[Marxism] Disjunction between antiwar sentiment and size of protest

[Louis Proyect <lnp3@xxxxxxxxx>]

(This suggests that ANSWER's time has come and gone. Becker and company 
would have played a much more useful role if they had functioned as a 
leftwing of a broader coalition but they overprojected what they could 
do in their own name. My guess is that even if they wanted to merge with 
broader forces, they would lack the skills to get anything done. Working 
in a true united front requires the ability to be conciliatory. When you 
see yourself as the second coming of Lenin's Bolshevik Party, that is 
more difficult.)

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/rawfisher/2007/09/live_from_the_mall_why_huge_cr.html

Live from the Mall: Why Huge Crowds Didn't Show Up

Perhaps in anticipation of a lighter than expected turnout, the ANSWER 
Coalition, the main organizer of the demonstration, issued a treatise 
early this summer suggesting that the anti-war movement has failed to 
stimulate a massive outpouring of people because of its own splintered 
message and tactics.

"Although the antiwar sentiment is growing among the general 
population," the ANSWER document says, "the size and intensity of the 
demonstrations, protests and acts of resistance does not at all measure 
up to the vast magnitude of feelings against the Iraq war among the 
general population. The single biggest reason for this dichotomy is the 
fact that the anti-war movement is badly splintered rather than working 
together or in a united fashion so as to marshal, stimulate and mobilize 
a truly massive outpouring of the people."

ANSWER organizers in May said that "it should be easily possible to 
mobilize one million people" at a demonstration in Washington this fall. 
"Whatever differences that exist between groups, and there are many and 
they are important, are not sufficient justification for preventing us 
from coming together in a show of force that will change the direction 
of this country," the ANSWER statement said.

But is it political splintering among opponents of the war that 
prevented that target from being met? Or is it that many Americans don't 
see an easy way out of the fix in Iraq? Like many of the politicians the 
demonstrators tend to dismiss as spineless, many Americans are caught 
between their desire to get U.S. troops out of a war that seems at best 
stalemated and at worst a lost cause, and their sense that a precipitous 
departure would lead to greater bloodshed and the flourishing of dangers 
that might not have existed had we not gone into Iraq in the first place.

And then there is the question of tactics. Check out the sites of the 
groups that belong to the coalition known as Americans Against 
Escalation in Iraq, which includes moveon.org, unions, student groups, 
and various other left of center organizations: I couldn't find any 
mention of today's demonstrations at any of these groups' sites. Even as 
they tout all manner of other ways in which to register protest and seek 
change in U.S. policy, they found no cause to enlist in the street 
action we saw today.

That might be a result of internecine battles on the anti-war side, or 
it might be because some groups on that side of the debate no longer see 
demonstrations in the streets as an effective or persuasive means of 
changing minds or creating change.

More on that coming in tomorrow's column....

________________________________________________
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