Yesterday’s SOPA strike was enormously successful, not only raising attention to the issue but moving a tremendous amount of politicians for a one-day event. Over 4.5 million people signed Google’s petition against SOPA. The Wikipedia action gave high-profile attention to the issue as well, and even if Facebook and Twitter’s responses were muted, overall the online community made themselves heard.
But those of us charting the protest yesterday were struck by how most of the lawmakers turning against the bill were Republicans. If you look at the latest whip count on PIPA, for example, you see that more Republicans oppose it at this point than Democrats.
Instead, Democrats by and large finessed their responses, claiming that they would work to fix the finished product. Markos Moulitsas lets Democrats have it:
You have an entire wired generation focused on this issue like a laser, fighting like hell to protect their online freedoms, and it’s FUCKING REPUBLICANS who are playing the heroes by dropping support?
Those goddam Democrats would rather keep collecting their Hollywood checks, than heed the will of millions of Americans who have lent their online voice in an unprecedented manner.
Are they really this stupid? Can they really be this idiotic?
Are they really going to cede this issue to Republicans, hand them this massive public victory, then get left with nothing but public scorn when SOPA and PIPA go down in flames?
To be clear, this is more of an issue with Congress. The Obama Administration responded last weekend with opposition to aspects of SOPA and PIPA, and the Obama 2012 campaign put out a petition on the issue yesterday (kind of leading from behind, but they’re in the right place). And there are plenty of Democrats who listened to their constituents yesterday, mostly the ones who will have to gain their support. Tim Holden, in a tough race in Pennsylvania, withdrew his SOPA support yesterday. Tammy Baldwin, running for Senate in Wisconsin, made a great statement of opposition. And candidates trying to get into the House, like Jose Hernandez in California, stood with the online community.
The problematic figures here are the institutional Congressional Democrats, the ones who don’t have an election coming up, or whose seats are safe, who simply welcome the campaign checks, mostly from the entertainment industry, and the power and influence that goes along with them. A former lobbyist writes at The Verge that this issue will ultimately get decided by the size of those checks.
Even if SOPA and PIPA die on the vine, Congress will be back with fresh legislation and cute new propaganda-laden titles, courtesy of the MPAA and RIAA’s ruthlessly effective combination of money and patience — a combination the tech community has shown little interest in matching. To change Congress, you have to change who Congress listens to. But more importantly, you have to change what those people are saying — and to do that you need to peer outside the marble halls of Congress and focus your gaze squarely on Silicon Valley.
As long as the entertainment industry spends more money in Washington than the tech industry, bad laws like SOPA and PIPA will appear with frightening regularity. The government will seem ignorant and unresponsive to the internet community for as long as the internet community refuses to participate — that’s just how this works.
Congress is a game, and anyone who wants to get something done in government plays. Those who don’t play never accomplish anything. It’s a game of reputation, relationships, back-room deals, and big money. And if you haven’t called or written your representatives, or engaged someone to advocate on your behalf, you’re not even spectating from the bleachers — as far as Congress is concerned, you’re sitting in your car listening to the game on the radio, somewhere in the uncharted Canadian tundra. Meanwhile, special interest groups help decide the batting order, while lobbyists line the bases, waving their pet legislation home.
This traditional view is becoming less true, in part because of the large megaphone that the Internet allows. Attention can get raised on issues that normally stay behind the scenes, and those politicians responsive to public opinion will shift their view. The problem is that this power relationship only works when the politicians listen to their grassroots. And in general terms, that describes the Republican relationship to the Tea Party, not the Democratic relationship to their grassroots. The Tea Party has struck fear into their party; the progressive movement inspires laughter. And that’s why you saw the movement you saw yesterday.



85 Comments


Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
The Orange Satan critizing Democrats? Had to check the calendar to make sure it wasn’t April 1.
Didn’t think much could shock me any more but that front page photo on your piece does, David. Bye.
Tip of the hat to Markos. Proving once again liberal progressives can learn. Some it takes longer. It will be interesting to see how Markos goes forward.
Yep. Repubs fear their extreme wing; Dems don’t at all. Instead, they tell us to shut the ____ up, because we “have nowhere else to go.”
Saw a clip on The Daily Show of the ranking member on the Intellectual Property committee who made it pretty clear he had no freakin’ clue how the internet works, let alone what damage the bills would do.
I wonder about Lamar Smith, author of the House bill, who happens to be (bleah) my rep. I find it hard to believe he understands it either, but he is evil enough to understand perfectly well.
Apropos:
“One of the best ways of enslaving a people is to keep them from education… The second way of enslaving a people is to suppress the sources of information, not only by burning books but by controlling all the other ways in which ideas are transmitted.”
Eleanore Roosevelt wrote in her daily column MY DAY on May 11, 1943
Mooning SOPA.
LOL!
It must be remembered that the administration is in campaign mode.
To me, the most interesting part of SOPA/PIPA was there were no hearings & no one read the bill. Clear example of lobbyists writing legislation. Lobbyist on democracynow this morning defended it against wiki guy by always saying that the bill didn’t say what he said it said.
Yes, and his second term will be much worse than the first. No reelection to reign him in, burnishing his resume for boards of directors, speaking fees, lobbying.
The Tea Party has struck fear into their party; the progressive movement inspires laughter.
Yet another reason why all “Progressives” should cast their ballots for Candidate Obama – no matter what.
Modern day “Progressives” excel at one thing: playing the useful idiot role to the DNC Powers That Be (see: Public Option faux debate, 2009-10).
Agree that it’s amazing, but just think it’s another Act in the Kabuki Show, wherein Moulitsas is playing the role of villain for the day.
Don’t count on Mr. CIA Spook Moulitsas for *anything.* Just my m.o.
This is a point I have been trying to make here for weeks. Regardless of the “astroturfiness” of the Tea Party, they were able to strike fear into their party by taking action. They found, supported and elected enough candidates to make a difference. They are “Actionist”. Progressives are “Activists” who preach to the choir on line, sign petitions and generally bitch a lot about the issues they care about. Where are the progressive challengers to primary the establishment Democrats.
Even OWS, as much as I respect and support them, is still a big pitty party in the eyes of the corporate/political elite. They will not have a slate of 99% candidates to challenge the establishment politics they are protesting. Without a credible threat to their power, politicians will continue to occasionally give lip service to and flatly ignore progressives.
Cue Jon Lovitz as “Pathological Liar“: yeah, yeah, the bill really really didn’t say what Jimmy Wales said it did! Yeah, THAT’s the ticket!
wasn’t this their exact same opening gambit with NDAA ???
p.s. firedogs, was pleasantly surprised to see several major food/foodie sites go dark yesterday as well
eh? I think I “get” what you’re saying, but the only reason why those Tea Party candidates got “elected” is because they were backed by huge corporate/lobbyist sponsors.
Clearly, the 1% ain’t gonna support any/most “progressive” candidates.
I don’t *believe* for an instant that anyone in the 1% is “fearful” of the Tea Party. That’s a media “narrative” fairy tale sent forth to fool the populace into believing in fiction.
JMHO, of course, but the Tea Party is wholly owned subsidiary of Koch Industries, and the Tea Party shall do as they are told. The end.
Needless to say, the rightwing propoganda wurlitzer is doing it’s “job” here by painting the picture of how very very “powerless,” useless, foolish and stupid so-called progressives are. That’s what they *always say.*
With respect, I disagree with you.
We need to call out our candidates! I did a little research on my Senator Al Franken,MN, whose opinions I typically love.
According to Open Congress (http://www.opencongress.org/money_trail#), Franken is a co-sponsor of the bill, and accepted 29K from the movie industry. I am usually proud of Frankin’s positions, but he is showing some bad colors here. I called him on it, pointing out that the only reason we know about his relatively progressive politics is due to web sites like FDL. He started out a main street media laughing stock, and the Minnesota Dem Party actively campaigned against him!
Our representatives had better pay attention to where the butter for their bread came from, before they shut down the source!
The Kochs paid to elect those candidates. Occupy has no such deep pockets to elect anyone who represents out views. BlueAmerica helped elect a few, but they turned coat as soon as they got to D.C.
Yes. And most of us liked Candidate Obama. Candidate Obama is, unfortunately, just a really good actor, though.
I’ve been trying to think of a Q Amy could have asked to reveal what went on. The best I’ve come up with so far is: Why are you so familiar with the language in the bills? Did your organization write them?
you owe me a drink! I’ll have an expresso, please!
I found something that moves one R, Newtie. Apparently the typical midlife crisis, Newtie wanted to see “other women”. I am guessing the “other women” were mostly corporate lobbyists. But he could be a “swinger”.
And, this is the guy who released the Starr Report, on the internet. HA HA HA
Yes, that’s a good question.
The second question, perhaps, could be: and WHY don’t any of the legislators have a clue about *anything* in this bill, while YOU clearly do???
Discussed at some length on the Rick Perry post down below.
Newticles exhibits his Doug Coe “Family” values all of the time: do what I SAY, not what I DO. a flaming asshole, that one.
Righto.
O always leaves himself a way to reverse. And it’s not that difficult to find the weasel words as you just did.
On Keystone, the weasel words were ‘not enough time to evaluate,’ meaning I’ll rubber stamp it right after the election.
Heh. Amy should have the debate betw a congressional sponsor of the bill & wiki guy.
Franken SOLD OUT a loooooong time ago. My respectful suggestion to you is: don’t trust Franken, no matter what.
Agree. I would enjoy hearing that debate. Jimmy Wales is no one’s fool, and I trust him way more than of those greed-heads in DC.
I dunno. I think they’re both Koch funded but kind of rogue at the same time. Most of them voted to shut the gov down during the debt deal, for example. I don’t think they always vote the way the oligarchs want them to.
Plus there’s that slippery slope thing. Legislation these days is designed so PTB can slide down that slope asap.
I read that Hollywood fatcats are witholding campaign donations because of SOPA. They’re typical of what passes for “liberal” these days -ok on a few trendy culture war issues like gays, but when it comes to everything else they’re basically Wall Street assholes. They’re the type that’s made the Democratic Party the POS it is today.
possibly. it’s always a bit like herding cats. nonetheless, the Tea Party candidates were all funded mainly by Koch money and/or other 1% money. So it’s no surprise that Tea Party candidates “won” with the war chests that they had for their campaigns.
I still do not believe for an instant that the 1% “fears” the Tea Party. That is out and out propoganda and a complete falsehood.
Well, My congressman is a Democrat. I couldn’t change his mind, and it isn’t because Democrats are in the bag to Hollywood, it’s because he already opposed SOPA.
My senators are both Democrats and pretty much as you say. Feinstein is supposedly trying to broker a truce — she represents both Hollywood and Silicon Valley (but she also said the strike was counterproductive). Boxer hasn’t been heard from, she’s a co-sponsor of PIPA.
But you could also read my delegation based on class lines. The senators are Washington-made millionaires. The congressman is the same guy he was when he left here to represent us.
LOL! Really MM criticizing the Democrats maybe there is an apocalypse on the way.
Absolutely. And haven’t we heard this “we’re opposed to certain aspects of this bill” before, only to have the President sign the entire bill? Where is the robust “This legislation will never see the light of day as long as I’m President”? Oh, yea. Hollywood wouldn’t approve.
Hollywood moguls better not withhold donations from O. I think he has every intent of fast tracking it as soon as he’s reelected. Guessing it’s already in the bag and they all smirked at each other on the handshake about how they’ve pulled another fast one on us.
In re to Hollywood: yes.
Hollywood is run by mega-rich “moguls,” and like the 1% anywhere they are just greedy grifters out for themselves. Witness the crap “product” that they “produce” anymore. Most Hollywood movies are pathetic, yet the Oscar’s still keep touting the “art” of film-making. my ass. they produce drek that they think’ll make the biggest bucks. art has precious little to do with it.
Hollywood just plays a role in the Kabuki Show called: so-called “liberals” v. so-called “conservatives.” Just part of the “culture wars” put forth to divide and conquer the 99%.
I was thinking congress & prez would pass it overwhelmingly regardless of who sponsors it bc it allows USG to censor internet.
There aren’t enough of them to be a real threat, but their ideology is not something the Wall Street 1% really approve of. Actually, a lot of 1%ers are Corporate Welfare Queens in a lot of ways, and the TPers actually do seem willing to kick them off the gov teat. I don’t think they like that idea at all.
yes. They ALL want to do that, and pronto, no matter which party they claim affiliation with. Don’t like the ability of the “Greek chorus” to have a voice that can be witnessed by just about anyone. Can’t have that!
In theory, yes I agree, esp about the 1% being corporate welfare queens. Nonetheless, the 1% is doing its best to “own” the Tea Party, and they do not “fear” them. Letting the Tea Party candidates vote “against” what the 1% actually wants is also “ok,” bc it permits the Tea Party 99%er to live in the fantasy that *they* have a “say.” They don’t.
The 1% doesn’t fear the Tea Party because they are owned by a protion of the 1% but not all of them. That doesn’t alter the fact that through the Tea Party that portion of the 1% that owns the TP has been able to change the dynamic within the Republican Party. Regardless of who paid for it, there were still enough like minded (though misguided) voters to get their slate of candidates elected in large enough numbers to force the establishment Republicans to deal with them.
I guess the question is, “Are there any real progressives in the 1% and why can’t we get to fund a Progressive Tea Party.” I suspect that there are not any progressives in the 1% besides the Hollywood Progressives who support SOPA/PIPA.
Like allowing gadflys Kucinich, Sanders, Paul to vote against anything bc their vote doesn’t matter.
Soros is as close as you can come.
Yes. The present copyright/IP laws are already being used to squash political dissent.
http://thesecondalarm.com/2011/12/12/citigroup-suppressing-memo/
Yeah, it only took Franken a couple months after we Minnesotans got him seated in the Senate for him to sell us out. Don’t even get me started on Klobuchar, who’s up for re-election this year. :-(
Well, there’s Michael Moore, and he’s for moving copyright laws in the opposite direction. So we have a few 1%ers on our side – just not a lot.
Thanks for the link.
How much evidence do people need to see the general pattern.
I think you answered your question. Despite the mighty conservative whiiiing about George Soros, I’m not aware of any other so-called “progressive” 1%ers, and I don’t count on Hollywood for anything. They’re simply NOT that progressive, esp when it comes to money issues.
For those keeping score (h/t to Matt Cutts on Google+) here are the congress critters who are still ostensibly co-sponsoring.
SOPA co-sponsors
PIPA co-sponsors
The Senate list may not be up-to-date. Cardin is still listed as a co-sponsor and I read yesterday that he had withdrawn his sponsorship.
Good point. I’m a little paranoid that the Progressive Caucus serves the same purpose, too.
Yes, exactly.
Gotta have a few “characters” ACT like they’re on the side of the 99% – whether the left or right. Just part of the Kabuki Show and the revolving cast of villains.
Be a “little paranoid” no more and realize that the Progressive Caucus is NOT YOUR friend, nor are they doing anything for the 99%. Hope that helps. Don’t trust ‘em. Fulla crap. All owned by the 1%.
A great way to keep lefties distracted while pockets are picked.
Ok: I’ll take Moore, although he can be a big old kiss-up to Obama, so I take Moore with a big huge pallet of salt. Don’t totally trust him, but… he’s done some good stuff. Just be wary.
Michael Moore, Matt Damon, and Larry Davis (seriously!) are the only actual Hollywood leftists I know of. And, uh, we need more than 3.
Bernie Sanders is in favor of SOPA and PIPA, by the way. :-(
Soitenly!
Yeah saw a list of Moore’s Obotness recently. It’s impressive.
Plus, don’t know whether it’s an act or whether he is really naive. But his list of hortatories, that he has no plan for how to effect, goes on & on. Sounds wonderful but completely empty of content.
Sometimes George Clooney, too, but would have to know a lot more about his politics before taking him too seriously.
Of course, there is Susan Sarandon & her former husband, Tim Robbins. And then also Sean Penn, who, I believe, has actually done boots on the ground real work trying to help out in Haiti.
So I guess there’s a few actors who have some decent things going for them.
Brad & Angelina have done some good stuff, too but not sure how trustworthy they are.
I’ve watched Moore pretty closely for a while, and genuinely believe he’s just dealing with the cognitive dissonance, denial, questions of lesser-evilism that leftists like me do. I’m positive that his heart is in the right place and his values are the same as ours. He’s just not an all-seeing oracle of truth (none of us are.).
Wow. And he could have been against it so easily.
Example of how they don’t even need to throw crumbs our way anymore.
indeed. I do appreciate Moore’s documentaries, though. Despite some issues in them, Moore has done a lot to educate the populace about what’s going on. I don’t care that he got rich doing it. That’s beside the point.
But he’s too much of a suck up to Zero, which gives me pause.
perhaps. I tend to feel that way, too, and I hope that you are correct in your assessment. I’d like to think so.
Yeah, they can be very progressive when it doesn’t cost anything or isn’t going to interfere with their revenue stream. And today’s films really do suck. Musicians and singer/songwriters promoting and selling their stuff on the intertoobz really ticks off the record industry.
too bad, but not surprised. although I’ve “liked” some things about Sanders, I’ve never seen him as some kind of savior, as some do. Just as bought off as all the rest anymore, sad to say.
I like his films too and agree that Moore is a good marketer for some of the important issues of the times. Lord knows, we need marketers.
Sarandon was elitist as all getout when she went down to OWS. I was actually yelling at my computer monitor listening to her talk. She was basically calling them ineffective hippies for not having a top-down organizational structure and solid strategy pre-formed.
That said, her heart is probably in the right place in a roundabout sort of way. I guess one can be a well-meaning elitist?
Oh? Do tell. Well sorry to hear that. I do think Sarandon’s heart is in the right place, but she’s probably been a bit influenced by her “power” in the Hollywood firmament, and has probably lost touch with having the serfs have a voice.
As the saying go: absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Often seems the case that even the “best” people get really really out of touch with “everyday reality” when they start making mega-bucks.
On Edit: and these Hollywood actors definitely live in a “reality” that is very different from the day-to-day lives of the rest of the population. I think all that insane “attention” really does a number on their psyches. One can only imagine, frankly.
I’ll take what I can get, and these days, it is often coming out of Moore’s documentaries, which, insofar as I can tell, are heavily and deeply researched. I say: more power to Michael Moore, and may he go on to make more documentaries (no puns intended).
And filled with humor; no better way to persuade.
It takes a while to really come to terms with how completely worthless the Dems have become. It’s very easy to get sucked back into denial because it’s just so depressing.
Here’s an example of Moore’s recent position:
http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/mike-friends-blog/2012-im-only-backing-candidates-who-pledge-get-money-out-politics-dan-kildee-flint
I find it, like, 700% more likely that Moore is a totally well meaning, but flawed human being like the rest of “us” than a hack with a secret agenda.
yes, exactly. a master stroke, imo.
Guess who doesn’t care a whit about small “d” democracy? Democrats. Republicans, though beholden to the wealthy exclusively, are still responsive to their will in a general way. Democrats are simply chasing narrow special interest cash and ultimately fail everything and everyone else.
Gotta few chores. BBL.
Agree that it is *depressing* that, in truth, there is only a One Party system anymore, and that the vast majority of politicians, esp at the fed level, are millionaires and billionaires soley out for what they can rip off for themselves.
I have many trad-Dem voter friends, and I have to tred very carefully with what I say to them bc the impetus on their parts right now is stay deeply in denial. And/or to admit somewhat to the reality of our plights, but then say: I’ll still vote Democratic bc they are “the lesser of two evils, and I have NO other choice.”
Well I think that’s wrong-headed. We DO have other choices, and voting Third Party is NOT “throwing away your vote.” At the very least, write in yourself as a candidate. Just saying…
yes. agree. IMO, Dems are far more venal anymore than Repubs, albeit there’s still not a lot of diff bet the 2 “parties.” all chasing after the big buck$$ for themselves.
outta here, too.
TTFN, folks. Keep up the good work.
Yeah, and I’ve noticed that with a lot of the older activists who were effective decades ago and still remember their old victories with nostalgia, that they don’t really seem to be able to see that their old methods aren’t working any more, because the power elite completely adapted and learned how to very effectively discredit, co-opt, etc. I guess it’s partly an ego thing, which is understandable and forgivable.
I don’t see this conflict amongst corporate interests as having anything to do with the 99%. The internet will become like the rest of msm; run by corporations unless the 99% get control of their government. This skirmish is b/t rich silicon valley interests and rich hollywood interests and our new scary government.
1. I’d love to see this kind of bad law when it’s decided at the SCOTUS — after it clogs every federal court at the start. SCOTUS will have a simple choice: throw out the law or the Constitution.
2. The piracy and sales of counterfeit material (copyrighted works or patented drugs, e.g.) for the most part takes place via p2p networks and not online. So the law will not stop or prevent piracy and counterfeit sales. Most solicitations for the counterfeit or pirated material go through email or news servers.
3. Now you too can become a victim, an author, and maker of Intellectual Property with a few keystrokes and a click or tap. Apple has just announced a breathtaking program for schools. But you have to check your cynicism at the metal detector because the program — while helping Apple sell iPads galore — will show schools and school districts how to save money galore.
SOPA and PIPA are a bad idea and this should be an issue that is embraced from all people, left, right, moderates, and libertarians… All we are saying, is give free speech a chance! The more we complain about to our lawmakers, the better.
My congressman is Progressive Caucus, he was against SOPA without having to be told. Supports EFF, too.
This guy here isn’t entirely correct, but in essence, he does have a point.
Are you sure the “former lobbyist working at the Verge who wrote this:
Didn’t also write this?
They want us to play this game, while they sell everything out from underneath us? It has shades of a coup.
Congress is out of control, and Mr. I’m going to Washington to “change” the way the game works hasn’t done shit, and hasn’t requested it. Neither have any of the lesser auctioneers.
Cenk Uyger confronts Andrew Sullivan about the same thing here.
I’m amazed at those of us who can’t accept the fact that conservatives are on the side of the angels on this issue. Why look a gift horse in the mouth? Why not ask where there might be other common ground, instead of assuming that conservatives are always evil?