Re: Forwarded from Anthony (NYT)

["Walter Lippmann" <walterlx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Anthony doesn't explain, specifically, what
disturbs him about MY remarks on the NYT.

We're all frustrated, I think, at the pace of
developments and at the various obstacles
which exist between current consciousness
among the great majority, and what some of
us Marxmail writers think about the world and
the powers that be. But consciousness and
its raisising is a process, not a single event.

My article warned AGAINST what the New York
Times is up to, yet noted that we cannot however
AUTOMATICALLY put a plus everywhere our
opponents put a minus.

The power of the New York Times flows from its
resources and its reputation as the "newspaper
of record" for a wing of the capitalist ruling class.
This is why we're all compelled to read and to
relate to the paper: because of the audience it
reaches, whom we, also want to reach.

At times, the NYT publishes important facts
which themselves become important by virtue
of having been published in the NYT. (Think:
Pentagon Papers, think Orlando Bosch's:
admission of some of his terrorist acts.)

The NYT has come to the conclusion that Bush
is conducting the war badly, and so, in an effort
to obtain a change in US policy, the Times is at
this time revealing some of the facts on the
ground, and reporting the growth of the anti-war
movement. If it were up to Bush and his team,
there would be little or no reporting on anti-war
mobilizations. They pretend we do not exist.

Naturally the NYT wants to channel anti-war
sentiment toward safe directions for the owner-
operators of the NYT. This surprises anyone
subscribing to the Marxmail list?

No one can guarantee the purity of slogans in
a genuinely mass movement, which is what is
occurring against this war. Thus it's silly to
view these matters as if they were matters
of absolute class principle, such as this:
---------------------------------------------------
"Support the Troops, Bring them home Now"
opens the door to the imperialist effort to coopt
the movement. The next step from this slogan is,
"Support the Troops, Send in More!" (just half a joke).
---------------------------------------------------

Does anyone think that someone marching to
protest this war today is likely tomorrow to
turn around and support the war? Of course
not, the very notion is absurd.

Notions, both guided and misguided about
patriotism play a complex role on social and
political life. Are 100% of all statements of a
patriotic nature wrong? Is patriotism the last
refuge of a scoundrel 100% of the time, too?

Should we ban people carrying the flag of
the United States from the protests? That
is just the kind of ultraleftist posturing that
our Cuban friends might be trying to help
us to understand, and to reject.

Remember: this photo is being displayed
on the website of the Central Committee
of the Communist Party of Cuba, not the
New York Times or The Nation, por favor.
http://www.granma.cu/espanol/manifestaciones/california.html

Those who object to such displays of a
proud and unashamed patriotism might
wonder about the Cuban Revolution and
just why the July 26th movement adopted
a patriotic, revolutionary and democratic,
but consciously NOT Marxist or Leninist
kind of approach. I haven't time to spell
it all out here, but a good explanation is
given in the wonderful book by

Lionel Martin  called THE EARLY FIDEL:
The Roots of Castro's Communism (Lyle
Stuart 1978) (Lionel was formerly the
Washington Post correspondent in Cuba.
He has lived there for forty or more years
and still lives there.) Enough for now...


Walter
========================

ANTHONY WROTE: (excerpts)
Sent: Sunday, March 30, 2003 5:01 AM
Subject: Forwarded from Anthony (NYT)

The New York Times article about the antiwar movement,
and Walter Lippmann's remarks about it are disturbing.
=======================
It seems to me that there is a very conscious attempt
to coopt, sanitize, and derail the antiwar movement.
=======================
Their aim is to to gain support for the war
against Iraq within the movement.
=======================
The way the NYT envisions doing this is by replacing
opposition to the war, with opposition to the way
the war is being conducted, opposition to Bush's
unilateralism, etc. The well financed right wing of
the movement is trying to impose censorship on the
left wing of the movement by demanding that speakers
limit themselves to opposition to the war in Iraq, and
some try to go further.

This effort to coopt the movement makes the issue of
the key slogans of the movement, and of democracy in
the movement central. Every revolutionary should be -
in my not very humble opinion - fighting tooth and
nail against the self appointed censors in the
movement.

And they should be fighting for slogans that will
mobilize everyone who is against the war -
but which do not in any way support the war.

"US Out of Iraq Now!" is such a slogan.

"Support the Troops, Bring them home Now"
opens the door to the imperialist effort to coopt
the movement. The next step from this slogan is,
"Support the Troops, Send in More!" (just half a joke).

And, while revolutionaries should put their main
effort into building mass demonstrations that mobilize
as many people as possible, they should not fall into
the traps set for them in this endeavor. Those traps
are all - in one way or another - based on the law of
politics that money is the mother's milk of all
poliltics.
======================
No one should ever accept a pro-imperialist slogan
just because they will get the cash to advertise the
demo. No one should ever accept a pro-imperialist
slogan just because somebody, or some organization
that is important, will endorse the demo if you do.
======================
At the same time we have to walk a very fine line
about militant tactics. Civil disobedience tactics are
legitimate and must be defended by revolutionaries -
they should however be limited to demonstrations in
which all of the people participating agree to them -
They are not tactics for mass demonstrations that
attract large numbers of people who are not already
deeply involved in the movement. Including a well
defined civil disobedience component that
accompanies a mass demo is one good solution.

US Out of Iraq Now!

Fuck the New York Times!

Anthony