There are a million reasons to be awake in the middle of the night in New York City.  Something magical happens there after dark.  The city changes.  It looks different.  It sounds different.  It has different people.

When it's 3am in New York, you can suddenly find yourself in a quiet place with your body tired and your mind awake.  That place may be your car, your room or where you work.  It could be a food counter or on a sidewalk seeking shelter from a downpour.  Or, you could simply be lying in your bed waiting for sleep to come.  In those places, there is a feeling unlike any other city in the world.  In the dark quiet, you suddenly feel like the city and you are aware of each other and you catch your breath together for a moment of that deep silence.

Cross-posted at The National Gadfly and The Motley Moose

There's more...

Living to make a differences versus Living to maintain a comfortable standard of living.

I have no doubts that in terms of social outcomes, Obama and Clinton are not at odds with each other. Both democrats would seek to make  this country a better place for everyone to live in than the Bush administration.

Their difference, to me, lies in their philosophical differences. It's not that Hillary Clinton is less liberal than Barrack Obama. I believe that Hillary Clinton represents the more authoritarian style of leadership. Politics, for Hillary Clinton, is about helping people to lead better standard of living; for Barrack Obama, politics is about helping and organizing people to make a difference.

It is not a surprise to find out that Hillary Clinton is more well versed in policy issues, because she is the type of leader who want to take charges of the issues she feel is important to the American People (after listening to them, of course). For Barrack Obama, what the "people" want is more important than deciding what issues he feel is important to him. So , he probably does not have a very detail or explicit plan to really do things any certain way , I believe his strength lies in empowering people to make a difference while Hillary Clinton's strength is her knowledge on many issues and providing a more stable form of governance that does not get sidetracked by fringe or radical movements.

The problem with more democracy is that it could promote mob mentality, as I've think is the case with caucus, a movement is by design, random and prone to surprises and even chaos, and this is what caucus is like , to some extent, and it is  not a surprise Obama is doing well in that kind of voting environment.

A primary is a more stable environment where people have to follow specific instruction and a narrow set of voting behavior, and mark their choices in private without disturbing or talking to anyone. Such orderly process is , not surprisingly, beneficial to Hillary Clinton.

Like someone has said, some of us live for the short term, some of us live for the long term, some of us are young, some of us are old, some of us are just starting our adulthood and striving to make a difference, finding their own identity in this crazy world, others are desperate to cling onto their orderly way of life (haha , do I sound like Obama) and hoping their jobs and pension will be enough to mark the senior years of their life.

Both candidates bring different things to the table, and that  is that.

There's more...

Someone recently told me that powerful ideas make us uncomfortable enough to re-think what we thought.  In the political sphere, an idea isn't the same as a critique.  Pointing out the income gap is not an idea.  Arguing that the income gap is due to structural racism and the solution is affirmative action -- that's an idea.  Caps on carbon emissions, Social Security, a path to legalization, civil unions, universal health care -- these are all ideas that at one point or another have rubbed up against the status quo, made our nation uncomfortable and provoked change.  

It makes me think of new clothes.  The world has changed and the old threads of the New Deal or the Civil Rights Movement just don't fit the same anymore.  Or in many cases, cozy though they might be, our old ideas are worn and tattered in the face of new economic and social realities.  On the other hand, we can't keep accepting the straight jacket of Right-wing, savage-market ideology.  It's time for change.  

Unfortunately, in the wardrobe of new ideas, progressive advocates are pretty much naked. That's not to say we have no ideas whatsoever or that we can't come up with more -- but very plainly that we don't have a comprehensive and coherent, shared vision for the future to offer a nation desperate for change.

Too often as progressives, we're clear about what we're against but not what we're for.  And when we do focus on positive change, it's often in small, incremental steps.  Where do we talk about our long-term, ultimate vision for the future we want?  HERE!

The Movement Vision Lab aims to shake us out of our lazy comfort with the unchallenged orthodoxy of existing ideas and help us struggle together in search of bold and dynamic new ideas. There are plenty of websites and blogs focused on what's wrong with politics and society today.  The Movement Vision Lab is where we all come to talk about solutions -- to trade and try on different ideas and develop our shared, alternative vision for the future.

Do you remember the story of the emperor who had no clothes?  It wasn't other elite members of the royal court who pointed it out, was it?  Political chatter today is dominated by the same elites who got us into this situation by following polls rather than leading with ideas.  And blogs and online media are often dangerously divorced from the real communities who are clamoring for change.   There's a sense that, if we just get some really smart people in the room, they can figure this vision thing out -- even if they've never experienced any of the problems their trying to solve or implemented a single idea in their lifetimes.  Maybe if we're looking for new ideas, we should start looking in new places.

The Movement Vision Lab amplifies the voices of grassroots leaders and organizers working in real communities across the United States.  These leaders not only have first-hand experience with the problems facing our society but also practical and innovative solutions that are grounded in the everyday realities of the communities where they live and work.  While these leaders -- and in particular leaders of color -- are often the most excluded from political discourse, their ideas and vision are what we need most.  

Each week on the Movement Vision Lab blog, we will ask community organizers and leaders to reflect on provocative questions about the future and offer their visionary ideas in response. This week, we're asking:  What is our vision for corporations, unions and the future of business?  We have four essays from Saru Jayaraman (Restaurant Opportunities Center of New York), Donald Cohen (Center on Policy Initiatives), Sarita Gupta (Jobs with Justice) and Omar Freilla (Green Worker Cooperatives).  We also have podcasts with Denise Perry (Power U Center for Social Change), Andy Stern (SEIU) and Burt Lauderdale (Kentuckians for the Commonwealth).  We urge you to comment and join in the discussion.  

Also check out the Idea Lab where you can search hundreds of concrete solutions for the future -- and add your ideas and resources, too.  Each week, we'll be adding new ideas and new features to the site so check back often.

Through the Movement Vision Lab Blog, Idea Lab and more, we promise to make you uncomfortable -- and to inspire, engage and energize you as well!

There's more...

As the Bluegrass Express bus tour continued to roll through Kentucky on Tuesday, a quick change of plans relocated our afternoon leaflet stops from Madisonville to Paducah, in far-western Kentucky. Although western Kentucky often is seen as an area that's less than friendly toward unions, bus volunteer Jeff Wiggins, who is president of the Western Kentucky AFL-CIO Area Council, treated me, Kentucky State AFL-CIO President Bill Londrigan and AFL-CIO Field Representative Don Slaiman to a very different glimpse of the rich history of the area's labor movement.

The city of Paducah has a mile-long mural painted along a flood wall next to the Ohio River. In 2004, artist Herb Roe added a panel depicting the city's annual Labor Day parade, which was first held in 1892. The mural depicts a parade in the mid 1970s with a massive crowd of local labor activists, including W.C. Young carrying a giant "Solidarity" banner through the city's streets.

Young, who hailed from Paducah, and died in 1996, was a nationally known labor and civil rights leader. He began as a member of the Brotherhood of Railway Clerks in 1941, when Jim Crow racial segregation and discrimination were the law and the social order in western Kentucky. Throughout his life, Young worked tirelessly to change this state of affairs, dedicating himself to the common causes of organized labor and the civil rights. He was a leader in the NAACP, the A. Philip Randolph Institute and the AFL-CIO's Committee on Political Education and journeyed to South Africa in the 1990s to protest apartheid.

I was very moved to see the mural, a beautiful testament to the incredible transformational effect Young and others in the labor movement have had on the American society in the past decades. That evening, while we distributed leaflets at the massive Gerdau Ameristeel plant in nearby Calvert City, I made a special effort to reach out and have conversations with the steelworkers coming in and out of the plant, rather than simply hand them the leaflets as they walked by. I wanted to hear their stories and to learn more about how union members in western Kentucky continue to change their society for the better to this very day.  

I felt sure that the workers I spoke to were keeping Young's wise and simple words alive:

You are supposed to love your brother and sister. That's the way it is with the union movement.

There's more...

-- Cross-posted from mnblue.com, home of the Norm Coleman Weasel Meter --

This is an essay to determine what is the condition of the progressive movement and where it is going. I define the progressive movement as the broad, loosely related coalitions, groups, organizations and peope working for social justice in the realm of politics. From the peace community to labor to child advocates to environmentalists, we are united in our goals of attaining social justice.

It's more than 6 months after our resounding electoral victories in November 2006. Amy Klobuchar won with a mandate to keep the Senate seat in DFL hands. Tim Walz won an unprecedented victory over an incumbent Republican in CD-1 (the far south of the state). There is now a DFL (MN-version of Democrat) majority in the State House and a larger majority in the Senate. DFLers were elected to Secretary of State, Auditor and Attorney General. In traditionally Republican strongholds of the western suburbs and Rochester (SE corner of MN), progressive candidates won and these areas are no longer Republican strongholds.

There's more...