Read on Twitter
This is a pretty good critique of any tactic that's not part of a strategy..
A petition is useful if you use it to build
1) build a ladder of engagement (like signatory
action participantattend training), &
2) a ladder of action (like petitionpetition drop offprotest) https://twitter.com/EmilyGorcenski/status/1278410141801603074
A petition is useful if you use it to build
1) build a ladder of engagement (like signatory
action participantattend training), &2) a ladder of action (like petition
petition drop offprotest) https://twitter.com/EmilyGorcenski/status/1278410141801603074
Petitions are useful not because they're going to make an impact in & of themselves but because used well they can provide you with:
- contact info to recruit to other actions
- a meaningful prop for a delegation action to a decision maker
- an implicit threat of future action
- contact info to recruit to other actions
- a meaningful prop for a delegation action to a decision maker
- an implicit threat of future action
They're also good for testing the water on issue messaging with a specific crowd.
If no one at the racial justice rally wants to sign your petition to save the owls, it's a good sign you need to re-message, re-prioritize, or do recruitment elsewhere
If no one at the racial justice rally wants to sign your petition to save the owls, it's a good sign you need to re-message, re-prioritize, or do recruitment elsewhere
Another thing petitions are good for is introducing a campaign and its messaging to your base, a broader audience, and/or your target.
"Mayor Kenney, fire Brian Abernathy for authorizing the racist gassing of Black neighborhoods" communicates the issue (racist police violence), the target (aka the person/people who can give you what you want-- Kenney), and the demand (fire Abernathy.
Send that out as a press release or just state it in an email, and it's just words.
Ask people to participate in that demand through a petition, and you get them on the ladder of engagement.
Ask people to participate in that demand through a petition, and you get them on the ladder of engagement.
If the campaign is controversial enough, that petition in and of itself can be story hook for press.
"Activists mad about something" isn't ever a headline.
"Activists launch petition calling for Abernathy's dismissal" very much can be.
Sometimes petition launches get press!
"Activists mad about something" isn't ever a headline.
"Activists launch petition calling for Abernathy's dismissal" very much can be.
Sometimes petition launches get press!
Also, petitions are a way to start your way up the process of escalation.
I talk about campaign escalation as having three stages, and the first one is ask nicely.
Basically, you start out by saying "you say you believe racism is bad, so please take action on racism"
I talk about campaign escalation as having three stages, and the first one is ask nicely.
Basically, you start out by saying "you say you believe racism is bad, so please take action on racism"
A petition is a great place to start a campaign, because it's super low escalation.
In a successful campaign, each tactic carries the threat of an escalated tactic next.
If the target doesn't give in, the campaign organizers need to be able to make good on the threat.
In a successful campaign, each tactic carries the threat of an escalated tactic next.
If the target doesn't give in, the campaign organizers need to be able to make good on the threat.
The beginning stage of a campaign is all about giving the target a chance to meet your demands before you start escalating.
That gives you a lot of room for future escalation, and also makes it hard for people to later be like, "well you never even gave them a chance to say yes"
That gives you a lot of room for future escalation, and also makes it hard for people to later be like, "well you never even gave them a chance to say yes"
From there you can go take the petitions to make that demand in person with a delegation, do a protest next if you don't get a response.
Basically, it gives you a lot of room to escalate.
That's important, because targets won't act if they don't think escalation threat exists.
Basically, it gives you a lot of room to escalate.
That's important, because targets won't act if they don't think escalation threat exists.
Also, honestly, petitions are just a really good way to build audience outside your base.
Like, maybe a thousand owl enthusiasts sign your owl petition, even though they don't care about your main issue of, say, urban environmental justice.
Like, maybe a thousand owl enthusiasts sign your owl petition, even though they don't care about your main issue of, say, urban environmental justice.
They sign that owl petition, though, and in local organizing terms, you've gotten a nice chunk of folks who aren't your base but *may* be receptive to your message.
AND, especially if you segment your email list to send targeted messaging to different audience segments, you can send owl-related urban environmental justice content to those owl enthusiasts and babystep them down the path to understanding your central urban justice issues.
From an owl enthusiast point of view, this isn't a great reason to sign that petition, but from an organizer point of view it's a great reason to try and *get* owl enthusiasts to sign that petition.
Finally, some orgs just do petitions to harvest addresses/emails so they can do fundraising, use segmented emails to push target-messaged electoral content (hi, MoveOn), and maybe sell their lists to other nonprofits for $$$.
SPLC is famous for doing the same thing with one time donors, where your $10 is the equivalent of a signature.
From there, they'll do very smart and sophisticated targeted direct mail to try and engage you in more long term donation strategies, like sustainership.
From there, they'll do very smart and sophisticated targeted direct mail to try and engage you in more long term donation strategies, like sustainership.
If this sounds sneaky or bad, it's worth remembering that organizing is all about finding a point of agreement on an issue, using it to locate shared values, building a relationship of escalating engagement around those values, then leveraging that organized power to make change.
I think of MoveOn petitions as sneaky and kind of dishonest because ultimately MoveOn isn't really interested in advancing petition demands. They just want to harvest your info and then feed it into an electoral turnout mechanism for the Dems.
If your urban environmental justice org doesn't give a rat's ass about owls, it's a bit dishonest to go around using it as bait and asking people to put their name and signature to something you have no intention of actually advancing.
That dishonesty can be justified if it's done in service of an urgent campaign, I think, but when it's done as an end in and of itself (as with MoveOn), it makes people cynical, and therefore less and less likely to engage on other petitions that actually do advance a campaign.
Even MoveOn petitions are tactics used as components in a campaign strategy.
It's just that in MoveOn's case, that tactic is a bait and switch played on signatories to try and funnel them towards MoveOn's fundraising and electoral email operations.
It's just that in MoveOn's case, that tactic is a bait and switch played on signatories to try and funnel them towards MoveOn's fundraising and electoral email operations.
MoveOn's petition tactic is dishonest, but it is strategic.
A petition floating by itself, though?
It's just a bit of data floating on the internet.
A petition floating by itself, though?
It's just a bit of data floating on the internet.
There's a press tendency to glorify "leaders" who jump on the wave of a trendy topic by starting a facebook event or a petition, to profile them as the new grassroots whatever.
The flip side of that is, it tends to privilege dilettantes and undermine movement strategy.
The flip side of that is, it tends to privilege dilettantes and undermine movement strategy.
Starting a petition or a protest around a flashpoint issue does not automatically make someone an organizer.
It makes someone the originator of a tactic that rode momentum that movement organizers likely spent years building.
It makes someone the originator of a tactic that rode momentum that movement organizers likely spent years building.
Dirtbags like to complain a lot about left organizers "gatekeeping," but a lot of the time the resistance that gets read as gatekeeping is really organizers trying their best to make sure that the movement momentum they helped build doesn't get squandered.
That's the dynamic we should be considering & paying critical attention to when we look at any protest, petition, or other tactic concerning a hotbutton issue.
It's not a matter of "does this tactic work," it's a matter of, "will this tactic expend movement energy strategically"
It's not a matter of "does this tactic work," it's a matter of, "will this tactic expend movement energy strategically"
That functionally means, "are the people behind this petition (or other tactic) planning to actually use this petition as part of a campaign escalation to achieve these demands?"
And (ethically), "are these people really part of the movement that gets to make these demands"
And (ethically), "are these people really part of the movement that gets to make these demands"
Petitions are low stakes, but this is a good way to evaluate any tactic people are trying to recruit you to.
For example, if the hosts of a Facebook BLM action are all white people with no prior connection to racial justice movement, that's a bad sign.
For example, if the hosts of a Facebook BLM action are all white people with no prior connection to racial justice movement, that's a bad sign.
There are such a thing as emergent movements (Occupy, the recent uprisings) that arise organically in response to an event or circumstance, but they never arise in a movement vacuum.
They are always rooted in the work and labor of the movement organizers who framed the issue.
They are always rooted in the work and labor of the movement organizers who framed the issue.
Occupy's framing wasn't new; labor had long pushed that particular messaging and understanding of economic justice issues.
BLM uprisings occur and occurred around a framing built by militant Black liberation movement.
BLM uprisings occur and occurred around a framing built by militant Black liberation movement.
As protest becomes more and more trendy, it becomes more and more important that we think critically about what responsible movement participation looks like.
We have to build a culture where engagement is guided with a respect for emergent movement but also existing organizing.
We have to build a culture where engagement is guided with a respect for emergent movement but also existing organizing.
When people try to appropriate movement energy that doesn't belong to them, we need to be able to say, no, this belongs to the people whose labor and lives are most tied up in that organizing.
Organizations like MoveOn and some of the more regressive local Women's Marches (like Philly's) commodify protest, presenting each action as a self-contained product to be sold, and using the power and profit gained to line their pockets and accumulate electoral clout.
Tactics are useless to liberatory movement as self-contained products; they work only when their energies are harnessed within a longer term strategy to build power and pressure behind a demand for change in an ongoing way.
A tactic that floats out there by itself, be it a petition or a protest, is useless until its power is reinvested in a broader strategy.
And trust, if a tactic attracts a lot of people and/or money, that power is going to get reinvested somewhere.
And trust, if a tactic attracts a lot of people and/or money, that power is going to get reinvested somewhere.
When there's no clear indication that a tactic is part of a broader strategy to build liberatory movement, it's very likely that tactic's power is being harvested, just not for the cause it claims to represent.
If that floating tactic is a petition, its probably being or going to be harvested for listbuilding.
If it's a "movement" podcast for otherwise disengaged podcasters, it's probably being used to line the podcasters' pockets.
If it's a "movement" podcast for otherwise disengaged podcasters, it's probably being used to line the podcasters' pockets.
If it's a protest, just give it a few months for the organizer to announce the new 501c3 where they are now the payrolled Executive Director.
Or, a year or two, when they announce their run for city council and ask you to donate to their PAC.
Or, a year or two, when they announce their run for city council and ask you to donate to their PAC.
Like any tactic, a petition is only as good as the threat of escalation it communicates.
If, as Emily says, that threat isn't clear or existant, the whole thing is pointless in terms of the actual issue that tactic is supposedly built around.
If, as Emily says, that threat isn't clear or existant, the whole thing is pointless in terms of the actual issue that tactic is supposedly built around.
Tactics outside of strategy fail.
Tactics that feed into a hidden strategy are dishonest and engender cynicism, making movement-building harder for organizers.
Tactics that feed into a hidden strategy are dishonest and engender cynicism, making movement-building harder for organizers.
Long term organizers don't own emergent movement, but if the people who organize within emergent movement aren't thoughtful about and respectful of existing organizing on the ground, the movement will likely collapse, as Occupy did.
Thanks to Trump, we're in a moment of almost constant emergent movement, and we have to become more sophisticated in how we engage with it.
We have to learn to look for and expect a sign of broader strategy around tactics.
Consuming them like products feeds opportunists.
We have to learn to look for and expect a sign of broader strategy around tactics.
Consuming them like products feeds opportunists.
This is especially important right now, as we watch white dirtbag "leftists" and "good" white liberals alike try and appropriate the energy and power & momentum of BLM uprising to advance their own agendas and narratives to the detriment of ground-level racial justice organizing.
Don't give energy to opportunists, most especially white opportunists, who are looking to steal BLM uprising's glow and use it to gain personal political capital, make money, listbuild, and/or push an agenda meant to de-center Blackness.
Don't sign petitions put out by electoral grind groups to try and channel movement power towards their grift without lifting a finger to drive its demands.
Don't rush to defend the honor of podcasts that ignored racial justice issues until they became popular and profitable.
Don't rush to defend the honor of podcasts that ignored racial justice issues until they became popular and profitable.
Don't give likes or retweets to white liberal politicians who want to wave "BLM" around like a flag after just a month ago suggesting the "riots" were caused by "outside agitators."
Don't let them get away with saying BLM and hugging the police at the same time.
Don't let them get away with saying BLM and hugging the police at the same time.
Don't get this twisted: you have a moral obligation to engage.
This isn't an excuse to avoid engagement or disengage.
It's an *additional* obligation, an obligation to self-educate and engage in an informed way.
This isn't an excuse to avoid engagement or disengage.
It's an *additional* obligation, an obligation to self-educate and engage in an informed way.
If there's one thing the past three years has taught us, it's that movements that disrespect experienced organizers and that are built around tactic rather than strategy inevitably waste the power they accumulate, generating cynicism that's detrimental to movement on the ground.
All too often, we find out those tactic-centered movements isolated from existent ground-level organizing weren't floating at all.
They were part of a strategy, a hidden strategy of personal/organizational powergrabbing and pocketlining.
They were part of a strategy, a hidden strategy of personal/organizational powergrabbing and pocketlining.
When I ran JwJ, the struggle (except very briefly, during Occupy) was to convince people to engage, period.
Now, everyone is engaged.
Now, the struggle is make sure that engagement happens in a way that responsibly and sustainably builds liberatory movement.
Now, everyone is engaged.
Now, the struggle is make sure that engagement happens in a way that responsibly and sustainably builds liberatory movement.
All tactics-- petitions, protests, whatever-- are only as useful as the larger strategy they are used to support.
If that strategy isn't clear or (in the case of emergent protest) taking shape organically, it either doesn't exist or it's hidden.
That's a tactic to skip.
If that strategy isn't clear or (in the case of emergent protest) taking shape organically, it either doesn't exist or it's hidden.
That's a tactic to skip.
Self-educate on the issues, but also self-educate on the people.
Read up on which orgs and people have a track record of getting shit done justly and effectively-- nationally, but also in your community-- and follow their lead on the issues they lead on and have stake in.
Read up on which orgs and people have a track record of getting shit done justly and effectively-- nationally, but also in your community-- and follow their lead on the issues they lead on and have stake in.
Look for movement leaders you can trust; follow their lead.
Protest isn't a product.
Pick tactics based on the strategy they support, not the hashtag activism brand they claim to represent.
This isn't like choosing a box of cereal at the supermarket.
Protest isn't a product.
Pick tactics based on the strategy they support, not the hashtag activism brand they claim to represent.
This isn't like choosing a box of cereal at the supermarket.
When someone says "Black Lives Matter," takes a knee, and asks you to join them, you need to ask yourself whether they're taking that knee as a cop or as a Kaepernick.
Judge a tactic based on the strategy it serves, not the brand name it claims.
Judge a tactic based on the strategy it serves, not the brand name it claims.
Otherwise, you're as likely to be donating energy to someone undermining movement as you are to someone building movement.
If you can't be bothered to look for the difference, you're complicit with the wreckers, no matter where you end up.
If you can't be bothered to look for the difference, you're complicit with the wreckers, no matter where you end up.
(the end)
PS-- totally forgot about this but MoveOn has a petition *platform* that other orgs use, too.
I'm very judgy about MoveOn-originating petitions, but if a petition has another sponsor, judge the petition by the sponsor, not by what I've said about MoveOn here.
I'm very judgy about MoveOn-originating petitions, but if a petition has another sponsor, judge the petition by the sponsor, not by what I've said about MoveOn here.
