|
I have noticed there are three operating rules of engagement when it comes to some wide swaths of LGBT community and the Human Rights Campaign.
Rule #1: If we win any electoral campaigns or legislation, it must be because of The Grassroots operating on their own and not anything HRC did.
Rule #2: If we lose, it must be because HRC squandered lots of money and has no influence over the Administration or Congress, and not because The Grassroots didn't care or had other priorities, but because HRC failed to mobilize The Grassroots.
Rule #3: If HRC does something cool, it should be questioned with cynicism. For example, if something cool happens- like the National Equality March drawing hundreds of thousands of people to the National Mall, driven in part by Lady Gaga's appearance- it's teh awesome. But if 1,000 people rally with HRC at Freedom Plaza in DC in the middle of a workday driven in part by Kathy Griffin's appearance, the use of celebrities in movement activism is questioned.
To that end, it raises a question in my mind on the role traditional legacy organizations play. As Pam notes in her piece on Barney Frank's comments regarding the LGBT agenda, if our legacy organizations with their foot in the door are ineffective at pressuring the Administration and members of Congress to do what we want, that's problematic. She's right. On the other hand, in terms of whether we succeed or fail at something, is it as Pam describes in discussing DADT repeal in trouble:
The bombshell, as it were, is the fact that we see, yet again, that the White House is letting the LGBT community down on DADT repeal in a way that shows the impotence of HRC's efforts.
Or is it because effective activism by community members hasn't been lobbed at the White House? I haven't seen tens of thousands of phone calls flooding the White House switchboard, day-in and day-out. Aside from Dan Choi's chaining himself to the White House fence, I haven't seen direct action- either in DC or out following the President around the country- since the President's State of the Union. So, who is "letting the LGBT community down", here?
Too often I think there is a misconception that organizations with lots of money and big e-mail lists can mobilize whoever they want, whenever they want. If hundreds of thousands of calls aren't pouring in, it must be because HRC didn't push that big red button.
When in reality, it's hard to mobilize communities. We are not all HRC's zombies, here. I've been doing LGBT organizing for 6 years- both online and offline, in college, on the streets with Soulforce around Don't Ask, Don't Tell in 2006, and today. I could name a dozen gay friends who wouldn't do anything for LGBT rights unless they got a personal phone call from Madonna, and even then only if it's something they can do on their computer. I'm serious- apathy is real in the LGBT community. Out of the zillions of e-mail lists out there and the millions upon millions of e-action blasts sent, a tiny fraction have truly worked. Chris and I manage e-action at OpenLeft and we can tell you: mobilizing people virtually is hard, especially now that everyone gets flooded from list after list.
Now, to be fair, HRC hasn't asked people to call the bejeezus out of the White House, or follow the President around the country demanding to know whether he wants to see repeal this year, ginning up earned media- and I've called that out, too. They have done event after event in targeted states with swing members of Congress, though, and are partnering with organizations around the country on a massive veterans lobby day on the Hill next month. And at the risk of sounding repetitive, I go back to Chris' piece on how to start your own netroots organization. Decentralized activism is in these days, as it should be- it's part of what we do here at OpenLeft. Hell, a blogswarm flooded HRC's phone lines on DADT just less than a month ago. OpenLeft participated in another one pushing the Speaker's office on ENDA more recently. From what I heard, both were slammed with calls. Yes, there are limits to what non-large, well-monied organizations can do- not everyone has $40 million to throw around. But just because HRC doesn't do a tactic doesn't mean it can't be done. And don't assume that if people aren't mobilized, it must be because HRC is failing to mobilize them.
Nevertheless, if repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell fails, predictably, the blame game will focus exclusively on HRC, calls to not donate will be made, Andrew Sullivan will once again incorrectly write how they haven't done anything since their founding, etc. And no doubt, newer, less monied, more "grassroots"- whatever that means- groups like GetEqual will get a pass. My question is whether that will all be correct or not.
The purse strings on activism, so to speak, are not all in the hands of A Few Large Monied Organizations. It's important to hold them accountable and call out poor organizing where one sees it- I've done so myself in many places, including with HRC. As Pam writes, they play a key role in pressuring the White House. But for the sake of responsibility, the rest of us all play a role, too. I don't assume HRC or anyone else has all the power, and consequently don't rely on them. Neither should anyone else.
|
