Re: AUT: RE: antiwar movement

[Peter van Heusden <pvh@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>
> As for unity: The desire for unity within the
> largest antiwar coalition in Sydney was expressed
> through denouncing the kids who threw chairs at
> police as "traitors to the cause".  In Melbourne,
> there was a determined exclusion of any
> Palestinian issues and presence.  In both cases
> (the kids in Sydney being mostly of Arabic
> backgrounds and the Palestinian groups in
> Melbourne), the coalitions were and are determined
> to exclude the most radical expressions of
> non-Australian nationalism that exist in those
> cities as a condition of this unity.  When an
> organiser of the Victorian Peace Network was asked
> on radio prior to the last round of large protests
> about the breadth of 'the movement,' he effusively
> replied that the movement included "everyone", "
> ... Labor, the Greens, Democrats and even One
> Nation."
>

God, and I thought having to worry about Trots and Islamists dominating
the anti-war movement (as in South Africa) was bad.

What you're describing, though, shows that "the movement" is incredibly
varied, which isn't at all surprising. We had a small demo in Cape Town
on Saturday, which was about a 50/50 split between (mostly middle class)
Muslims and activists from township social movements. The organising
committee is made up of stale old Trotskyists and a few Muslims, which is
basically the people who have been bothered and able to get to organising
committee meetings. The Muslims bring in the Palestinian issue big-time,
the Trots the 'worker issue' of the day (currently a baggage handler
strike). My personal contribution (which has been limited by illness and
over-work) was reprint some stuff from Occupation Watch and WCP Iraq, and
highlight the need to build concrete links across borders (the question
of the various refugees from African conflicts that are mistreated in SA
was raised at org. committee meetings but not followed up as yet).

Anyway, the point for me is that "the movement" is seriously dodgy in
some very important ways, and I feel no loyalty to supporting this. I'm
not in the anti-war "movement" to advance the movement - I'm there
because endless war is part of the organisation of what I'm fighting
against. Personally, I feel that the left has some chip on its shoulder
about "building unity" which is probably derived from an understanding of
unity that is centred on some notion of transcendence - the ultimate
"rightness" of a left programme (although the "masses" might go along at
this point without understand their "true interests").

Ok, enough ranting...

>
> I'd be happy to see the antiwar coalitions
> sacrificed to an agenda which prioritised stopping
> the war/occupation.
>

Yeah, that sounds kinda right! But besides that, enough of this symbolic
action.... there are so many practical things that can be done,
everything from highlighting and supporting struggles in
Iraq/Afghanistan/etc to organising solidarity network (visits, news
exchange, etc) to supporting refugees... its a small world and things are
'over there', 'beyond reach'. There is no need to focus the anti-war
movement solely on 'appealing' to politicians!

Peter
--
Peter van Heusden                     pvh@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Tel: +27 (0)83 256 0457



     --- from list aut-op-sy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---