MoveOn.Org Seattle Council Meeting

Following attending a MoveOn.org community forum, I attended a MoveOn Council meeting.

In theory, the Councils are "MoveOn members who work together locally to organize MoveOn events".  This is  supposed to be sort  of a combination focus group, and core membership team. It is also supposed "a great way to meet other MoveOn members", as I fall into the "I love mankind, it is people I can't stand," school of politics, I find the latter something of a chore.

The issue that we are supposed to be rallying  to challenge one out-of-control corporations, most specifically "person hood" of corporations.  

The genesis of this focus was, of course, a reaction to the Citizen's United v FEC and Davis v. Federal Election Commission, decision.

There was a lot of talk about "participation" being the theory behind their efforts -- which was sort of disappointing as that isn't a political theory.  I suppose I am old fashioned, but I really think that a political theory is needed in a political movement...and that participation should be organized by working with people who accept most of the theory.

I was, as usual, a  something of a contrarian. Specifically, before we go forward fixing the corporate establishment, I wanted to know what they meant by  "corporation".  I assume they meant the joint stock/limited liability companies where the stock holders don't have much control.

At one level, I think that this is a correct understanding and what really needs to be address.  However, the issue was discussed mainly in terms of "getting money our of politics." This may be useful, but does not go as far as I would like.

What we are talking about is means of organizing and governing economic organizations on an an on going basis.

I know that there is some serious thinking about how to define and manage this sort of corporation, but I personally am not really familiar with more than some main currents.  I had hoped when I asked what was meant by a corporation I might get an answer.

Similarly, I really wanted to get a better answer to the question of the theory behind the movement.

It may make me sound like someone from working on the Popular Front in the 1930', but I think that actually addressing the theory of state and economy we plan to be working with (first defining a theory and then getting assent or acceptance from participants)  makes politics actually effective.  Frankly for all their loopiness the right wing does have a theory.

The upshot of the meeting to organize calling parties to get Sen. Patty Murray to sign on to the Fair Elections Now Act.  Worthwhile I suppose, but considering that Obama opted out of the campaign finance for president, probably largely irrelevant.

It was all a bit disappointing, but not surprising. There may be a kernel of a new party -- and I say that rather than movement, because parties govern -- but there is also a lot of the old chaff.  A lot of feeling and not much thinking. 

But as they say in bad magazine articles, time will tell.