John Walsh calls out those “progressive” movements controlled by party statists working to corral the antiwar element into voting the status quo. Move On receives a critical review that is spot on. But the burning questions I’ve had since Eli Pariser deactivated a wildly successfull and allegedly independent peace movement crossing international borders to become the ho-hum MoveOnPac’s executive director remain unanswered.
Only after Pariser launched The MoveOn Peace campaign post-9/11 did Move On become the “radical phenomenon” it has been distancing itself from at least since that debacle of an election they perpetrated upon their membership. If Eli was ever independent, what was his price for selling-out to Move On (and including a formidable e-mail list in the bargain)? If not, doesn’t that mean he intentionally misled millions into supporting peace with the goal of eventually herding their time, talents, and money into supporting murderous thugs? He’s the catalyst for this predictable outcome I’d most like to get the story on, as Move On, created by Joan Blades and Wes Boyd to support Clinton during his impeachment hearings, attempts to convince whatever antiwar members they’ve left to support staying the course in Iraq.
Walsh links to a piece by Norman Solomon who cites Progressive Democrats of America (PDA) as an organisation that will fill the void created by Move On’s abandonment of antiwar activism.
Fool me twice, shame on me. “Progressives” are pathetic. Instead of bashing Bush alone they should turn their ire upon the despots in the Democratic party who play them like simpering, desperate fools.