Noam A wrote:
>
>
>
> No War and No Bombs does not rule out Special Forces Operations from
> capturing terrorists specifically,
If you consider the casualties and other damage involved in capturing Noriega I think "No collateral damage" rules out this option. But it's true even if these were hypothetically made into Congressional legislation the government would find ways to get around them. I offer them partly as a negative comment on the demand for a "positive program," and your finding of a loophole illustrates the main point. When you talk about a "positive program" you are talking about dictating the language of legislation and even more importantly dictating the interpretations put on that legislation by the state bureaucracy. In other words, the demand for a positive alternative is a movement killer.
For the movement to grow it will have to move towards widespread agreement on a core "program" not much longer than my proposal. It is with such slogans, filtered through debate, etc. that a movement finds coherence. It is the process leading to them as much as the slogans themselves that is crucial. (Note that "slogan" here does not mean something to shout.) The 1001 grouplets, regional organizations, caucuses, etc that make up such a movement will all add their own footnotes and their particular twists, but the central slogan is essential.
Carrol
P.S. 128 people met here tonight to form "Bloomington-Citizens for Peace and Justice." They plunged into work with enthusiasm and bubbling with ideas. It looks quite promising. A campus organization is also being formed. I'll be able to check it out on Monday. I'm really amazed that Doug had to ask why I was feeling optimistic for the first time in 30 years. The answer ought to be obvious just from the postings on lbo.