Next, Yoshie writes:
>>It's not a "handful of people" who want to bring the troops home,
though. The most recent polls say 40-54% want to bring the troops
home, rather than keeping them in Iraq "until there is a stable
government there" or "until the situation has stabilized" (cf.
<http://pollingreport.com/iraq.htm>).>>
The problem is it never became part of any political agenda. SIGNIFICANT numbers of people attending the Democratic convention were clearly anti-war (and I'm not just counting the Kucinich, Sharpton or Dean people), but they were clearly at odds with their party's candidate on how to settle the issue. The very lack of enthusiasm amongst them while on camera was so obvious: they wanted to go where their leaders would not dare.
There might have been something to the argument that if it's political you have to do something inside the political system, and there is nothing possible in the Repugnican party, so you look to the Democrats. But the Democrats either have to be severely confronted and reformed or destroyed for the political agenda to change. Please don't tell us that a serious stance on the war would make the Democratic candidate unelectable. He proved unelectable, in part, because he took no serious stances.
Kerry's haplessness notwithstanding, there was no mechanism inside or outside the party to make the DLC and DNC respond to where many in the party wanted to go. Instead, what they and we onlookers heard was 'Kerry is electable' and 'Do something about the war after Kerry wins it'. We also were treated to a gay marriage circus and a friends of Hillary sideshow in DC instead of serious discussion about the war. Now, what did a gay marriage movement (pushed by right wing libertarians most likely) and Hillary's meeting on the mall accomplish? Perhaps there needs to be a narrowing of issues instead of a proliferation of lifestyle advocacy. What these shows got us was unity among Christian evangelicals, Catholics and even some pro-Israeli Jews--and another Bush presidency.
The WAR is still the issue. It was the issue from the 1990s to 2001, when the people who run the national security state were figuring out how to use the continuing Iraq 'conflict' to justify total war and total militarization of the federal budget. The WAR connects to all the other things progressives and leftists might care about. While there is a war on and there is no politically connected anti-war movement, Bush has free rein. Bush reigns.
F -- _______________________________________________ Find what you are looking for with the Lycos Yellow Pages http://r.lycos.com/r/yp_emailfooter/http://yellowpages.lycos.com/default.asp?SRC=lycos10