must be nice! :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gulliver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-01-08 01:37 PM
Response to Reply #4
26. I agree, except on the plagiarism point.
It doesn't follow that because politics is marketing, the specific plagiarism criticisms are "ridiculous." Obama himself acknowledged that he should have credited Patrick for the "just words" lines, for example. Then Obama mitigated the damage by pointing out Patrick's relationship to the Obama campaign.

Obama handled it well. Had he called the charges ridiculous, they might still be a factor right now. Instead, Obama showed understanding of the issue to his critics and let his movement call the issue ridiculous. That was a good combined response.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Faygo Kid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-01-08 12:50 PM
Response to Original message
5. Thanks for the photo. Many parallels.
There are many parallels between Lincoln and Obama, not least of which is that each will have beaten a heavily favored senator from New York to secure their party's nomination.

Excellent, thanks so much for the thoughtful gift of the photo.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
candice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-01-08 01:22 PM
Response to Reply #5
19. Obama also claims to have Lincoln's experience! (about 30 years less)
Lincoln is my favorite American President. If Obama is the nominee, he'll be the first Dem candidate that will be a complete disappointment to me. Just not qualified. Reminds more more of the last empty suit foisted on TV viewers (Gore rolled his eyes and Bu$h won the debate by not falling on his face). Obama is a better speechifier, even better than Reagan who B acting abilities played well on the small screen. I don't think teleprompters were available during Reagan's political career.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ElsewheresDaughter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-01-08 02:30 PM
Response to Reply #19
31. Obama uses two of those teleprompters so that the camera fools everyone into thinking he is looking
at the crowd...nice theater eh?

He does Oprah Proud!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-01-08 06:16 PM
Response to Reply #31
45. I saw his rebuttal to Hillary yesterday---I read it--and still it was weak (besides


the content! )
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-01-08 12:55 PM
Response to Original message
7. Give it a REC
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Evergreen Emerald Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-01-08 12:58 PM
Response to Original message
9. "The Obama 'movement' demands nothing from the candidate except to get elected."
Not truth. Not consistency. Not even qualifications.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ElsewheresDaughter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-01-08 01:06 PM
Response to Reply #9
13. that's a Bucket of Truth!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
amborin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-01-08 01:29 PM
Response to Reply #9
22. exactly
why is why as has been said it's so dangerously self-referential

and reduces to a cult of personality crusade

in one tiny respect, obama supporters are correct:

electing a black man would be a major change...but....electing a woman would be equally dramatic, so in that sense Hillary's election would be equivalent
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mmonk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-01-08 01:06 PM
Response to Original message
10. Opinions and judgment of people in opposition
Edited on Sat Mar-01-08 01:06 PM by mmonk
aren't considered impartial and purely fact based. People can pass around writings of people supporting their candidate and opinions of their opposition all day long but it doesn't necessarily equate with truth. Only reality will be the judge.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tabatha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-01-08 01:06 PM
Response to Original message
12. Everyone is trying to understand, outsmart something that
has not been seen in this country before. Maybe there is some jealousy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lucinda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-01-08 01:10 PM
Response to Reply #12
16. How so? In what way is Obama different?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jlake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-01-08 01:07 PM
Response to Original message
14. K&R!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sueragingroz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-01-08 01:07 PM
Response to Original message
15. "The Obama 'movement' demands nothing from the candidate except to get elected."
That's it in an nutshell...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ContinentalOp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-01-08 01:10 PM
Response to Original message
17. A question for those of you who think this article is relevant and insightful...
Can you point to a successful presidential campaign that was actually based on a ground-up, grassroots movement or mass social movement as described by Dixon?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jgraz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-01-08 01:19 PM
Response to Original message
18. Cool pic. Stupid article.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
libbygurl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-01-08 01:26 PM
Response to Original message
20. The culmination of training of a society by Madison Ave ad execs. Excellent perspective.
Edited on Sat Mar-01-08 01:27 PM by libbygurl
Thanks, ED!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
amborin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-01-08 01:26 PM
Response to Original message
21. a movement typically
occurs without *any* marketing

this campaign is all about marketing....you are political consumers

and....if Obama gets the nom and wins hte GE, his supporters are in for a major crash

b/c the capacity for implementing any change is very small

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OPERATIONMINDCRIME Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-01-08 01:29 PM
Response to Original message
23. He Just Happened To Be The Right Face, At The Right Time, As People Were Looking For Someone To
Edited on Sat Mar-01-08 01:29 PM by OPERATIONMINDCRIME
clutch onto. It's not so much about Obama, as it is the fact he's fresh and new. That's what sparked the movement more than anything else. If Hillary had been fresh and new, and Obama part of the old, she'd be having the almost cult-like following. He's just the face that's been put to this idealistic energy that's been pent up in so many who want change. It doesn't matter if he's far more similar to Hillary than they'd ever admit, and it doesn't matter that in reality, there really isn't anything all that distinctively special that separates him from her. It just matters that he's fresh, and that they finally have somebody to clutch their hopes onto, even though it really could've been almost anybody.

Thankfully though, whether or not you'd agree, at least the face it happened to be belongs to a Democrat, and to a Democrat that is in fact a very good Senator; even if no where near to the degrees that his supporters have escalated him to. And I am thankful for that, because it will hopefully mean in November we get a Dem elected finally, and that Dem, regardless of the overhype, is still pretty damn good. So I'll absolutely take it. I just think it's been an amazingly unfair campaign season for Hillary, and really do feel for her for all that's occurred. But she really was powerless to stop this movement, because try as she might, there's no way she could compete with this idealistic surge that's come her way. She's not competing against a candidate; she's competing against an ideal. So it must be incredibly frustrating for her. But at the end of the day, come November, we should have a Dem in the WH. Whether him or her, it will be a great President and a Democratic one, and I'm DAMN excited about that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maribelle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-01-08 01:29 PM
Response to Original message
24. Bamboozling the American electorate again


Evidence of a covert campaign to undermine the presidential primaries is rife, so it's curious that the Democractic Party and even some within the G.O.P. have ignored the actual elephant in the room this year. That would be Karl Rove. Long accused of rigging the two previous presidential elections, this master of deceit would have us believe that he's gone off to sit in a corner and write op-eds.

Not so. According to an article in Time magazine published last November, Republicans have been organized in several states to throw their weight behind Senator Barack Obama, the Democratic rival of Hillary Clinton. At least three former fundraisers for President Bush flushed his coffers with cash early on in the race, something the deep pockets haven't done for any candidate in their own party. With receipts topping $100 million in 2007, the first-term Illinois senator broke the record for contributions. It was a remarkable feat, considering that most Americans had not even heard of him before 2005.

The Time article went on to explain that rank and file Republicans were switching parties this spring to vote for Obama in the Democratic primaries. Though not mentioned in the piece, a group called Republicans for Obama formed in 2006 to expedite the strategy. Many states have open primaries, allowing citizens to vote for any candidate, regardless of their party affiliation. In Nebraska, the mayor of Omaha publicly rallied Republicans to caucus for Obama on February 9th, according to Fox News Channel. Called crossover voting, the tactic is playing a crucial role in what appears to be a Rove-coordinated effort to deprive Clinton of the nomination. Even with his more well-known dirty tricks arsenal - phone bank sabotage, fake polling data, swiftboating, waitlisting, electronic voting equipment, Norman Hsu, etc. - Rove would be hard pressed to defeat Clinton in November, since she's generally popular nationwide and has promised an immediate troop withdrawal from Iraq. If the contest isn't close, the vote-rigging won't matter. (Several influential Republicans admit as much in a February 11th story for Politico.)

more ...



http://www.thecityedition.com/Pages/Archive/Winter08/2008Election.html

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ElsewheresDaughter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-01-08 01:33 PM
Response to Reply #24
25. This deserves its own thread...please post it as a thread?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NastyRiffraff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-01-08 02:33 PM
Response to Reply #24
32. This is what I'm afraid of
I've been uneasy about the numbers of Republicans "crossing over" to vote for Obama. Are ALL of them sincere Americans concerned about our country? Some of them? Most of them? Some are, to be sure; in fact I know a couple of them. In fact (and I know this is anecdotal; I have no further proof of this) one of them told me that several of his Republican friends have said outright that he's only voting for Obama to get Clinton out of the race, as that's the GOP strategy.

I don't subscribe to every idea in the City Edition's piece, but the meta-issue here is: Why would the GOP fear Clinton in the White House, and not Obama? After all, if indeed they're asking Republican voters to vote for Obama to knock out Clinton, it's a gamble for them. Obama might actually win the presidency, if nominated. Sure, there's vote-tampering, but even that's a gamble, with large turnouts. On the face of it, it makes no sense. Except...

Perhaps like Benazir Bhutto, the years of relentless political bludgeoning may be wearing her down. Regarding Karl Rove, she has yet to implicate him as the instigator of the Obama candidacy, although in Ohio she accused her rival of tactics "straight out of the Rove playbook". As for the rest of the Bush-Cheney team, all she has mustered to date is her oft-repeated statement, “They’re not going to surrender the White House voluntarily." Last spring, she suggested that another terrorist attack against the United States would inevitably play into the hands of the G.O.P.

Vague as they sound, those last two remarks may prove prophetic in the event the Obama strategy fails and she goes on to win the Democratic nomination. The implications of a female president for American foreign and domestic policy are profound, creating jitters not only on Wall Street but for the Pentagon, the CIA and the State Department. Improbable though it may sound, a number of officials accused of breaking U.S. laws or violating the Geneva Conventions might be arrested and prosecuted by a Clinton-run Justice Department.

If that's not enough to keep Bush appointees and generals lying awake deep into the night, their long-running undercover operation with the ayatollahs in Iran (who paved the way for Reagan's 1980 election), the Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence, and the Saudi royal family could be curtailed by the staunchly pro-women's rights democrat. The Saudis especially have reason to fret now that they and their counterparts in Kuwait and the U.A.E. have started buying up huge stakes in U.S. banks. Condolleeza Rice and Nancy Pelosi are one thing. A Clinton White House is quite another.
(emphasis mine) http://www.thecityedition.com/Pages/Archive/Winter08/2008Election.html


True, there are a lot of "ifs" there. But worth considering, at least. It's not unreasonable to think that if a Democrat does win the White House, they'd rather see Obama there than Clinton. They've been heartened by Obama's promise to "reach out" to Republicans, and they have no reason to doubt him since he's made that a central part of his campaign. They haven't gotten that same promise from Hillary Clinton.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-01-08 06:21 PM
Response to Reply #32
50. and THAT deserves its own thread. thank you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
F.Gordon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-01-08 01:45 PM
Response to Original message
27. Obama is a 'Product'
Probably being packaged and marketed by the best Madison Avenue people Oprah Money can buy. We are a nation of Consumers and the decision to sell Obama as a ‘Product’ appears to be very well planned and executed.

I had always had this impression of him but when I started looking at the Consumers that attended his ‘Mega-Events’ that struggled to explain “why” they liked Obama and the huge Ad buys he was/is doing on shows like American Idol and American Gladiator. These... and a few other things...

The “movement’ is an important element of the marketing of this ‘Product’. It helps convince people that they have made the correct buying decision. The problem I have with the “movement” is that it crosses the line into something a little disturbing from time to time.

I'd be willing to bet that future MBA classes will study the "Selling of Obama" because this is not a political campaign. It is one of the best 'Product' sales ever made on the American Consumer.

I'm not so interested in buying a Can-O-President.

Just my opinion.
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ElsewheresDaughter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-01-08 01:48 PM
Response to Reply #27
28. your opinion is absolutely spot on!!! everyone needs to watch this docu. "The Century of the Self"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-01-08 06:14 PM
Response to Reply #28
44. i saw that a few months ago. I agee--all should see it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
snagglepuss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-01-08 02:30 PM
Response to Reply #27
30. Well said.
:applause:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
libbygurl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-01-08 02:36 PM
Response to Reply #27
34. Amen. Same as my response upthread! Glad to meet you, thinking person!
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
F.Gordon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-01-08 03:17 PM
Response to Reply #34
41. Sorry. I didn't see that (great minds and all)
:hi:

The Psychology of Selling is a refined science. Even "intelligent" people can be sold something that they may or may not really want to buy. The 'key' is selling in such a way that you convince that person that they made the decision to buy on their own. In the olden days this was called the "Puppy Dog Sale". Not sure what Madison Avenue calls it today.

When our "political process" comes down to The American Idol Sponsored by Obama..... well... it certainly has become a strange country. :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bridgit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-01-08 02:40 PM
Response to Reply #27
39. agreed...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-01-08 02:35 PM
Response to Original message
33. What should "we" be doing? Losing, and by gawd you've nailed it!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
anamandujano Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-01-08 02:36 PM
Response to Original message
35. "Join the movement" = "Help us take a big dump on the USA."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-01-08 06:17 PM
Response to Reply #35
47. yes, its been dumped on enough
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kid a Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-01-08 02:37 PM
Response to Original message
36. Will you vote for Obama if he is the Nominee?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bridgit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-01-08 02:39 PM
Response to Original message
37. Fair questions
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
emilyg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-01-08 02:39 PM
Response to Original message
38. k/r
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stillcool Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-01-08 02:43 PM
Response to Original message
40. You think "Organizing" might have..
something to do with it? Are we through with the kitchen sink and now throwing the plumbing?

A History of Organizing

As a community organizer for three years in Chicago in the late 1980s, Obama learned the skills of motivating and mobilizing people who had little faith in their ability to make politicians, corporations, and other powerful institutions accountable. Working with churches and neighborhood groups, Obama taught low-income people how to analyze power relations, gain confidence in their own leadership abilities, and work together to improve their housing, schools, and other basic services.

"What if a politician were to see his job as that of an organizer," he asked a local newspaper at the time, "as part teacher and part advocate, one who does not sell voters short but who educates them about the real choices before them?"

Since embarking on a political career, Obama hasn't forgotten the philosophical and practical lessons that he learned on the streets of Chicago and that are now central to his campaign for the White House.

Last year, Obama enlisted Marshall Ganz, one of the country's leading organizing theorists, to help train organizers and volunteers as a key component of his presidential campaign. In the early 1960s, Ganz dropped out of Harvard to work in the South with the Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee (SNCC), the student wing of the civil-rights movement. He then returned to his home state of California to join Cesar Chavez and the United Farm Workers, becoming a key architect of the union's early successes. The UFW combined a clear-eyed drive for more workers' power in the California fields and orchards with a deep spiritual yearning for personal and social change.

Ganz now teaches the history and practice of organizing at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government. "Organizing," he says, "combines the language of the heart as well as the head."

According to Ganz, "it is values, not just interests" that inspire people to participate in social movements. This approach is well-suited to Obama's own style of translating values into action by telling his own story in public.

A key tenet of community organizing is developing face to face contact with people so that they forge commitments to work together around shared values. Organizers are not social workers. Their orientation is not to "service" people as if they were clients, but to encourage people to develop their own abilities to mobilize others. They help people turn their "hot" anger into disciplined action. Community organizers also distinguish themselves from traditional political campaign operatives who approach voters as customers through direct mail, telemarketing, and canvassing urging them to support their candidate as if they were selling soap.

This approach is reflected in how Obama's campaign has integrated itself into local communities. In Iowa, for example, campaign organizers, both paid staff and volunteers, were required to help in community recycling projects, tree planting and garbage pick-up -- making themselves available for the day-to-day tasks required to enhance the neighborhoods they were in.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ElsewheresDaughter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-01-08 06:12 PM
Response to Reply #40
43. He is Jesus!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-01-08 06:19 PM
Response to Reply #43
48. No he isn't........
and no one thinks that but you, apparently.

Just like most don't believe that Hillary is ready from Day One as she claims,
and most understands that she does not have 35 years of experience that would lead one to think so,
and further, we have no reason to believe that she will answer the red phone with the right answer.

Those are the real myths being perpetuated in this campaign.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
F.Gordon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-02-08 04:16 AM
Response to Reply #40
54. That really isn't the best 'copy and paste' you could have used
Ganz, who has done consulting work for Oprah, is a sociologist. He has indirectly and directly said that "issues" distract from the more important matter of forming a cohesive "movement". You should read his missives on how political TV ads should focus on creating viewer anticipation and "branding" rather than 'messages'... you know... all that "issue" crap.

He has also said that young people have a biological destiny to be hopeful. "Hope" wasn't a random word pulled out of the dictionary.

I understand what they are doing. The Obama campaign is trying to use a 21st century version of the Reagan campaign. It may work, and that scares the shit out of me. Ya' see... I'm not big on having people shove "Heroes" on me. Hillary, with all her faults, appeals to me because I see her as someone who is actually running to be President of the country and who is very sincere about fixing all the fuckups those slugs in the White House have created.

Your 'copy and paste' hasn't convinced me that Obama is nothing more than 'Product' and this whole "movement" thing still creeps me out.

Peace... and good luck with that whole Hero Worship thing.
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Avalux Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-01-08 06:19 PM
Response to Original message
49. Where's he been? Politics IS marketing.
But maybe this time, Obama will do what he says and continue to involve the electorate after he's elected. I think there's a chance and that's why I'm supporting him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NMMNG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-01-08 06:22 PM
Response to Original message
51. K&R
Excellent piece!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
indimuse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-01-08 06:26 PM
Response to Original message
52. this is what the media says it is...
until they say... it isn't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ElsewheresDaughter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-02-08 02:13 AM
Response to Reply #52
53. nice Hillary graphic
:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mattclearing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-02-08 04:19 AM
Response to Original message
55. Obama's campaign is for a more open, responsive government.
The whole point is transparency and focus on popular issues, not corporate-sponsored ones. Hence our movement is his campaign and vice versa.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 01st 2024, 05:22 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC