Search
IND: No, you can't
There's been some back and forth here recently on IND, the so-called Independent Neighborhood Democrats, and their role in the primary in the 25th Senate District. Here and here, a commenter claiming to be the chair of the board of that organization explains their rationale for backing incumbent establishmentarian state Senator Martin Connor over insurgent Progressive newcomer Daniel Squadron.
The structure of that argument offers an opportunity to discuss the structural role of political clubs in the democratic process and the political life of the state, and whether their role is adequate to a vastly changed political environment in a changing city.
Let's begin with the basics, the public face of that organization, their web site. The site offers literally no avenue of engagement - there's not even a 'contact us' page, let alone everything else that's become standard over the last few years, a blog, a Facebook page, a Flickr page, YouTube, MySpace, none of that. What you get instead, presumably because that's what reform is all about, are links to forms, long lists of club officeholders, the heady stuff of committees and by-laws, and, as the glittering prize, links to the web sites of various incumbent legislators. What's noticeably absent is any acknowledgment of what's been built by Progressives over the last few years - the blogs, the resource web sites, the new think tanks, books, authors, all of it - just not there in this immaculate self-contained universe. IND is clearly alive with the intoxicating spirit of insurrection and rebellion that fueled its origins.
Those origins, as the site helpfully points out, lie back in the halcyon days of protest against the Vietnam War.
IND was organized more than 30 years ago by young activists from Carroll Gardens seeking to improve our neighborhoods and to end the war in Vietnam. IND continues to be committed to improving our Brooklyn community and to reforming the Democratic Party.
Of course, Vietnam is over, an entire generation in the past. The spirit of Vietnam has long since been co-opted by mortgages, careers and second homes, or whatever else it is that animates the baby boom generation. Apparently, high on their list of priorities is the maintenance of committees and boards, carrying as they do titles, coveted markers of social distinction. If this was once a revolutionary generation setting out to remake the world in its own image, that spirit has long since calcified into something far more brittle.
IND fails miserably on three fronts. First, as already noted, their web presence is amateurish, but think that through for a moment. What we've seen at least since 1998 with the founding of MoveOn.org is that the web is a powerful tool for organizing and messaging. One integral benefit the online/offline model provides is this: barriers to entry are lowered, which is why we've seen entirely new demographics and generations enter the political process. IND's failure to act on that phenomenon in the space of a decade might be dismissed as a simple lack of technical competence, but there's more to it than that. Opening yourself to the web requires a mindset, one which isn't there - a willingness to engage new and volatile people, ideas and events. You can't really detect that willingness from listings of grandly titled club officers taking up most of your screen real estate, the part at least that isn't taken up by your by-laws. This is self-glorifying bureaucracy on bended knee to the incumbency. In a change election like few before, IND marches into battle in an atmosphere it believes is still fragrant with the scent of burning draft cards.
Second, it's a truism, but it's worth repeating: the entire Western half of Brooklyn is changing rapidly, with tens of thousands of new arrivals displaced from Manhattan, new college graduates coming to the City for the first time, and new immigrants from every corner of the globe. What is IND doing to engage these new demographics and to give them a voice? That's right, very little. That would be uncomfortable, since the new arrivals, presumably, haven't yet put in twenty years of attendance at agonizingly tedious process meetings. So these newcomers, along with ethnic minorities, young grads, whomever, wind up giving of their energy and enthusiasm to Brooklyn for Barack. Oh, look, you can sign up to volunteer via their web site - how radical. Oh, and get this: those crazy young people are sponsoring a party at McCarren Pool. That's out there, man - making it easy and maybe even, heaven forbid, pleasant to engage politically, in a way that is open to all comers.
Third, it's worth pointing out - Mole and myself had a long and, I think, fascinating email exchange about the subject - that there are different visions of reform out there. One is incremental and accomodationist, the other systemic. The first posits that the system itself is sound, and that what must be done to achieve ends conducive to the common good is to work inside it; the other, that our monolithic, closed political system, in which the legislature concentrates power in one man, legislators draw their own districts, and deploy the vast advantages of incumbency to get re-elected over decades, is the root issue. IND, as one might deduce from their cozy relationships with those in power, has chosen the first approach, and why not? There's much to be said for it. But if you believe that Progressive values aren't just about occasional positive outcomes dispensed at the discretion of the powerful, but about an empowering, open and transparent process, then the question arises whether the former approach, IND's approach, can still be called Progressive.
Well, can it? I think not, and here's why: the dismal approval ratings of the legislature speak for themselves. Voter turnout rates do the same. These are systemic issues, results of process. New York has some of the most engaged citizens in the nation, and our metrics for civic engagement lead practically everyone else. The one glaring hole in that field is in the realm of state politics, and why? Because, over decades, we have developed a culture of apathy, based on a very simple observation made by Joe and Jane Citizen: that their votes in state elections simply do not matter. There are answers to this: campaign finance reform, Clean Money Clean Elections, non-partisan redistricting (wouldn't that be an awesome idea, not having incumbents draw their own district boundaries?), term limits, rules reform, same-day voter registration, less onerous ballot access requirements leading to more frequent primaries in safe districts, and what not else. The effect of all these reforms would be to reduce the structural benefits accorded to incumbents, to empower citizens, and to restore accountability to the democratic process.
Can IND embrace this vision of structural reform? Perhaps it can, but given that the cumulative effect of real process reform is to make life more difficult for incumbents, the same incumbents that IND quite assiduously courts, it's somewhat doubtful that they'd be tempted to embrace this core Progressive vision, certainly not in their own backyard.
And if the central idea of Progressivism - not liberalism, Progressivism - is that a transparent, open process that empowers citizens is the true measure of virtue, then IND is not Progressive. It can't be, and it's foolish to pretend otherwise.
Indeed interesting
I enjoyed our discussion. And I agree with your assessment to quite an extent. I give IND credit for being so welcomeing to someone like me who has been something of a critic.
My main disagreement with you is what alternatives there are. I have been active with a whole slew of organizations from MoveOn.org to DFNYC to NDM to Progressive Majority. Not one of them has taken an interest in Brooklyn's Democratic political quagmire, or they took an interest but it proved ineffectual. To date the only thing that has helped elect better judges and have any tiny effect in fighting the machine (which is even worse than IND) has been the "reform" clubs. I am not very satisfied with them either, but have been far less satisfied with any alternatives to date. That may change...but no one has convinced me that any alternative has a better shot.
I will also point out that I have often drawn a distinction among three factions in Brooklyn: machine (the strongest and most problematic), the "reform" (which ranges from genuine reform to machine wannabes), and the "progressive" (which has been the one I like the most but is least effective). Most groups are a mix of all three with a strong bias towards one.
I will also point out that IND isn't the only game in town. I suspect you will have similar problems with other reform clubs, but they are not all the same or take even a similar approach to "reform". But I will leave it to others to discuss the clubs, reform or otherwise, in Brooklyn.
Seriously?
Hello Bouldin,
I am the Chairman of the Executive Board of IND. I don't claim to be, I am. To paraphrase comedian Bill Maher, the internet is like the wall of a bathroom. Anyone can write on it, but what's true and what's false is hard to know.
Let's start with the web site. I agree with you, it's bare bones basic. We want our members to come to our meetings and discuss things there. Perhaps that's old fashioned, but it's difficult to have a level headed discussion on a blog site (as your post makes clear). If you look at our site, you'll see my name. You'll see that my position is Chairman of the Executive Board. If you scroll to the bottom you'll see an email address (click on it - WOW you can send us an email). There's a phone number, you can call and leave a message. Shocking! Surf on over to facebook. Look for IND (http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=10247863061&ref=ts).
I don't mind when people write about IND. I don't mind if they disagree with our endorsements. I mind when they are sloppy and don't do their research and write something that is amateurish at best, and misleading and dishonest at its worst.
You write "the new arrivals, presumably, haven't yet put in twenty years of attendance at agonizingly tedious process meetings". You have obviously not been to any our meetings. Honestly, there isn't much of a process to our meetings, which you would know if you'd ever attended one. And if you have, then you are being dishonest with your readers. Anyone in attendance can ask any of our elected officials a question. Even guests (which I invite you to be at our September meeting).
I don't have the time or need to respond to anything else you've written since it is no more than the writing on a bathroom wall. I encourage you, and anyone reading this to come to our next meeting and see for yourself how IND is run. And please feel free to introduce yourself to me. All are welcome!
Kenn Lowy
Chairman of the Executive Board
Independent Neighborhood Democrats
Yup, seriously.
First of all, if this post is indicative of what is written on bathroom walls in your neighborhood, it's apparently far more genteel than mine. But that's a different subject.
Second, you're correct, there actually is contact information on your site: in six point type, light gray on white, hidden at the very bottom of the page. Your Facebook group? Not linked on your site, anywhere. In short, those aren't things I'd list if someone has just made a meticulous case that my web site. like my organization, has a problem with insideritis and a lack of outreach to new demographics.
Third,
...again: that's exactly my point. You're not interacting with people on terms of their choosing, but of yours.
Fourth,
...I'd point out that what matters about that sentence isn't the tediousness, it's the length of time. I'm pretty sure that not everything IND does makes eyes glaze over, but that's also not my main point.
I'd be a little slower to throw accusations of dishonesty when I've conceded every factual issue at hand, but maybe that's merely a personal conceit.
Ignorance is not considered cool...
"I'd be a little slower to throw accusations of dishonesty when I've conceded every factual issue at hand"
So you're pleading ignorance? You just didn't know? You've written some decent material in the past, but you just didn't do your homework on this one. You didn't do any research on the way the club works and consequently I stand by what I have already written. That post was writing on the bathroom wall. You owe your readers more than that.
"I'd point out that what matters about that sentence isn't the tediousness, it's the length of time" What length of time are you writing about? Being an officer, voting? There are reasons for that. Voicing one's opinion at a meeting? Anyone can do that, members and guests. Again, this is ignorance and your part. You simply don't know and making things up is unprofessional and should be unacceptable on Daily Gotham. There should be a level of honesty and profesionalism and your post did not pass the smell test. If you don't understand something about the way IND works, why don't you ask?
You're only valid point is that we did not have a link to our facebook page on the site. That has already been corrected.
Why don't you stop writing out of ignorance and come to a meeting and then write an honest followup.
Yeah, Kenn...
You've written some decent material in the past, but you just didn't do your homework on this one.
...that must be so, because you're here emoting, and if I really were so wrong, you'd go after my central point, which is that IND is a tool of the status quo, rather than arguing that your meetings are not, in fact, lame-ass. Fine. I concede that some people might find your meetings fascinating, except that I happen not to know any of these people. Happy now?
You simply don't know and making things up is unprofessional and should be unacceptable on Daily Gotham. There should be a level of honesty and profesionalism and your post did not pass the smell test.
Sure. More to the point, why don't you tell people when you've last endorsed a non-incumbent in a primary against an incumbent, how long it takes on average, how many years of acquaintance, to become an "officer" - how revolutionary! - of your org, what you're doing to bring new and disenfranchised people into the process in a meaningful way on their terms, what you've done to open up the process itself, whether you endorse what I've outlined here as the generally agreed-upon steps to make our political process transparent and open, and some other things that would actually dispute any of the things I'm saying here?
Oh, that's right, you can't, because I'm right. Aw, shucks. IND is a tool of the status quo, and it's time you were honest about that.
Good websites do not necessarily make for good politics
Bouldin,
I have seen you work in political races. I'm pretty sure that you know that a huge chunk of the people who go vote in the real elections, namely the primaries, are largely over 60. Most electoral organization are largely made up of older voters. Why do think all candidates spend every Sunday going to a few church services? The church ladies vote, and they are informed and committed and passionate about politics. After being very involved in politics a few years, I get to be quite skeptical of the attitudes of anyone wearing an iPod. As your average blog-obsessed, poll-obsessed, politically-obsessed thirty-something who their Assembly representative is, and they will probably not even know that New York has an Assembly.
Yeah, maybe the blogs are a solution to educating and involving people below retirement age. Sure, but let's compare the traffic on this blog to, say, a blog about real estate or restaurants.
My own dear friends who are deeply committed to progressive ideals and who are passionate about politics could not care about the City Council or the State Senate.
When I go out to advocate for a candidate, they will be too busy blogging about Obama than to show up for a primary election.
But the elder voters know the candidates, and many of them can barely figure out email. I know many many activists who don't know the difference between their AOL email and a web page. Yet they will probably get more people out to the polls than every one of your posts combined.
I'm not saying that IND shouldn't have a better website. Absolutely. Their website is amateurish, and they could use a LindedIn, myspace, facebook, YouTube, Hi5 and wiki initiatives.
But it's a volunteer organization, as is this. We should all hold our breath for a few seconds and realize than none of us can do much on our own.
We need to start working together, because IND will not get any candidates elected. Neither with DG. But a few choice words by a Bloomberg crony at a Carptenter's Union meeting will do a lot.
IND has their place, as does DG. But at least IND has the organization to put people at polling sites, and will do the phonebanking to likely voters.
Again, I have to give kudos to Mole for bridging both the ineffective online world and the by-laws obsessed local club. We need a variety of tools up our sleeve.
Most of your vaunted new residents of western Brooklyn would rather go out to a new locaterian restaurant than go to any political meeting. Most are too busy taking yoga or shopping at Moshood to knock on doors. We need to find a way to bring these people in, but if you're not starting a new political club, then try to find a way to get involved with the existing clubs to make them relevant.
There are legitimate criticisms of IND, but you'll be a much more astute observer after you've showed that you can run something better.
And please don't confuse me with an IND supporter. I dislike their snuggling up to the powers that be. But we need a lot more than MoveOn. We need more than a bunch of people nagging about Bush from the comfort of their bedrooms, occasionally donating money. We need to build neighborhoods and communities- that's the most radical thing, but it also involves working with all those people who don't have no steenking computers.
One comment
First off, thanks for the kudos. Appreciated!
I will point out that MoveOn.org is a good model to learn from. Not only do they have a good web presence and put out occasional TV commercials, but they also ran the largest and most successful phone banking effort for Congressional races evern in 2006. There were some criticisms of it (they used the sweatshop-like system also used by the PIRGs) but it was effective in an old fashioned way at getting out the vote. However, they don't get involved in the local races that is the bread and butter of IND, LID and CBID's efforts. When I see another group helping us out getting good judges rather than Noach Dears and the like, I will see them as a possible alternative to the reform clubs.
Interesting.
A few points.
As your average blog-obsessed, poll-obsessed, politically-obsessed thirty-something who their Assembly representative is, and they will probably not even know that New York has an Assembly.
Probably not, but that's entirely by design. Those same thirty-somethings probably belong to the Sierra Club, volunteer at their local church or synagogue, give money to Obama, and are aching to be engaged. They're not, because our system, zealously guarded by the vested interests, makes sure that whatever they do, there's no payoff.
When I go out to advocate for a candidate, they will be too busy blogging about Obama than to show up for a primary election.
I hear that a lot, but it's simply not true. The most engaged people I know are, in fact, Kossacks.
I'm not saying that IND shouldn't have a better website. Absolutely. Their website is amateurish, and they could use a LindedIn, myspace, facebook, YouTube, Hi5 and wiki initiatives.
Sure, and there's more besides that. But sites reflect posture and personality, just as this site, for example, reflects Liza's very eclectic personality. IND has the site they want, otherwise, they'd do something about it.
Most of your vaunted new residents of western Brooklyn would rather go out to a new locaterian restaurant than go to any political meeting. Most are too busy taking yoga or shopping at Moshood to knock on doors.
Again, that's a lovely cliché, but that does not make it true. We have practically the highest rates of civic engagement in the country. And the answer, even if you were correct, is not to simply write off everyone new, but to engage them on their terms.
Yet they will probably get more people out to the polls than every one of your posts combined.
Well, I know Marjorie works her tail off, for example, but I'm pretty sure that's broadly a bit of creative license on your part.
HEY MICHAEL (FRENCHIE) BOULDIN.
Hey Michael (Frenchie) Bouldin: someone came in from outer space and captured your blog. They actually wrote a column that leaves hope for your political soul/LOL. I eagerly await your next piece of this calibre. TYVM.
Right back at ya'
Not all of our meetings are exciting or fascinating. Yes, some of them are boring. But they do give our members (and guests, and you could be one of them) a chance to interact with our elected officials. I think that is important. As for being a tool of the status quo — every member has a vote. The truth is, and I think you know this, that incumbency is very powerful. It is rare for an incumbent to be challenged. And if you are a member of the club and attend our meetings on a regular basis, you get to know the incumbent. Consequently, they are usually endorsed. But not always. Two years ago we voted "no endorsement" on Congressman Towns. We can agree that George Bush has been a horrible President. But he was elected (only once) on 2004. I know I was shocked (seriously, I was), but that's how strong incumbency is. Even an idiot can be elected President. At our endorsement meetings, all candidates are given equal time and treated with respect. This year Ed Towns representative spoke for more than the alloted 5 minutes. We went outside and found Kevin Powell and made sure he was given equal time. If you ask Daniel Squadron if he was treated fairly, he will tell you that he was.
To answer your other question, you must be a member for 2 years before being eligible to run for office (1 year for the board). Anyone who has been a member in good standing for two years can run. Anyone! The reason for the two years rule is that we want people who are serious about being members of the club.
So Bouldin, when was the last time you attended an IND meeting?
I'm not sure
I should even be getting involved in this pie fight. But as a member of IND, I feel I have to speak up.
When mole first recruited me to join the club, I did indeed feel that I was being viewed as a suspicious intruder. The irony of that was that my reason for joining had nothing to do with the situation that was provoking the suspicion, though that wasn't apparent to either side at the time. But it didn't make for an auspicious start.
However, I have been a member for over two years now, and I can say the following, sincerely:
1) the club is less progressive than I wish it was, but more progressive than it was when I joined. I've met some really hardworking, active progressives there, though, including people in executive positions. And it won't become any more progressive unless more progressives join it (hint).
2) the membership is pretty diverse in age. I am one of the older members (as opposed to CBID, a far more progressive club, where I am one of the younger ones).
3) the meetings are not at all process-heavy. Most meetings are taken up with hearing reports from the district's elected officials, invited speakers, or with discussing mobilization plans for upcoming election work.
4) the first time I renewed my membership in the club, after one year, I was invited to run for the executive board. This in spite of the fact that I had been viewed as an interloper when I first joined, and the fact that everyone there knew that I'd been brought into the club by mole, and so not likely to be a defender of the status quo. I declined due to lack of time.
5) I continue to belong to IND in spite of the fact that membership is a strain on my schedule, and in spite of the fact that the club is not as progressive as I would like it to be, because it is effective. If we, as a club, endorse a candidate that I support, I know that I and many others will be carrying petitions, doing phonebanking and visibility, and the other face-to-face shoe leather campaigning that brings votes. I might add that I have never been asked to carry a petition for any specific candidate. I only petition for candidates I support.
why i cant see the
why i cant see the verification codes to login myspace