> I'm getting tired of being one of the more vocal critics of ANSWER, but I'm
> wondering what we can do collectively to speak up about ANSWER. Would it be
> useful to come up with a statement about ANSWER that is activist-focused, but
> doesn't tar all communists and socialists and anarchists with the same brush
> that Corn, Cooper, Gitlin and others of their ilk are using? How about
> something that criticizes ANSWER and affirms the necessity for many movements
> against the war and for peace, all of which are democratic, open and
> transparent.
As a species of anarchist, I find this choice of opponent very dispiriting and all to familiar. Anarchists shouldn't fight weak sects and nutty wankers - though that is what they seem to always be doing. My comrades in Sydney spend so much time complaining about the trots and picking fights with the last remaining nazi in Australia...sigh... If you pick on the weak you become weak yourself.
Institute representative limits per organization at meetings and some standing orders with which to boot truly disruptive people. End of story. It's just not worth the headeache.
This, on the other hand, is just nuts:
> Now I'm wondering how ANSWER figured out a way to forge access to the
> nomenclature of the anti-globalization movement. Acronyms involving the first
> letter of a month and the date of the month, such as "M15," is the hallmark
> of days of action associated with the anti-globization movement.
Fancy an anarchist complaining about intellectual property. And how terrible it would be if the "anti-globalization" movement merged ideologically with the anti-war movement. That would be a disaster, I tell you.
Thiago
------------------------------------------------- This mail sent through IMP: www-mail.usyd.edu.au