> BASTIDS!
>
> that shoulda been OUR money. if it hadna been for that fuckin' moveon
> warping the brains of perfectly radical anarchist kids, we woulda had
> millions. we coulda been somethin'.
>
> Back in 1999, we was going somewhere. We coulda been something'! We
> couda been a contendah!
>
> Fuck ANSWER. FUCK Moveon.
Pretty damn funny, Kelly! By the way, I don't smoke, but perhaps I would be chewing a toothpick or something.
Seriously, Moveon can be commended for pioneering some new ways of doing grassroots organizing, but I don't see their goals as being worthwhile, nor do I think that they will be an influence two or four years from now. I also see Moveon as being peripheral to the activism of anarchists and radicals.
The 9-11 attacks did take the wind out of activism and dissent, perhaps hastening a process that would have played out over a few more years. In my chats with activists, it's clear that the 9-11 attacks had a dampening effect on dissent, but not to extent that some people think. In my view, the 9-11 attacks sped up the process wherein the anti-globalization movements shifted from a narrowly focused movement against one thing--globalization--to movements that are more focused on big picture problems such as capitalism and imperialism. There was also a desire, which existed even before 9-11, to engage in more local activism. Many activists right now seem to be focused on local dissent and organizing, which I think demonstrates the maturity of the movements. The over-the-top level of security at summits has also promped activists to do more of their work locally. This local dissent holds the most promise, because the national security terror state can't deploy robocops everywhere, and because we need to change minds face-to-face.
And I think there is some understanding that the anti-globalization movements did accomplish much in those few years before 9-11.
Chuck0