>This announcement is for a conference call in connection with organizing
>a rally. My guess: the most likely outcomes are decisions about whether
>and how UFPJ and Win Without War folk particpate in ANSWER's rally
>mobilization, not some grander alliance, in other words the typical short
term rally coalition.
But Chuck's point is Who do these people represent?
Coalitions are supposed to represent a coming together of representatives of various organizations with actual members. But increasingly, they end up representing lists of names of orgs with no constituency, in fact often being the remains of past "coalitions". So this meeting -- a coalition of coalitions (often themselves of "coalitions") becomes more and more emptied of any democratic content or accoutability.
"It's only picking a rally day" says people thinking democracy is therefore unnecessary. No, it's also picking who will speak on the platform that day, it's who will pick the message for outreach to the public.
It boggles the mind that so many progressives treat democracy -- actual voting, actual counting whether anyone has been elected by anyone else -- as so irrelevent.
-- Nathan Newma