Jason Everett Miller, in his <a href="http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/blogs/j/a/jasoneverettmiller/2010/01/go-out-and-make-me-do-it.php">Go Out and Make Me Do It</a> post, is just the latest of many cafe folks I have seen reference, over the past couple of years now, the story about how FDR told labor leader A. Philip Randolph, who had just eloquently recited a list of grievances he wanted the President to address, to "make me do it."

What FDR meant was create political support and pressure, on me and Congress, to force us to do what some of us, at least, would like to do but don't have enough support to do right now.

A number of cafe denizens--Ramona, Erica, Jason, Theda Skocpol come to mind but I know there are many others thinking along these lines--seem to believe this needs to be done.

We all know that building a social movement that is organized, disciplined, and above all effective requires the dedication, commitment, ingenuity, and smarts of a great many people willing to contribute time and energy to an effort which offers guarantees of precisely nothing in the way of progress and results, but much in the way of disappointment and heartbreak, and often carries with it substantial risks just as an extra bonus.  

Suppose you as a denizen agree with this line of thinking.  What, you ask yourself, could I do specifically to try to advance that process?  After all, I don't run a large or powerful organization.  I don't have lots of money I could give.  I'm tired of talk, talk, talk--or at least if I'm not I want more in the way of constructive action to accompany it and am willing to pitch in.  How would I go about acting on that?

Herewith, a few questions that occur to me.  I am most interested in any thinking denizens might wish to offer on this topic.  I know there are many here who have valuable personal experience in organizing and movement-building endeavors, and with that much insight and wisdom and good ideas to contribute. 

1. How do you assess the landscape for building a movement or a movement of movements that could coalesce to exert national influence in support of a progressive agenda?  (my take: extremely fragmented, as usual, and not just on the progressive side although it feels that way sometimes.  Lots of personal rivalries and sensitivities and egos in the way of effective collaborative effort.)

2. What issues, and policy proposals, would be the focus of a movement you would be willing to support?  (i.e., green infrastructure public jobs bill, financial reform, strong public option on health care soon although not this year, more aggressive action to move towards a green economy, some way to clean up the Washington sewer of corruption and organized interest domination that the Supreme Court might not rule unconstitutional, etc.)

3. Are there leaders with a prominent public profile you could envision playing a, if not the, lead role as a prominent spokesperson for such a movement?  Whose name(s) would bring you to look favorably on making some sort of a personal contribution of time or money or both to such an effort?  (not necessarily, maybe not preferably, a single organization but perhaps a coalition of existing organizations--dare I say it, a "coalition of the willing"?)

4. There are lots and lots of protest and organizing movements in existence at the local and regional levels.  Some of these have impressive tangible results to show for their efforts, which usually get little or no attention from national media.  What would need to happen in order to take full advantage of whatever potential exists for exerting focused national leverage, presumably on one or more issues, through collaboration among these groups?  What might be a mechanism to get a critical mass of local and regional-level activists together to begin figuring out how to do this?

5. What audiences would you prioritize to recruit to such an effort in the early stages? 

Feel free to add and speak to your own questions--these are just a few that occur to me.