Re: [Marxism] Hey, Antiwar Movement!...

["Naveen Jaganathan" <naveenkj3@xxxxxxxxx>]

Andy,

I don't think the SW edit placed the blame on ANSWER alone for the collapse
of the March actions.  I think it laid out really well the dynamic that
played out, which started with the shift to the right by UFPJ, which then
led to a vacuum of leadership around mass actions.  CS and ANSWER's Year 5
efforts, which tried to fill that gap, was an exclusive process, and they
issued a fait accompli for a mass action on the 15th without IVAW's
consent.  In that sense the final blow came when IVAW decided to hold their
ground.  I don't think the article was trying to place blame on any one
organization, but was rather trying to explain how closed processes, and
lack of political agreement amongst antiwar forces has led to a near
collapse of the movement nationally. Also, I'd dispute the role of ANSWER in
the Bay Area, as the assessment I have now gotten from a number of people
leads me to believe, ANSWER was not trying to operate in a true
united-front.  Even in the Year 5 effort they weren't innocents and at some
level they were setting up UFPJ for embarrassment.  (Not at all to justify
UFPJ's behavior, I just don't believe there was genuine attempt made at an
united front by ANSWER.)  ISO's influence in IVAW shouldn't be exaggerated
either.  Sure they have members in IVAW, and have some level of influence
but the role of the liberals and UFPJ far outweighs anything the ISO could
have done to change the situation.  I agree that moving forward the Left
should try to win IVAW over to a mass action perspective.

Best.
Naveen.

On Jan 17, 2008 4:04 PM, Andrew Pollack <acpollack2@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> ANSWER definitely got a bad rap from Ashley in the Socialist Worker
>  article. If the March national action didn't come off they can't be
>  blamed. In the Bay Area, and in the Sheehan initiative, their role from
>  what I can tell has been fine.
>  As for the IVAW: I'm sure there were many factors involved, probably as
>  many as there are political viewpoints within IVAW (which I assume and
>  hope, are many). In any case, the ISO has done lots of good work with
>  IVAW, so I'm sure they'll use whatever influence they have to make them
>  understand the dialectical reinforcement that national and local  actions
> can have, that "base-building" and "foundation laying" on a  local level are
> complements to, not substitutes for, national  demonstrations. It's just a
> shame such discussions weren't possible  before a March national demo became
> impossible.
>  Andy
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Never miss a thing.   Make Yahoo your homepage.
> ________________________________________________
> 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
>
________________________________________________
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