>Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2003 17:08:33 -0800
>From: "Ian Murray" <seamus2001 at attbi.com>
>Subject: Re: re Next
>
>C'mon Chris, the issue is not issues, but the institutions!
>IMF/WB/WTO/Federal Reserve/Treasury/Pentagon and the materiality/practices
>that are constitutive of their contestable and unstable legitimacy.
>
>Ian
>Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2003 20:52:21 -0500
>From: Chuck0 <chuck at mutualaid.org>
>Subject: Re: re Next
>
>
>Movement? That is so 20th century. We all know that when the left talks
>about "movement this" and "movement that" that they are really talking
>about something that they can turn into some vanguardist party. MovementS,
>or "multitude" for the hip marxists on this list. I'm working on a new
>collaborative anti-war website (war.infoshop.org) with other anarchists,
>whose purpose is to help organize the fight against the war machine, not
>just the war du jour, which has already started, but the activists are
>waiting for the "shock and awe" before they decide that the "war' has
>finally started.
>
>The US killed Iraqis today. I think the war is well underway.
>
>Chuck0
I would concede to Chuck (I do not know if he would meet me on this) that was has occurred is not a movement in the 20th century sense of structured organisations, but has come about as a result of networking. (on the other hand do not underestimate the amount of planning that facilitated the manifestations. The Independent has directed an arch swipe about how one of the leaders of Stopwar UK has written an article suggesting that not everything about Stalin was negative.
But to Ian, I would say, if 10 million or more took part in demonstrations world wide on 15th February, and subsequently saw reports of these and confirmed that something massive happened internationally, where will they want it to go? Yes I take Chuck to mean it will largely go in the direction of the struggle. I agree with Ian if I understand him rightly that the whole assumed legitimacy of the international bodies should be challenged.
But put it differently: the mass of placards on the million + march in London were provided by 4 organisations, and were available for people to pick up. (Though many individuals brought their own. The placards for the first Saturday after the war breaks out will rightly be ones of intense protest at the legitimacy of the war. But what will be decided in the circles of the organisations behind the coalition, about the mix of slogans on the second Saturday after the war. That is a key question in my opinion.
Is the aim to build pure anarchism? to build pure pacificism? to overthrow the Pentagon, or to experience a joy and lightness of being? or as Chuck suggest to contribute to the building of a relatively small vanguard party? There are many versions of reality, and many different personal experiences of participation in what was a massive collective event. And might lead onto more massive collective events, if protest can flow forward into channels that draw more people in.
I favour a pluralist solution. But I also favour debate and argument within the network now, and not just in the organisations that Chuck views with suspicion.
To the extent that this is a tiny part of the network, I contribute my comments.
Chris Burford London