On Internet Activism

As few modern epochs, the Reagan presidency ushered in the ideal of privilege for the few, above the rights of the many. I am old enough I clearly recall the air of defeat about liberal activism and activists during the Reagan years. The "Reagan-despair" on the Left translated itself at times into clichéd rants that alienated all but die-hards; at other times, progressive cynicism manifested as sunny granola-cliché about "thinking globally." And me? A product of the Reagan era, I'd learned by my 30s to accept the lack of cultural resonance of protest against moneyed interests, and for human and civil rights. After Bush's re-election, I almost gave up.

But, thankfully, I didn't. I have stayed engaged in "the struggle," refreshed by the impact of internet-based Leftist organizing--particularly, it turns out, by the example of MoveOn.org.

That MoveOn.org, started by political novices and supported by individual small-donor contributions, has influenced American culture and the American political climate is attested by the statement of one Bush official that the organization had "hurt the president." The Right is clearly on the defensive, and this shows also in the emergence of Rightist groups in vein of MoveOn.org, specifically to counter its messages. We on the Left are feeling our own power and efficacy against powerful far-Right elements in American culture, perhaps as never before in decades. Bush's catastrophic second term notwithstanding, we've realized we are "getting somewhere."

What does MoveOn.org give me, personally? What does the organization give other activists, and would-be activists, who eagerly read emails from the MoveOn staffers?

The first thing MoveOn.org gives me is a handy way to get involved, through its emailed donation requests and letter-writing and petition drives. This isn't to be underestimated. Before the internet, when interactive, one-to-many communication wasn't yet taken for granted, requests by "good causes" to sympathizers tended to be much more difficult for every-day people to respond to. It cost money for a nonprofit even to put out the mailing requesting money, for instance, so the asked-for donations tended to be in high amounts most people could not justify. The need by good causes for non-monetary support, likewise, tended to be understood as significant commitments of supporters' time and energies--beyond just signing a petition. The result was that people like myself, who thought volunteering more would be "a good idea," tended to become involved seldomly, if at all.

In the dark days before the internet, I might also have been dissuaded from involvement in progressive causes by something subtler than lack of convenient means to "get onboard." I'm thinking of the ethic of self-sacrifice that pervaded lots of 60s-era Leftist rhetoric, rhetoric that survived as "inspiration" through the 80s. The notion that your own skin was less important than your ideals has been acknowledged in the glorification of Leftist reformers, like the rioters at Peoples' Park in Berkeley, who were willing to die for a cause. You earned your "activist" stripes, at one time, by enduring hardship, and by showing a willingness to "lay down your life" for a cause, literally, or figuratively, as by interrupting other life's pursuits to work to further your ideals. The Leftist ideal of self-sacrifice, for every-day people like me, engendered guilt over finding oneself an "armchair"--bourgeoisie, pampered, "inadequate"--activist, and that was nothing I wanted any part of.

Whether they've consciously re-habilitated the model of "all-or-nothing" activism that has prevailed on the Left, MoveOn.org has clearly done much to legitimize "part-time" activism. If you can't spare $20 to help air the latest radio ad against the Iraq War, then you're enthusiastically encouraged to sign the petition, or telephone a legislator about that war. It isn't much, but if most everybody who gets the MoveOn.org email takes part in the drive, obviously, it boosts the cause significantly. MoveOn has swelled its ranks by enfranchising droves of people like me, who were concerned about the state of the world, but who rarely "got involved," who had not previously felt entitled to think of ourselves as "activists."

The next thing MoveOn.org gives me, beyond a means to get involved, is encouragement. Whether it features grave tidings about national or international developments, MoveOn.org email always includes positive news about the organization's achievement of some practical milestone or other: "We raised a record total of $500,000 for our last advertisement.." "Your signature to our petition helped to save..." Simply, this kind of thing nourishes me and keeps me engaged.

As the legitimization of part-time activism, MoveOn.org-style encouragement also seems to counteract a deep Leftist bias concerning a dearth of "good news" in the increasingly corrupt and hostile world. The expectation of "struggle" by progressives dates from the Reagan era, or perhaps much earlier; "liberal" movements have regarded themselves as ineffectual. "Good liberals" feel it's best to "try anyway," of course, though the news in the world is relentlessly bad for believers in civil and human rights and the environment.

The homely collection of essays that MoveOn.org released before the 2004 election, 50 Ways to Love Your Country, includes pieces by political progressives from different walks of life, about their successful activism. The writings have titles like, "Alert the Media to Uncovered Events," and "Run for Office to Challenge Incumbents." "50 Ways" made the Bay Area best-seller list, not because it's any theoretical treatise, but because it's an inspirational handbook.

Leftist online organizing, particularly MoveOn.org, poses a growing threat to the Right because it starts to dispel the sense of helplessness that out-gunned, out-bankrolled progressives like me have lived with for decades, hardly questioning.