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

[Dddddd0814 at aol.com]

Chuck writes:
"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."

Rah-rah, eclecticism!

" 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."

This is sheer dogmatism, the application of generalized rules and belief 
structures to particular realities. Besides, no one can predict the future. 
Anyway, there is no "attempt to create one movement," any more than the 
Marcyites are genuinely attempting to lead the United States to a Communist 
revolution! What there *are* are popular front tactics, i.e. the attempt to 
include many disparate liberal and progressive elements into a loosely 
organized umbrella with complete autonomy of the individuals and 
organizations who choose to participate.

"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 clearly have no clue as to what popular-front Stalinist tactics are 
about. The WWP are simply "going where the action is" in the same manner as 
anarchists, to whatever issues are in vogue. They only difference is in the 
aesthetics (i.e., whether they masquerade as "autoritarian" communists or 
"anti-authoritarian" anarchists) and particular tactics they "fetishize." The 
war will simply continue as long as the capitalist system does. Until workers 
collectively challenge the bourgeoisie as a class, we are FUCKED.

"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."

....like the 'propaganda of the deed' of smashing up chain coffee shops?

"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."

Here we go with these sweeping assumptions of "people's" subjectivity again. 
Completely meaningless, and totally unscientific. There is way too much of 
this crap going on on this list.

-- David