good news

[Chuck0]

Liza Featherstone wrote:
> 
> Hi Listers,
> 
> Just want to point out that while the WWP/IAC were initially -- and in my
> view, unfortunately, for all the reasons Nathan and ChuckO have mentioned --
> the most prominent anti-war "coalitions," they certainly don't control the
> movement anymore. Not on campuses, not in numerous IAC-free coalitions in
> cities and communities nationwide, not among religious types and not among
> people of color and immigrants working against the war in their own
> communities.
> 
> WWP is still more visible than I'd like, but I agree with Paulsen's comment
> that some on the list are exaggerating its power. The eclipsing of the WWP
> doesn't mean that the anti-war movement doesn't still have a lot of the same
> problems it did; one of reasons the WWP bothers some of us so much is that
> its flaws aren't unlike much of the rest of the left, just in a more
> exaggerated cartoonish form (bland mechanistic slogans, boring protests,
> cookie-cutter analysis, self-marginalization). Still, the emergence of all
> these other elements in the anti war movement is a very good thing.

That's encouraging news, but the IAC is not just a cartoonish group here
on the East Coast. Those of us who organized for the World Bank protests
that never happened had to deal with some seriously fucked-up stuff that
they were doing.

I've heard from other activist friends that the IAC/WWP has been
marginalized in several local coalitions. That's good news and it makes
me hopeful that some of these groups will start accomplishing something.

Chuck0