>As Justin notes, there are plenty of pro forma statements at antiwar
>rallies of regret at the deaths of Sept 11, but they sound half-hearted
>even to my ears. To those angry enough to bomb starving Afganis, they
>sound completely disingenuous in their sparceness.
-Do9n't attribute this to me. I didn't say the remarks were pro forma or -sparse. Maybe they were in NYC, or maybe Nathan would find them so in -Chicago, and maybe some of the families of the Sept 11 victims would not be -satisfied (and others might), but I heard strong, clear, unequivocal -condemnations. Maybe Nathan thinks that it's equivocal to say, as I did, -that the NLG doesn't believe in bombing buildings with airplanes or from -airplanes. But if we spend all of our time denouncing the Sept 11 events, -when we will deniunce the war? jks
Condemnations are not enough. They are words without demands for bringing the criminals involved to justice. The latter is what has been lacking from the largest WWP-related rallies that have gotten most public attention. Sure, some smaller rallies have had better politics, but the initial cooperation of many leftists in making the WWP events early successes helped pigeon hole the image of the antiwar movement in many peoples minds.
The NLG is heavily split on this whole thing-- large chunks of the New York and DC chapters have opposed participation in any rally that does not clearly call for seeking to capture and try the Sept 11 murderers. Others have militantly defended the WWP line of rhetoric. Yeah, everyone agrees that if they get caught, they should be tried in an international tribunal, but the national convention spent more time debating whether capital punishment should be allowed against Bin Laden than in discussion on any serious alternative positive policy that would promise security to fellow Americans.
Max and others on the left are supporting the bombing for good reasons-- they know the American people want justice for their loss and the Left is not promising it in any real form. He doesn't buy my version either, but that just means we need to strengthen it until Max and a range of other progressives see a viable way to achieve that justice without bombing innocent Afgani civilians.
My point is not that we need more than pro forma statements seeking justice. We need to make seeking justice the be all and end all of our rhetoric. Nothing else. If the methods we advocate, including global justice, peace and tolerance -- do not logically lead to that goal of justice for the victims and prevention of further violence, then they will not be implemented.
I happen to think they are not just the moral policy but the most effective policy.
And as the resident warmongering cruise missile liberal, I think I have the non-pacifist credentials to indicate I mean it :)
Nathan Newman