http://www.thenation.com/doc/20081201/piven

Obama Needs a Protest Movement

By Frances Fox Piven
The Nation: November 13, 2008 ( in the December 1, 2008 edition.)


The astonishing election of 2008 is over. Whatever else the future holds,
the unchallenged domination of American national government by big business
and the political right has been broken. Even more amazing, Americans have
elected an African-American as president. These facts alone are rightful
cause for jubilation.

Naturally, people are making lists of what the new administration should do
to begin to reverse the decades-long trends toward rising inequality,
unrestrained corporate plunder, ecological disaster, military adventurism
and constricted democracy. But if naming our favored policies is the main
thing we do, we are headed for a terrible letdown. Let's face it: Barack
Obama is not a visionary or even a movement leader. He became the nominee of
the Democratic Party, and then went on to win the general election, because
he is a skillful politician. That means he will calculate whom he has to
conciliate and whom he can ignore in realms dominated by big-money
contributors from Wall Street, powerful business lobbyists and a Congress
that includes conservative Blue Dog and Wall Street-oriented Democrats. I
don't say this to disparage Obama. It is simply the way it is, and if Obama
was not the centrist and conciliator he is, he would not have come this far
this fast, and he would not be the president-elect.


Still, the conditions that influence politicians can change. The promises
and hopes generated by election campaigns sometimes help to raise hopes and
set democratic forces in motion that break the grip of politics as usual. I
don't mean that the Obama campaign operation is likely to be transformed
into a continuing movement for reform. A campaign mobilization is almost
surely too flimsy and too dependent on the candidate to generate the weighty
pressures that can hold politicians accountable. Still, the soaring rhetoric
of the campaign; the slogans like "We are the ones we have been waiting
for"; the huge, young and enthusiastic crowds--all this generates hope, and
hope fuels activism among people who otherwise accept politics as usual.

Sometimes, encouraged by electoral shifts and campaign promises, the
ordinary people who are typically given short shrift in political
calculation become volatile and unruly, impatient with the same old promises
and ruses, and they refuse to cooperate in the institutional routines that
depend on their cooperation. When that happens, their issues acquire a
white-hot urgency, and politicians have to respond, because they are
politicians. In other words, the disorder, stoppages and institutional
breakdowns generated by this sort of collective action threaten politicians.
These periods of mass defiance are unnerving, and many authoritative voices
are even now pointing to the dangers of pushing the Obama administration too
hard and too far. Yet these are also the moments when ordinary people enter
into the political life of the country and authentic bottom-up reform
becomes possible.

The parallels between the election of 2008 and the election of 1932 are
often invoked, with good reason. It is not just that Obama's oratory is
reminiscent of FDR's oratory, or that both men were brought into office as a
result of big electoral shifts, or that both took power at a moment of
economic catastrophe. All this is true, of course. But I want to make a
different point: FDR became a great president because the mass protests
among the unemployed, the aged, farmers and workers forced him to make
choices he would otherwise have avoided. He did not set out to initiate big
new policies. The Democratic platform of 1932 was not much different from
that of 1924 or 1928. But the rise of protest movements forced the new
president and the Democratic Congress to become bold reformers.

The movements of the 1930s were often set in motion by radical
agitators--Communists, Socialists, Musteites--but they were fueled by
desperation and economic calamity. Unemployment demonstrations, usually (and
often not without reason) labeled riots by the press, began in 1929 and
1930, as crowds assembled, raised demands for "bread or wages," and then
marched on City Hall or local relief offices. In some places, "bread riots"
broke out as crowds of the unemployed marched on storekeepers to demand
food, or simply to take it.

In the big cities, mobs used strong-arm tactics to resist the rising numbers
of evictions. In Harlem and on the Lower East Side, crowds numbering in the
thousands gathered to restore evicted families to their homes. In Chicago,
small groups of black activists marched through the streets of the ghetto to
mobilize the large crowds that would reinstall evicted families. A rent riot
there left three people dead and three policemen injured in August 1931, but
Mayor Anton Cermak ordered a moratorium on evictions, and some of the
rioters got work relief. Later, in the summer of 1932, Cermak told a House
committee that if the federal government didn't send $150 million for relief
immediately, it should be prepared to send troops later. Even in
Mississippi, Governor Theodore Bilbo told an interviewer, "Folks are
restless. Communism is gaining a foothold. Right here in Mississippi, some
people are about ready to lead a mob. In fact, I'm getting a little pink
myself." Meanwhile, also in the summer of 1932, farmers across the country
armed themselves with pitchforks and clubs to prevent the delivery of farm
products to markets where the price paid frequently did not cover the cost
of production.

Notwithstanding the traditional and conservative platform of the Democratic
Party, FDR's campaign in 1932 registered these disturbances in new promises
to "build from the bottom up and not from the top down, that put...faith
once more in the forgotten man at the bottom of the economic pyramid."
Economic conditions worsened in the interim between the election and the
inauguration, and the clamor for federal action became more strident. Within
weeks, Roosevelt had submitted legislation to Congress for public works
spending, massive emergency relief to be implemented by states and
localities, agricultural assistance and an (ultimately unsuccessful) scheme
for industrial recovery.

The unruly protests continued, and in many places they were crucial in
pressuring reluctant state and local officials to implement the federally
initiated aid programs. Then, beginning in 1933, industrial workers inspired
by the rhetorical promises of the new administration began to demand the
right to organize. By the mid-1930s, mass strikes were a threat to economic
recovery and to the Democratic voting majorities that had put FDR in office.
A pro-union labor policy was far from Roosevelt's mind when he took office
in 1933. But by 1935, with strikes escalating and the election of 1936
approaching, he was ready to sign the National Labor Relations Act.

Obama's campaign speeches emphasized the theme of a unified America where
divisions bred by race or party are no longer important. But America is, in
fact, divided: by race, by party, by class. And these divisions will matter
greatly as we grapple with the whirlwind of financial and economic crises,
of prospective ecological calamity, of generational and political change, of
widening fissures in the American empire. I, for one, do not have a
blueprint for the future. Maybe we are truly on the cusp of a new world
order, and maybe it will be a better, more humane order. In the meantime,
however, our government will move on particular policies to confront the
immediate crisis. Whether most Americans will have an effective voice in
these policies will depend on whether we tap our usually hidden source of
power, our ability to refuse to cooperate on the terms imposed from above.

About Frances Fox Piven
Frances Fox Piven is on the faculty of the Graduate Center of the City
University of New York. She is the author, most recently, of Challenging
Authority: How Ordinary People Change America. more...


------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LAAMN: Los Angeles Alternative Media Network
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Digest: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Help: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive1: <http://www.egroups.com/messages/laamn>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive2: <http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Reply via email to