CNN on Progressives Pressuring Obama

CNN today today published a long piece on its website about what an Obama presidency would mean for the African American community. The article fronts an absurd title asking whether an Obama presidency would "hurt black Americans." I'd say there's very little chance of that. However, I do believe the amount that Obama moves the country forward on all issues is contingent on how much we pressure him.

To that end, here's my quote in the piece:

"He's like any politician. He's cautious," Sirota said. "He's a potential vehicle for change, and I think he is a good vehicle, but he is just a vehicle."

His presidency may represent fundamental change, but that doesn't mean he will initiate such sweeping changes if he's elected.

"Politicians, even the best-intentioned ones, are weather vanes," Sirota said. "If the wind isn't blowing in the right direction, they will perpetuate the status quo."

It will take more than a presidential candidate to change the status quo; it'll take a movement, Sirota says.

"My concern is that people will think that by simply electing Obama, change will come, whether it's on race or economic justice issues," he said.

"If people believe that, then real change will not happen."

Movement psychology - the kind that is going to take the populist uprising and turn it into a movement - requires us to focus on making that wind blow in our direction before the election and after. If we can do that - and I think we can - we're going to see the kind of change we are all hoping for.

This is an ongoing series from the national tour for THE UPRISING. You can order The Uprising at Amazon.com or through your local independent bookstore.

Comments

[DieboldHacker]

Hmm. And just how much pressure would we have had to bring to bear on him to force him to do the right thing on FISA? I think we have already seen just how impervious to our wishes he is.

[joebhed]

But saying NO to anything is not good enough.
We need something to say YES to, so that we can replace that private money-creating cartel of the Rothchilds and the Morgans.
Let them lend their own money, rather than create huge debts for the American taxpayers.

But, how?

FDR's fear of the bankers left one major policy recommendation floundering - the true economic justice tool of the Chicago School economists of the mid-30s.

Create a publicly-controlled monetary system, and have the government create the new money needed each year through direct DEBT-FREE credits to the people.

Readers really should tune in to the message of monetary reform as a revolutionary tool to achieve the economic justice that our free, sovereign people deserve.

See the proposed monetary reform bill at monetary.org .
And, let's get on with it.

[joebhed]

Monetary Transformationist Here.

That Economic Justice Issue.

I hope that all progressives that yearn for real economic justice have heard of the famous Canadian politician named C.H. Douglas. A revolutionary.

We know we want something more than that provided by the invisible hand of free capital markets.
Do we have a solid idea of what it is we need to do to achieve that economic justice.

There is only one solution.
Put the people of the United States of America in charge of their money, currency and banking system.

Or, forget about it.

For anyone who doesn't know how the system works, it's like this:

"Allow me to create the nation's money and I care not who makes its laws."

So said the Rothchild banking czar of the day, Meyer Anselm Rothchild.
And, they're still doing it.

So, if all you want to do is to change the laws, then go ahead and have some fun.
But don't expect ANY economic justice from those laws.

We need leaders.:
Thomas Jefferson:
"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered."
No further comment is necessary.

[clevelandchick]

David,

I use this statement by you often when discussing Obama with voters who haven't committed. I think the large scale popularity of Obama does scare some people off, they are cynical. But if you explain to them that Obama is not some miracle worker but a vehicle for us all to change the direction of this nation, they get it. They know McCain is no vehicle for change.

Obama knows this. He tells the people in the crowds he attracts that change from the status quo is something we all have to be committed to and work for. He has stated (much to the chagrin of Bill Clinton) that the last 25 years our leaders have favored corporate interests over the people's and while corporate influence is never going to be zero in our government that overwhelming influence must be curbed and the people's influence has to be greatly increased. No leader, regardless of their charisma, can achieve this without the committment and involvement of the citizens.

I think your message to this subject is very important and no criticism of Obama at all. It's ridiculous to think that just voting gives you the democracy you want, you have to be more invested in your community and your country for that to happen.

[sfbayani]

This is very correct.
A president is not the nation.
The people is the country and the nation.
In a real democracy, the president serves as the instrument
by which people can make the changes, according to the interests
of the many, rather than the few.
(Of course, the rich and the powerful will argue that they also part
of what we refer to as "people".)
Nonetheless, the majority should rule, not only a plurality of people.

[MPeter]

Great piece David. You are bang-on. But then, I am a fan. I follow your work religiously.