With the rise of the “Orange Corporate Curtain” many of us poor people, like anyone reading this (and myself), because the ultra-mega-super-rich have folks that do it for them—really are seeking a new political way that meets their needs.  This phenomena has often been termed “Movement Politics.”

From this article (https://www.thenation.com/article/resurgence-movement-politics/): The Resurgence of Movement Politics in August 2005, David Sirota calls progressives to action with a plan for a grassroots movement that unites fragmented factions.  Which is precisely where we are at after Election 2016.  Earlier in the summer of 2004, Robert Reich had written this: Movement Politics in the Boston Review (http://bostonreview.net/archives/BR29.3/reich.html), which lamented:

A little over a decade ago, it looked as if Bill Clinton’s “New Democrats” were in firm control. Although Clinton was elected with only a plurality of votes (Ross Perot ran as an independent third-party candidate, taking votes away from the first George Bush), once in office Clinton appeared to enhance his standing as a “new kind of Democrat” by eschewing stands associated with the traditional left. He signed the North American Free Trade Agreement, embraced “fiscal austerity” and deficit reduction, and called for an end to the dole. It seemed as if a new Democratic era had begun. Democrats controlled both houses of Congress. The country seemed solidly behind us. (I say “us” because I was Clinton’s secretary of labor.)

But within two years, Clinton’s ambitious health-care plan was defeated. In the fall of 1994, Republicans took over Congress. Clinton was reelected in 1996, but his second term was mired in scandal, and the country appeared to veer to the right. In 2000, with the country enjoying unparalleled prosperity, George Bush won the presidency (although Al Gore just barely won the popular vote). What happened?

To which he answers:

“We failed because we failed to build a political movement behind us. America’s newly ascendant radical conservatives do have such a movement, which explains a large part of their success. They have developed dedicated sources of money and legions of ground troops who not only get out the vote but also spend the time between elections persuading others to join their ranks. They have devised frames of reference that are used repeatedly in policy debates (among them: it’s your money, tax and spend, political correctness, class warfare). They have a system for recruiting and electing officials nationwide who share the same world view and who will vote accordingly. And they have a coherent ideology uniting evangelical Christians, blue-collar whites in the South and West, and big business—an ideology in which foreign enemies, domestic poverty and crime, and homosexuality all must be met with strict punishment and religious orthodoxy.”

In 2016,   The Democratic Convention Is Highlighting the Difference Between Electoral and Movement Politics: Elected officials operate within the parameters of possibility. Movement politics is about redefining those parameters (https://www.thenation.com/article/the-democratic-convention-is-highlighting-the-difference-between-electoral-and-movement-politics/).

 

Later in 2016, some (like Daily Kos) saw the need to revitalize the political debate of old: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/12/23/1613767/-Unite-to-Fight-Trump-Controlling-the-Narrative-Movement-Politics (in the article: Unite to Fight Trump: Controlling the Narrative & Movement Politics).  They talk about the diaries by VTGenie and KarlRover, which cover the powerful guidance provided by former Congressional staffers (i.e. “the staffers”) in their document: Indivisible: A Practical Guide for Resisting the Trump Agenda. In this guide, the staffers lay out the success of the Tea Party movement in a way that sheds light on how Congress actually operates. More specifically, how Congress interfaces with the public they are tasked to serve. In the process they create a field guide for organizing to resist the Trump regime at the local level.

After the January 21, 2017 Women’s March on Washington (and the World), a number of groups have sprung up or being revitalized:

“Our Revolution” coming out of the Bernie Sanders candidacy and movement.

People’s action: https://peoplesaction.org/programs/movement-politics/

https://www.indivisibleguide.com/web/

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/-indivisible-movement-presses-legislators-at-home-on-trup-agenda-862143043568

So it is important to understand what a political movement is and is not: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_movement.

Moving forward against the Orange Cheeto P-Grabber it is important to understand there are 99% of the We The People who have similar interests and a reason to be the “Resistance.”

Advertisements