RE: Said piece, solidarity and violence (Mark)

[Mike Friedman <mikedf@xxxxxxxx>]

Mark,

... and I hope she continues to do so. I'm responding to her words on this
list, which are advocating a position for the solidarity movement that will
monkeywrench its 'organizing against the violence of the occupation'. You
will notice, of course, that Said was quite clear in those phrases of
Yoshie's I quoted. He was talking about unequivocal support and eschewing
positions with respect to "Palestinian violence" on the part of solidarity.

Yoshie insists that for the solidarity movement, taking a position favoring
a tactic or tendency among the Palestinians will do no harm to the
movement. I know otherwise from experience in the anti-apartheid movement.
During the late 70s we built a broad campus (and off campus, as well)
coalition to demand divestment from businesses in South Africa, as many
did. We held massive demonstrations and had forced the issue on the Board
of Trustees, among whom we had allies. We were a successful movement at a
major university. Along came a group that favored "armed struggle." The
problem was, this group wanted the Coalition Against Apartheid to adopt a
position advocating armed struggle and supporting one of the South African
anti-apartheid groups (PAC, I believe it was), which they viewed as having
the correct line. They wouldn't let go. Folks got caught up in discussions
of which faction to support, or how much violence was appropriate. And when
the majority rejected this, the redbaiting and threats began. The long and
short of it is, people became discouraged and left, and the movement dwindled.

Mike


> Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 22:25:28 -0400
> From: "Mark Lause" <MLause@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: RE: Said piece, solidarity and violence
>
>
> Mike, the only trouble with your argument is that Yoshie and the
> Palestinian solidarity groups ARE organized against the violence of the
> occupation.
>
>
> Solidarity!
> Mark L.


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