Marxism
[All Periods] [All Lists]

RE: [Marxism] Precipitous withdrawal?

To: Activists and scholars in Marxist tradition <marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [Marxism] Precipitous withdrawal?
From: Louis Proyect <lnp3@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 14:24:20 -0400
Delivery-date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 12:24:31 -0600
In-reply-to: <E1E7dIo-0007lv-Gl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <6.2.0.14.0.20050823111234.032e3cc0@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <E1E7dIo-0007lv-Gl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Walter wrote:
This is another area where we need to look at these matters
differently than we did in the Sixties and we cannot make
"immediate withdrawal" a splitting issue for the struggle
against the war.

Who is talking about a split? Russ Feingold is not part of the antiwar
movement. UfPJ is *for* immediate withdrawal, even if they are wasting time
in lobbying efforts. The only split I know about is whether to incorporate
"the right of return" as a slogan. Thank goodness, the two coalitions have
agreed to march separately and strike together. But if UfPJ ever decided to
adopt Russ Feingold's proposals as their own, then  it would be necessary
to build an alternative. In the 1960s, politicians often spoke at peace
demonstrations but stopped short of calling for immediate withdrawal. Ted
Kennedy is one example, but there are others. There is no harm in this. But
the movement itself *must not* water down its demands to curry favor with
such Democrats.

--

www.marxmail.org


________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>

Valid HTML.