Fw: David Corn: troubling origins of the anti-war movement

Chuck0 chuck at mutualaid.org
Fri Nov 1 18:02:41 PST 2002


Doug Henwood wrote:
> Marta Russell wrote:
>
>> Disabled people -ADAPT - have protests at least twice a year -- major
>> ones and most groups don't come out in support of our demos. It is
>> usually about 500 crips out in the rain, in the streets. We don't
>> even get mention in the "progressive" media. I guess we must be
>> spewing out alienating rhetoric. That is a joke. So this just
>> reinforces my point -- where are the organizers whom all will follow?
>> The mythical organizers?
>
>
> Nathan's talking about organizers - but on a specific issue, like
> homelessness (as in his example). You're talking about diabled people
> demonstrating for disabiility rights with no support. That's the
> American left, such as it is, for you. No contact, no solidarity.
> Against that, you can sometimes see the appeal of a Leninist party (ha,
> just kidding).

I wrote an article today on homeless organizing:

D.C. Activists Win Victory for Homeless http://dc.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=37559&group=webcast


> All you anti-demo types in your diversity - Nathan, Thoams, Chuck0 -
> what organizational/agitational strategy you proposing to stop the war?
> Knocking on doors? Roving bands of masked persons?

How about we try everything? ;-)

Seriously, we should first look at the composition of anti-war dissent as it now stands. There isn't one movement that can be led by the WWP or anything else. There have been lots of anti-war protests and actions that have been organized locally. There have been protests in small cities and town, where you wouldn't think there would be much dissent. Students are organizing on campuses. The religious community is organizing opposition to the war. Socialist and communist groups have organized rallies. Artsy groups have organized creative actions. We anarchists are doing a variety of things. There are also liberals and libertarians and even conservatives protesting in various ways. There are former military people speaking out like Scott Ritter.

What we have is several anti-war movements and tendencies. There is unity in this diversity, but ham-fisted attempts by leftists to create ONE MOVEMENT is going to create more division than unity. Which is why it is so good to see so many anti-war protests happening outside of the orbit of individuals and groups who want to lead them.

You ask about strategy. Obviously, strategy is going to depend on the different movements and their goals. I think we should look back at history of American imperialism and war and the resistance to that. We can learn important lessons, such as the fact the accepted notions about how the "anti-war movement stopped the Vietnam War don't give the full picture. There was alot of resistance to the war that was organized by people working with enlisted soldiers. Their was mutiny in the military, fueled by underground "GI revolt" zines (see the Kevin Keating article I cited in the other email). Also, widespread revolt in American cities forced the U.S. to adopt a more conservative war strategy. Something like this could be encouraged this time by labor unions.

It's also important not to get fooled into thinking that this war is going to be like the last one, or that we should copy tactics that we used last time. I think the anti-war movement believed back in 1990 that the Gulf War would be a drawn out operation like Vietnam. This led to foolish and stupid tactics, such as in Madison, Wisconsin spent much energy in getting the City Council to pass a resolution declaring Madison a "draft free zone." Given that there was no draft, this was an incredibly out-of-touch strategy.

I'm not as against rallies and marches as you all think--they do have some useful purposes. But fetishing tactics to the point where they become the strategy is a huge mistake too. At this point in the build-up to war, rallies and protests help in showing that people oppose the war. But last weekend, it was the small town protests in Nashville and Taos and Maine that were much more effective than ANSWER's "boring picnic in the park without food." People watching the tube or reading the newspaper in Nashville, Tenn. can write off the Washington protests as "just those lefty Mumia folks," whereas a protest in Nashville shows that local folks oppose the war. Those kids from Berkeley certainly didn't come across country to Nashville!

If we want to be more effective in the long run, the anti-war movement needs to take some risks, be it civil disobedience at the cruise missile factory outside of St. Louis, or the trashing of the Army recruiting office in San Jose. We can't just get a permit to end the war.

There is also an opportunity for activists to reach out to National Guard families. Many of these families are pissed off that the Bush administration recently extended the tour of duty of NG "volunteers." Combine this concern about being out of touch with loved ones with worries about losing loved ones in war, and I think you have a group of people who could be organized to oppose the war.

Just a few thoughts,

Chuck0

------------------------------------------------------------ Personal homepage -> http://chuck.mahost.org/ Infoshop.org -> http://www.infoshop.org/ MutualAid.org -> http://www.mutualaid.org/ Alternative Press Review -> http://www.altpr.org/ Practical Anarchy Online -> http://www.practicalanarchy.org/ Anarchy: AJODA -> http://www.anarchymag.org/

AIM: AgentHelloKitty

Web publishing and services for your nonprofit: Bread and Roses Web Publishing http://www.breadandrosesweb.org/

"...ironically, perhaps, the best organised dissenters in the world today are anarchists, who are busily undermining capitalism while the rest of the left is still trying to form committees."

-- Jeremy Hardy, The Guardian (UK)



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list