[lbo-talk] Liberal imperialism

Nathan Newman nathanne at nathannewman.org
Tue Sep 27 13:59:48 PDT 2005


----- Original Message ----- From: "Charles Brown" <cbrown at michiganlegal.org> -CB: The disagreement over N. Korea and China is not a basis for not -supporting a mass demonstration against the U.S. war in Iraq.

As I've made clear, my criticism of marches as the main and sometimes only focus of the ANSWER/UFPJ wing of the antiwar movement goes betond those politics to the fact that those politics mean that the rallies are unconnected to mobilizing people for real community politics.

Precisely because the ANSWER folks have their loony politics, they oppose any politics that might actually engage regular Americans in a way that would be politically effective.

^^^^^

But I'm very happy that there has been an explosion of attacks on ANSWER's role in the antiwar movement in the wake of Saturday's rallies.

^^^^^ -CB: But there hasn't been an explosion of attacks on ANSWER's role in the -anti-war movement in the wake of Saturday's rallies. Just a few people who -sound like they are sort of envious of ANSWER's obvious success in -organizing such a big rally. My guess is that there have been fewer attacks -than usual on ANSWER after Saturday.

Go read www.dailykos.com over the last few days. There have been raging debates over ANSWER's role with hundreds of those who participated complaining they had been hoodwinked and condemning other antiwar leaders for giving ANSWER a platform for their views.

Some take yours or others line saying ANSWER's role is irrelevant, but large numbers see it as a betrayal of their participation.

Nathan



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list