> Yes I like a whole number of tactical points that Lou Paulsen made.
> About
> flags the sort of thing the alternative movement should do is to place
> the
> symbol prominently in the context of a whole number of other flags,
> and the
> flag of the United Nations. Say the flags of the United Nations
> Security
> Council, plus the UN flag. That would also have the merit of keeping
> the
> sectarians away from the demonstrations. It would also resonate with
> people's need for peace, security and justice, and the fact that the
> US
> cannot win this on its own.
>
The only appropriate thing to do with a national flag is burn the
damnable thing. Why on *earth* would any revolutionary person or
organisation want to legitimise in any way this concept of nation? To
abandon such basic principles for the sake of expedience in a crisis can
only serve to weaken the position, no matter what the short-term gains
are. It is, to me at any rate, analagous to the shedding of civil
liberties for a veneer of security - a knee-jerk reaction when the
immediate situation seems lost (and possibly is lost). Embracing the
flag as a symbol of anything good won't stop the war. I doubt anything
can right now. This war was lost 8:40am September 11th. It is
regrettable, but I think true.
The best that can come out of this from a revolutionary perspective is to be able to consolidate fragmented cliques and win over fringe support. Not by giving in to some banal sense of patriotism or nationalism, but to show that the events of the day were indeed tragic and were indeed despicable but also need to be placed in a political and historical context. The events subsequent to the 11th are, as far as I can see, ripe for presenting a credible argument, not against war, but against the US policy and military action. Unfortunately though, the continued bloodletting won't be stopped now.
Cheers
Zak