Everything wrong with the "Uncommitted" movement

[superrific]

From an interview on slate with Layla Ehabed, one of the founders of the Uncommitted movement. Note that the article was occasioned by the fact that Kamala invited Layla to speak with her about arms sales to Israel. Here's how the interview ended:

Q:
As the election gets closer, is there a point where you might give up on Kamala or decide to rally support for her despite everything?

"Uncommitted isn’t an option in November, so I won’t be asking people to vote uncommitted. But neither will I personally advocate for voting for Kamala without our demands being met. We need a policy that guarantees Palestinian lives will be saved. We need her to differentiate herself from Trump, who has already promised his mega-donors that he will annex the West Bank to become part of Israel. His Project 2025 outlines plans to criminalize the work that I and many other uncommitted organizers, and student protesters, and people mobilizing in the street, are doing to advocate for human rights. We need her to make a clear policy shift away from Biden."

******
There it is. "Trump is so bad that he will make me a criminal and raze the West Bank, so Kamala needs to do what we want so that doesn't happen."

The other option is the one that most everyone has been choosing for -- well, since the advent of democracy. I'd love to ask her about what happened in France, when people of all different ideological stripes rallied together to beat the National Front. Gee, they managed to put aside their differences to focus on the common enemy. Hmm. Sounds like a good idea to me.

It's this weird narcissism of assuming that "only we matter." Does this woman realize that Kamala will lose swing votes if she does their bidding -- a lot of swing votes, and far more votes than the Arab Muslim community could possibly deliver. And part of the reason for that is the pro-Palestinian protesters who are running around alienating everyone. Nobody is forcing them to do that. So a reasonable person would realize that their views cannot be embraced by a major party candidate because they are toxic. Instead they choose the most confrontational strategy possible.

 

[RaiGuy]

She is basically saying that she’s voting for Kamala without saying it.

“Uncommitted isn’t an option in November, so I won’t be asking people to vote uncommitted”

They know Trump is worse, but they want their voices to be heard and respected. What would you suggest they do? What is a better option to get heard?

 

[Bigs23]

She is basically saying that she’s voting for Kamala without saying it.

“Uncommitted isn’t an option in November, so I won’t be asking people to vote uncommitted”

They know Trump is worse, but they want their voices to be heard and respected. What would you suggest they do? What is a better option to get heard?

Do what she basically said she’ll do, work work with the people who will at least listen.

 

[heelinhell]

She is basically saying that she’s voting for Kamala without saying it.

“Uncommitted isn’t an option in November, so I won’t be asking people to vote uncommitted”

They know Trump is worse, but they want their voices to be heard and respected. What would you suggest they do? What is a better option to get heard?

A better option to get heard is to strongly endorse Kamala and recognize that Trump has no interest in a resolution to the conflict and will be quite content to support Bibi's pogrom and his refusal to participate in negotiations for a two state solution.

Moreover, recognize that if Trump is elected, there will be no pro-Palestinian protests allowed here at home beyond a hunger strike in a 6x8 prison cell.

 

[Paine]

A better option to get heard is to strongly endorse Kamala and recognize that Trump has no interest in a resolution to the conflict and will be quite content to support Bibi's pogrom and his refusal to participate in negotiations for a two state solution.

Moreover, recognize that if Trump is elected, there will be no pro-Palestinian protests allowed here at home beyond a hunger strike in a 6x8 prison cell.

That’s effectively what they’re doing. Everyone knows the stakes of what happens if Trump is elected. But if they endorse Harris now, they have no leverage. This is political advocacy 101 level stuff.

These protests happen at Harris rallies because the protestors know a Harris-Walz administration would be more receptive to them than a Trump presidency.

 

[RaiGuy]

That’s effectively what they’re doing. Everyone knows the stakes of what happens if Trump is elected. But if they endorse Harris now, they have no leverage. This is political advocacy 101 level stuff.

These protests happen at Harris rallies because the protestors know a Harris-Walz administration would be more receptive to them than a Trump presidency.

Exactly. They’re not there to heckle her at the rallies, but instead are there to let her know they exist and need their voice heard. This is an urgent matter and needs to be addressed asap.
Yesterday, the administration gave Israel $3.5 billion more for weapons and then today Israel massacres 100+ people.
But as they stated, everyone knows Trump is worse. He’s not getting anyone’s vote. But they know Kamala could potentially help.

 

[heelinhell]

That’s effectively what they’re doing. Everyone knows the stakes of what happens if Trump is elected. But if they endorse Harris now, they have no leverage. This is political advocacy 101 level stuff.

These protests happen at Harris rallies because the protestors know a Harris-Walz administration would be more receptive to them than a Trump presidency.

So disrupting Kamala's campaign rallys gives them leverage...seriously ?

 

[Lando]

So disrupting Kamala's campaign rallys gives them leverage...seriously ?

Meet our demands or we’ll wreck this is a form of leverage.

 

[heelinhell]

Exactly. They’re not there to heckle her at the rallies, but instead are there to let her know they exist and need their voice heard. This is an urgent matter and needs to be addressed asap.
Yesterday, the administration gave Israel $3.5 billion more for weapons and then today Israel massacres 100+ people.
But as they stated, everyone knows Trump is worse. He’s not getting anyone’s vote. But they know Kamala could potentially help.

Please tell me how disrupting a Kamala rally is helpful to their cause.

 

[Lando]

I doubt the Uncommitted movement has much control over the sort of people who heckle rallies.

 

[Paine]

Please tell me how disrupting a Kamala rally is helpful to their cause.

It projects their visibility to both Harris and the Democratic base. It forces Harris to deal with their existence as a political force rather than ignoring them, which would be her preferred choice if she knew there would be no political consequence (that would be the obvious electoral choice).

If this didn’t give them leverage and visibility, we wouldn’t be talking about it. Like it or not, this form of protest is effective. And it’s part of democracy. Harris handled it perfectly in Arizona.

 

[heelinhell]

It projects their visibility to both Harris and the Democratic base. It forces Harris to deal with their existence as a political force rather than ignoring them, which would be her preferred choice if she knew there would be no political consequence (that would be the obvious electoral choice).

If this didn’t give them leverage and visibility, we wouldn’t be talking about it. Like it or not, this form of protest is effective. And it’s part of democracy. Harris handled it perfectly in Arizona.

Seriously ? This self-aggrandizing cosplay is bringing attention only to the protesters and distracting from the crisis at hand. To think she needs to be made aware of what is going on in Gaza by disrupting her rally is silly.

 

[Paine]

Seriously ? This self-aggrandizing cosplay is bringing attention only to the protesters and distracting from the crisis at hand. To think she needs to be made aware of what is going on in Gaza by disrupting her rally is silly.

I’m not sure why you think chanting “Free Palestine” is a self-aggrandizing cosplay, and I’d like to hear you explain that a bit more. No one said she needs to be made aware of what is going on in Gaza. That’s not what that protest is about (though it may make some Dem voters analyze or think about the issue who weren’t previously).

Again, the protestors’ goal is use their leverage as a political/electoral force to ensure that Harris engages with their position. Without protests, there aren’t many voices for the Palestinian community that break through the media discourse. This is by design.

These protestors have forced all of us to reckon with their position as well. That is the goal, and they are succeeding. Harris handled the protests poorly in Michigan and well in Arizona.

 

[superrific]

Meet our demands or we’ll wreck this is a form of leverage.

It's only leverage if you're willing to wreck this. And if you're willing to wreck it, then you're an idiot and you will lose all political support for your cause.

And the bigger problem is that the uncommitted voters are outnumbered by swing voters who support Israel. There has to be a reason why both Fetterman and Josh Shapiro are both vocally and visibly pro-Israel. And that's why the Biden people haven't been able to do what would seem to be the easiest thing in the world: stop funneling weapons into the slaughter zone.

So if they are successful, all they will do is put the Harris campaign in a vise, choosing between Michigan and Pennsylvania. That's what I meant when I referred to the narcissism of thinking only your view matters.

It would be much smarter for them to ally with the Harris campaign and try to work it from the inside. This sort of pressure will only backfire given the political realities in this country. Who are they going to align with? Burn their bridges with Democrats and then grovel to MAGA to take them on?

 

[Lando]

I’m not sure why you think chanting “Free Palestine” is a self-aggrandizing cosplay, and I’d like to hear your explain that a bit more. No one said she needs to be made aware of what is going on in Gaza. That’s not what that protest is about (though it may make some Dem voters analyze or think about the issue who weren’t previously).

Again, the protestors’ goal is use their leverage as a political/electoral force to ensure that Harris engages with their position. Without protests, there aren’t many voices for the Palestinian community that break through the media discourse. This is by design.

These protestors have forced all of us to reckon with their position as well. That is the goal, and they are succeeding. Harris handled the protests poorly in Michigan and well in Arizona.

Did Harris meet with people in Arizona that she refused to in Michigan? Did she roll out the policy solutions protestors wanted in Arizona?

 

[Paine]

Did Harris meet with people in Arizona that she refused to in Michigan? Did she roll out the policy solutions protestors wanted in Arizona?

Do you assume that the people protesting in Arizona were the same ones protesting in Michigan? Like they’re following her around from rally to rally?

The anti-genocide movement isn’t as coordinated as you make it out to be.

You have a juvenile understanding of politics if you think that activists expect their protests to result in a politician immediately changing their position.

Why does it make you so mad that these people are voicing their concerns in a democracy? At a political rally for the Democratic Party? This is how a democracy works.

 

[superrific]

But if they endorse Harris now, they have no leverage. This is political advocacy 101 level stuff.

They don't have leverage, period. In political science, I believe the term is "pariah group." It's like socialists. Politicians can't be seen endorsing socialism to gain socialist votes, because they will lose far more votes in the middle (the problem with the Bernie Sanders campaigns and generally the problem with embracing that label if you want to be president).

All they can do is wreck things. They will either vote for Kamala, in which case what was the point? Or they won't vote for Kamala, which means nobody will ever care about them again (if Kamala wins despite their lack of support, they will have demonstrated their impotence; if she loses, they will be rightly despised by Dems everywhere). Or they can make a lot of noise, make swing voters identify Kamala with radical protests that people generally hate, and then what?

What they won't get is Kamala changing her position at all -- not publicly at least. Especially now. It will look like she is kowtowing to the radical left. Giving them anything would be validating Trump's incoherent and ridiculous rants about "RADICAL LEFT DEMOCRATS."

It is so frustrating because we've seen this play out before. How much leverage did the Green Party and Ralph Nader get after 2000? None. None more leverage. In fact, the Naderites just faded away and Nader's '04 campaign was ignored and inconsequential. How much leverage did the Green Party get after 2016? None. How much leverage did the antiwar protesters get after 1968? Well, I suppose you could say, "some" given McGovern's nomination in 72. So instead of wrecking one election they wrecked several.

 

[Lando]

The anti-genocide movement isn’t as coordinated as you make it out to be.

I just posted "I doubt the Uncommitted movement has much control over the sort of people who heckle rallies" a little bit ago. I'm not making the movement out to be coordinated, I just wanted someone to confirm it for me.

Since meeting with Uncommitted people didn't have any effect on hecklers (it was suggested on this forum the hecklers didn't know about the meeting) and you admit it's not that coordinated of a movement, why should Harris believe that the movement can deliver the votes?

 

[superrific]

You have a juvenile understanding of politics if you think that activists expect their protests to result in a politician immediately changing their position.

Why does it make you so mad that these people are voicing their concerns in a democracy? At a political rally for the Democratic Party? This is how a democracy works.

1. Their whole message is "this is urgent because children are dying in Gaza." And they are right about it. In a better world, we already would not be giving weapons to Israel. But if your message is "do this now to avert genocide," it's hard to see that as anything but a demand that the politician changes their position.

2. Also, the person interviewed said, "We need her to make a clear policy shift away from Biden." That doesn't sound like what you are suggesting.

3. Well, democracy worked to give us Bush in 2000 and Trump in 2016. In fact, you could argue that all of our worst presidents of the modern era -- Nixon, Bush, Trump -- were aided and abetted by the Far Left. If that's how you think democracy should work -- I mean, fine, if you're OK with Trump.

 

[heelinhell]

I’m not sure why you think chanting “Free Palestine” is a self-aggrandizing cosplay, and I’d like to hear you explain that a bit more. No one said she needs to be made aware of what is going on in Gaza. That’s not what that protest is about (though it may make some Dem voters analyze or think about the issue who weren’t previously).

Again, the protestors’ goal is use their leverage as a political/electoral force to ensure that Harris engages with their position. Without protests, there aren’t many voices for the Palestinian community that break through the media discourse. This is by design.

These protestors have forced all of us to reckon with their position as well. That is the goal, and they are succeeding. Harris handled the protests poorly in Michigan and well in Arizona.

I submit that Israel's horribly despicable actions in Gaza that were covered by the media moved the needle significantly in support of the Palestinians. But now the media discourse is no longer focused upon the horrors in Gaza but focused upon the "free Palestine" protests that are disrupting Kamala's rallies.

If the protesters were serious, they would be much more effective bypassing Kamala's rallies and going to Israel to join with the Israelis who are protesting against Bibi's war crimes.