I have always believed that movements are more than just a conglomeration of people. I also hold the opinion that so-called movements centered around a politician are not real movements. As I told my friend, for me, these so-called movements are just campaign machinery.

I may be wrong but I did some checking and I found 2 interesting articles on the subject matter in http://movementbuilders.com. The first one sought to define what a movement is; the second one what it isn’t. The following excerpt from the second article is exactly what I was looking for:

Political campaigns, however, typically fail to involve their members past the electoral cycle.  They may well be a mini-movement while approaching the election, but they fall short of becoming a true movement by ending their efforts too early.

With all the movements sprouting everywhere, I think it’s about time we all learn to distinguish the real movements from the rest. We should be especially concerned about this because, in our country, even the most idealistic movements inevitably end up being commandeered by politicians. “Epal” (pumapapel) as my good friend would like to call it. There’s just no way we can stop politicians from embedding themselves in movements. “Epal” is in their nature. All of them.

Many of us will most likely join a movement especially come election time. To those who will may I suggest a minor adjustment. Instead of basing your choice on the politicians they represent why not base it on the SPECIFIC PLANS (not motherhood vision statements) that these politicians propose. Simply put, let’s support the PLANS, the PLATFORMS not the personality.