Home | About | Donate

Making 'Our Revolution' Ours


Making 'Our Revolution' Ours

John Atcheson

One of the most remarkable things about Sanders’ campaign was how it electrified the young, reinvigorated progressives, and forced Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party to lurch desperately to the left.

Of course, once she got the nomination, she wasted no time in tacking back to the right of center and doing what Democrats have always done – assuming that progressives would fall in line because there was nowhere else to go.


I hope readers will link to the Bernie Delegates Network's petition.


This list of proposals is NOT too extensive. But it's already been done: it's called the Green Party and we have a candidate that's running on these ideas: Dr. Jill Stein. So cheer up Mr. Atcheson, your hero (or heroine in this case) already exists! Just focus on supporting her and promote her candidacy. It's ok to use fancy names (e.g. "OR"), but it's most important to mention her name and promote the Green Party. Forget about Democrats; that party is thoroughly corrupted and fraught with fraudulent electoral practices, including the disenfranchisement of voters and reliance on rigged electronic voting machines.


The first problem with OR is that it's a 501(c)(4).
In other words somebody is looking to turn OR into a political party somewhere down the road.
The template for this or any other movement is Occupy Wall Street.
OWS had no "leader." That was it's strength. Leaders never accomplish anything except to cause disillusionment and in-fighting.
OWS had no script. It was flexible and able to respond quickly to changing dynamics.
OWS was democratic. It was a bottom-up movement which reacted to what it's participants wanted in a nimble way.

What we don't need is another bureaucratic, institutional nightmare lurking over the landscape.


Good point re the Green's progressive platform.

IMO, OR supporters and Greens will do better if they work as practical allies vs. falling out over the Democratic Party.

Seen the petition? It calls for supporting Greens among other third party candidates:

"...we are concerned that many will get the impression that only progressive Democratic Party candidates will get "Our Revolution” support, not Greens, for example. We hope it will become more clear that "Our Revolution” will support progressives of all kinds whose campaigns can usefully educate and especially elicit and organize support for social change, including trying to win office to advance that change."


Making our revolution' ours. " In Every Neighborhood, Revolution ", Fidel Castro. Guess what? It worked.


The way I feel right now, after having been cheated (I regret the $$$ I gave Bernie, wish I had given directly to Jill Stein instead) by the Democratic Party, I'm not ready to sing kumbaya with anybody who does not share the view that the Democratic Party is a cesspool of corruption which is best to stay away from. Otherwise you risk repeating the mistake of funneling $$$ and energy into essentially a black hole, which is not a particularly exciting political strategy. You have to call things by their name. If you refuse to do that, then I know I can't trust you: either you are naive, or actively corrupt. Either way, I'll put my effort elsewhere.


Bernie Sanders was a great teacher who proved that people can afford to compete with the billionaire class. He proved what every one thought was true about campaign financing; $27 per person can overpower the back room fat cats and their secret deals.

Our Revolution is now a super pac brand name that sends formulaic nonprofit emails about the issue of the day and asks for donations.

My point? Bernie discovered our revolution and then he went back to the senate and left it with a brand name. Though I'm disappointed in Bernie, the Greens have a good chance at continuing the political revolution.

If our revolution has guts, it will throw off fear of iTrumpet and vote Green. Here’s a chance for victory and also a chance to push a no clear majority presidential election into the house of representatives. Once this happens, anybody can be selected as president, even dark force Dick Cheney.

Here’s where our revolution becomes interesting. Republicans are known for their ability to do one thing; create gridlock. We the people hand a presidential election without a victor to the house of representatives. Fractured republican subgroups promptly create gridlock. Will they pick a president by 2018? Or will 30 year office holders panic and try and make newcomers behave?

Panic and gridlock still rules congress and the people who filled stadiums hoping Bernie was real become even more awesome. Distributed human intelligence focuses and replaces the entire congress in 2018 except for rightwingers from safe districts. The new congress spends a year lining up a new president only to realize it's just a year to the presidential election and people are already campaigning. It would be better to wait.

Remember what Bernie said when he first started filling stadiums like he was a rock and roll star?

“There’s something going on around here.”

Distributed human intelligence and autonomous democracy are the wave of the future. Nine feet of sea level rise by 2050. Existing government can't cope, all it can do is play regime change on Pentagon computers. Even so, autonomous democracy is rising.

Will the US unilaterally switch investment from war to taking carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere no matter what anybody else is doing? Will yankee ingenuity save Earth? This depends upon if the home of the brave escapes fear of iTrumpet and steps into the future with gusto.


When and if Our Revolution makes it clear that Green Party candidates will, in every instance, receive OR support over competing Democratic Party candidates, I might begin to consider taking them seriously.

Until then, I will consider OR in competition with the Greens, and another instance of Bernie sheep-dogging for the Democrats.


One concern is that Berrnie's campaign success may be due to the possibility that it was largely a personality cult. Was it the progressive programs or was it more Bernie? I am not sure. And now that Bernie has given a strong endorsement to Hillary Clinton does he really have the same clout to move people? Whatever Bernie has most candidates do not. Hillary Clinton certainly lacks it. Martin O'Malley lacked it. It is the it factor. You either have it or you don't.


Saddle up those rainbow unicorns! Sheriff John Atcheson is ready to lead the posse of OR (our revolution--get it?) on to glory!
John, your hero, Bernie, was, is and will remain a Potemkin as phony as the Russian schemer who helped Katherine II become the Czarina of imperial Russia.
Further, Bernie was that way from the git-go and when the time suited him (after the White House conference with Barry and Queen Hillary) to be Mr Establishment loyalty, he broke all his promises about taking his candidacy all the way to the convention and lead the cheers for "it's my turn now" Queen Hillary's coronation in Philly.
So now the faithful are "tryin' to get back the feelin' again" and making themselves look foolish in the process.


Bernie is the mask or was he wearing the mask?
Actually Bernie wasn't anything more than a CD playing over and over again delivering a long overdue message to whoever would listen.
Unfortunately, and this happens all the time, some people superimposed their own needs and desires onto him.
When Bernie didn't live up to their expectations or chose a different route then they'd expected he would, they became enraged.
People are what they are and most of them are not Messiah material.


At this point, I am keeping an open mind about OR but am fully supporting Jill Stein.

She is the only progressive candidate in the race with an agenda that gets to the real issues the country and the planet are facing.

Voting for any other candidate is a vote against our planet and humanity.


Alternatively, OR could reach out to the myriad movement building organizations in an effort to convene a meeting among movement leaders so all voices are at the table and heard. Through the work of this coordinating team, a set of shared values and demands could be created under which millions of people could unite.

The white patriarchal structure of OR is what I find most disconcerting, and it won't find a very big toe-hold unless it comes to the movement as an ally instead of a reiteration of the campaign. A lot of work went on outside both the Dem and GOP conventions by movement leaders on how to exploit this moment, and to my knowledge, no one from the Sanders campaign leadership including Sanders himself has shown any interest.

Sanders campaign did not turn into a movement. It certainly lit the fire, but in the end it was a campaign, and it is still a campaign of sorts. I said in another post, overall it's not a bad thing, and it has potential. I'm keeping my eye on it while I work on real movement building activities.


And, remain enraged.

This is the part I don't get. He pretty much did what he said he would do, and it became clear pretty early on he would keep his word. There was absolutely no way the DNC would allow an insurrection at their big bonanza. The inside protests went uncovered by the corporate-owned news (CON), and all kinds of mechanisms were employed against Sanders' delegates as it was, along with the immoral if not illegal dirty tricks the DNC played during the primary season.

Agreed, with the stipulation that no person is Messiah material. But corporations are people, too. And the gawd-awful truth is that this nation is basically selecting Corporation A and B. Between Trump and Hillary, the only beneficiaries will be multi-national corporations.


What if we substitute demigod for messiah? Would that calm the waters?


You're absolutely right to vote for Stein.

Anybody who votes for either Hillary or Trump is making the same mistake in judgement.


We can thank Bernie for introducing democratic socialism to the American public, a public that is woefully misinformed and uninformed.

He is a well-worn product of a different era and unfortunately is beholden to the established political system. I find his support of Clinton immoral when there is a fabulous progressive candidate running. To get my support, OR will need to move on from Bernie, which may be taken as unfortunate as he is a charismatic figure, but that's spectacle. Or and progressives should move away from supporting personalities (remember those pretty Obama speeches) and supporting actual agendas.

So, thanks Bernie, and ciao. Don't let the door hit ya where the good lord split ya.


I agree that we don't need "another bureaucratic, institutional nightmare..." but to look to OWS as the example for what we need to do is terribly short-sighted. Lack of leadership and program were at the heart of brought about its demise.

What Bernie got right in his presentation was very simple, and should be easily replicated - he spoke truth to power with passion and consistency.


Because she "speaks truth to power with passion and consistency" Sanders' issues voters will vote Stein while Sanders' identity voters are more likely to vote Clinton, Johnson or even Trump.