Chuck O replied
> The anti-war movement is going to spin it's wheels as long as it just
> goes along with ANSWER's agenda and doesn't come up with a proactive
> long-term campaign that involves many tactics and is democratic. ANSWER
> needs to be chucked overboard. Do I want to see ANSWER fail? Absolutely!
There is just the ridiculous idea that those planning big rallies are the only ones doing anything about the war. You may not like it, but the hundreds of thousands supporting Dean in the primaries think they are sending an anti-war message-- and his success is probably pushing politicians to come out agains the war far more than any ANSWER rallies.
There are lots of folks joining moveon.org or other groups to promote ads and email to the broader public against the war. There are hundreds of left blogs propagandizing against the war.
These tiny ANSWER rallies are pretty marginal to real antiwar organizing. What do they accomplish? What power do they exert? What strategy do they have?
As I've said many times, these kinds of rallies are all about talking to the converted-- they accomplish almost nothing. They occasionally build solidarity among progressive forces, but ANSWER is so divisive, it fails in even that limited goal. I'm not sure whether it's irrelevant or a net plus for the pro-war forces, due to its embarassment factor, but it's clear it contributes NOTHING to convincing the broader public that the war is a terrible thing.
Luckily (or unluckily), the Bush forces or so clearly deceitful and nasty and incompetent that the American people largely on their own are turning against the war. They probably would have done so faster if the antiwar movement hadn't been so cripplied by the dominance of the insane Stalinist ANSWER messages and method.
-- Nathan Newman