[lbo-talk] In Support of the NOAC's Call for a Unified Anti-War Action in the Fall

[Shane Taylor]

Chuck0 wrote:
> Why is it that some peace activists tend to be as
> dense when it comes to recent movement history
> as most Americans are about their own history?
> This effort to "unify" the Movement(sic) and give
> ANSWER more credibility works against the
> interests of activists and ensures that our dissent
> will continue to be squandered on pointless
> spectacles which only serve to swell the heads of
> the people involved with ANSWER.
>
> Perhaps the news takes a while to get out to
> northeast Ohio, but in case the Ohioans have
> heard the news, many anti-war activists and
> groups have rejected ANSWER and their self-appointed
> role as "leaders" of THE peace movement. The UFPJ
> exists, in part, to provide an alternative to ANSWER.
> I know that I've supported UFPJ earlier this year,
> precisely because I wanted to see an alternative to
> ANSWER in anti-war organizing. I'm not fond of UFPJ's
> politics and it sucks what they did to the movement
> on F15, but they are more of a coalition of peace and
> anti-war activists than the so-called ANSWER
> "coalition."
>
> Let's hope that UFPJ does the right thing and
> doesn't enable ANSWER by agreeing to this call.

Agreed.  It's dizzying to hear "unity" taken as a virtue in and of itself
by anti-war activists, despite having endured the post-9/11 mantra of
United We Stand.  Unity with ANSWER is about as constructive as continued
unity with the John Birch Society would have been for modern
conservatism.

-- Shane

________________________________________________________________
The best thing to hit the internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
Surf the web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!