Re: Response to Derek; and, Two Trends in the Antiwar Movement

[Gary MacLennan <g.maclennan@xxxxxxxxxx>]

At 03:16  29/10/02 -0500, Lou wrote:
> We want to unite antiwar organizations and individuals on the basis of
> opposing war and sanctions, not on the basis of opposing imperialism--a
> far narrower conception

I am finding the dialog between Lou and the Answer grouping very
encouraging and at the same time a little challenging for me.
Temperamentally I am on the purist side of things.  For instance my
response to Greens Leader Bob Brown, was not exactly joy to see him at the
rally.  Yet as Lou would have pointed out to me his presence was vital to
the success of the rally. Moreover if we could have got the Bishop of
Brisbane, whoever he is, there, it would also have been a good thing.

Still if I were to speak at such an event and I may be speaking at some of
the smaller lead up events, I will demand that the audience attempt to come
to understand the word 'imperialism'.   I won't be contented with
'objectively anti-imperialist'.  That to me means they are unconsciously or
implicitly anti-imperialist.  It is only when anti-imperialism becomes a
discursively explicit phenomenon that we will be close to victory - the
construction of a socialist society.

In the mean time, in between time, stopping this war would be a tremendous
achievement, and Comrade Lou is correct in what he writes here.  Moreover
in terms of the world wide opposition to the war, the American Left have a
big role to play as always.  The anti-war demonstrations in the States have
been poorly reported in Oz, but that they are taking place is mightily
encouraging for the rest of us.

regards

Gary


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