Up and down the road to a big anti-war movement From: "Nathan Newman" <nathan at newman.org>
Yes, the use of terms like "fifth column" against anyone who disagrees with the antiwar line on any specific issue is exactly why the movement has been a failure-- anyone who has partially disagreed at any point in the last ten years has been so heaped with abuse that they find little attractive in the movement.
^^^^^^^
CB: There's nothing wrong in the least with peace activists heaping abuse on supporters of the war.
You try to avoid the obvious point I make , but you can't avoid it. You are not a trustworthy advisor on how to organize the anti-war movement if you are not definitely against the war. Your credentials on the substantive question of war vs. peace are shaky, and so they undermine your credibility in advising how to organize the anti-war movement. In the above post, you make the phony move of trying to turn this patently valid critique of you into some kind of democratic procedure point. There is no contradiction between democrratic procedure and emphatic and dramatic criticism as I make of you. Freedom of criticism is part of the democracy you posture to defend. The movement is more democratic because I am free to sharply criticize you.
^^^^^^^
When even people in the tiny minority of folks who oppose the war in Afghanistan are routinely insulted, its no wonder that those who are on the fence are running away. This is not a movement where the non-righteous need apply.
^^^^^^^^
CB: You are not holier than us, nor more democratic. You are the artificially righteous one in this discussion. You are full of what's wrong with the peace movement. Well, you can be criticized just like you criticize.