[PEN-L:33019] Re: Re: ANSWER, NION, United for Peace, & Win Without War

["Ian Murray" <seamus2001@xxxxxxxxx>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Yoshie Furuhashi" <furuhashi.1@xxxxxxx>

> What does Sam Smith mean by "the colloquial left"?  And you mean that
> "anti-sectarian sects" (your term) = "the colloquial left" (Smith's
> term)?  I'm trying to understand what you are trying to say.

================================

http://www.commondreams.org/views02/1024-04.htm

While there's stuff in the piece to quibble with, SS is pretty much on
target as we approach 2003. As Jim D. pointed out, anti-sectarians get
caught up in rituals of litmus tests and the like too; ah those blasted
paraconsistencies of pluralism! It be nice to think that comedy and
kindness in communication will be enough to get us through such a nasty
stretch of history...but they will be necessary. Lessons from
http://eserver.org/bs/reviews/2002-9-23-8.20AM.html will be useful at
this point.




> For that (= the breakdown of the distinction between rank-and-file
> activists and "peace and justice bureaucrats") to happen, resources
> -- money, skills, name recognition, access to facilities, contact
> info about liberal and left-wing intellectuals and celebrities,
> contact info about anti-war organizers and activists nationwide, etc.
> -- have to be equally possessed by all the (as of now) local
> organizers, rather than centralized by the national organizers like
> those who manage ANSWER, NION, United for Peace, and Win Without War.
> In other words, all of the local coalitions and their main organizers
> will have to have what ANSWER, NION, United for Peace, and Win
> Without War have.  Is that possible?  Is it desirable if it is
> possible?  How do you propose to accomplish it?  (Three different
> questions here).
> --
> Yoshie
>
======================

Now if I could fit those answers into 5 paragraph
email...................:-)


Ian