Fw: [107disc] New Yorkers--Come to an antiwar planning meeting on June 20

["Fred Feldman" <ffeldman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

The following are messages I received from Steve Bloom, a prominent antiwar
activist in the New York area, about a meeting September 20 to consider
organizing an antiwar protest in New York City on September 11.  I think the
idea is an excellent one.  I hope list members from the New York area will
attend the meeting as I plant to, and  people from other areas may want to
consider helping to initiate September 11 antiwar activities in their own
regions.
Fred Feldman
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Bloom" <sblm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <sblm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2002 9:08 AM
Subject: [107disc] New Yorkers--Come to an antiwar planning meeting on June
20


> June 11, 2002
>
> At an informal dinner gathering last week activists from more than a dozen
> organizations in the NYC area began kicking around the idea of what
> peace/anti-war forces should do in this city to mark the first anniversary
> of September 11. It became clear to us that this was the kind of question
> where a broad consultation with many groups and constituencies was
> essential, and we decided to work toward a meeting which could initiate
such
> a process. The date of Thursday, June 20, seemed like a good one, with no
> conflicts that we were aware of.
>
> Consulting with others in the week since we discover that many have,
indeed,
> been thinking about what needs to be done in NYC in September, and it does
> seem likely that a reasonably broad consultative meeting could take place
on
> June 20. However, we also discovered one potential scheduling conflict.
The
> "Not In Our Name" organization (NION), which has been circulating a
"pledge
> of resistance" also has a meeting scheduled for that night, part of a
> regular series of Thursday evening meetings.
>
> We have initiated a discussion about how to deal with this scheduling
> difficulty with the people organizing the NION meeting. However, even if
we
> end up with two meetings on the same evening we think it is important not
to
> wait, to at least begin the broader consultation process we envision. We
> know that June 20 is a reasonable date for many, and whatever date we pick
> in NYC there will be scheduling difficulties for someone. It will simply
be
> necessary for both meetings to proceed with full awareness that another
> process is also going on, and that coordination and further consultation
> will be necessary if we are going to achieve the broad consensus and
> collective action we need. So we are asking that folks plan to attend on
> June 20, at 6:30 pm (place to be announced).
>
> Although this process is open to all, the concept is not necessarily to
> build June 20 as a mass meeting, attended by all activists, but rather to
> conceive it as a representative gathering, involving a range of
> constituences and organizations, to begin a process of discussion and
> consultation which we hope will lead to a concensus about what to do on or
> around September 11. The sooner we come together to begin planning this
> event, the broader/more inclusive it can be and the more time we will have
> to organize it and publicize it.
>
> Your input is essential if we are going to help define our common
interests
> and plan an action which reflects that interest. Please plan for someone
> from your organization/constituency to be there. And urge others to do the
> same.
>
> Feel free to circulate this message.
I received this inquiry, which does not surprise me, from a close political
associate. I take the liberty of forwarding it, without the name of the
sender, along with my reply to the broad list which got the announcement
from me this morning, since I think others probably have the same question:

> -----Original Message-----
>
> Steve,
> What groups should I say are involved in pulling together this mtg? I
> hate to send it as is, without any intro as to who is behind it, since
> people are generally wary about going to something they don't know who
> is initiating. I understand this is a 'first mtg', but it would still be
> good to informally list a few groups as pulling it together.

At the informal dinner meeting mentioned in the initial announcement, a
small group of five volunteered to do the work of determining whether a
meeting on the 20th was really practical, and if so developing the logistics
for it. Frankly, in this case, the names of the groups these individuals
belong to are not that significant, since none of them can actually speak in
the name of their organizations as such. It's really just a proposal to
start a process, made by a number of concerned individuals. People will have
to judge it with that understanding, and on its merits.

We consciously chose to word the initial announcement without mentioning the
names of organizations, or individuals, because we did not want this to look
like another process where some group was trying to stake a claim to be "the
leaders" before things even get started. Rather, we want the process to
really belong to everyone who comes on June 20, from the outset. (I, too,
would be anonymous except that someone had to send the call out from their
email address).

If this makes some uncomfortable, and they want to wait to become involved
until after they see who actually gets the ball rolling, and what the
process looks like, that's perfectly understandable. But the sense I get
from general feedback is that many are ready to proceed, and will be
attending on the 20th, simply based on the importance of beginning a broad
collective process and an assumption (reasonable in this case, IMO) of good
faith.

I hope this answers your question adequately. If not it's still probably the
best I can do at this point.

Steve Bloom



~~~~~~~
PLEASE clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.