[Peace-discuss] What do we do now?

[Matt Reichel]

I think many people who say that AMERICAN ELECTIONS don't mean a thing 
(which is, of course, an exaggeration) would be content if we had elections 
similiar to Spain, where there are multiple parties and ideologies on the 
table with each election (instead of two parties, one ideology).

That said: the "holier than thou" crowd would be the people who tell the 
skeptics to shut up and put the clothespin on and vote for a mass-murderer 
neo-con instead of a mass-murderer neo-con for president. I think it is very 
"holier than thou" to demean those who have a strong desire to stand up for 
what they believe in.

And it is by no means an understatement to say that the focus on the 
election has diminished the anti-war movement. Lefty periodicals like the 
Nation and the Progressive have shifted the bulk of their editorial 
attention to silly little pieces about how Nader is really screwing up this 
time around, instead of continuing to expose the horror of war profiteering, 
crimes against humanity at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo, and (oh I don't know) 
how the Democrats have gone to illegal extreme to fight against Democracy by 
waging war on third party (second ideology) options in this country.

Meanwhile, a plethora of organizations (especially those under the banner of 
United for Peace and Justice (really "United for Kerry")) have focused 
attention on voter outreach, voter education, get out the vote, voter phone 
banking, and other cute activities which are really just means of electing 
John Kerry (the mass murderer). I know, because I worked for one of them 
prior to leaving for Europe. These organizations could have waged a 
nation-wide protest of the election, demanding an end to feeble compromise 
on issues of war and imperialism. They could have showed up at the DNC and 
protested the existence of a platform which shut up voices of dissent and 
shoved down our throat hour after hour of mindless blither blather. But, 
instead, we were told by our spokerperson Dennis Kucinich to "shut up," and 
we were told by our leader Todd Gitlin that "Dissent never works, so we may 
as well just bow down."  And now the ever present Michael Moore has 
attempted to articulate a coherent demand in asking that everyone show up to 
vote Bush out so that he can take credit for pioneering a movement with his 
sub-par (even for Michael Moore) documentary.

Sorry guys, this is not a referendum nor "public impeachment" of Bush. Yes, 
Bush should have been impeached for lying to the public about reasons for 
going to war and creating an American police state, but it didn't happen 
because the system sucks and the Dems usually prefer to not even ask 
congress before going to war (Clinton should really have been impeached for 
killing a million Iraqis, and thousands of Serbs, Somalians, Rwandans 
etc...) . We don't have public referendums nor impeachments in the U.S.: 
only elections. You can go the rational route of voting for what you believe 
in, or you can go the "holier than thou" route of shunning those people and 
voting for a mass murderer.

You can't spoil what's already been spoiled.

I've already stamped and mailed in my absentee ballot with the big x-mark 
next to Ralph Nader, so feel free to blame me if somehow Kerry manages to 
blow Illinois.

cheers,
matt


>From: Morton K.Brussel <brussel4 at insightbb.com>
>To: Ricky Baldwin <baldwinricky at yahoo.com>
>CC: peace-discuss at lists.cu.groogroo.com
>Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] What do we do now?
>Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 21:50:00 -0500
>
>Thanks, Ricky, for your reasonable reply.
>
>If you read my note carefully, you will see that what disturbed me about 
>the Mahajan piece, what I called "nonsense", was his claim that those who 
>wish the defeat of the Bush junta are are harming the antiwar efforts. I 
>think I said that clearly. Mahajan, along with many others of the holier 
>than thou left, constantly trumpet the message that the election is a 
>diversion, that Kerry is not a "dimes worth of difference" different from 
>Bush, and that they don't really give a damn about who wins.  [Tell the 
>Spanish that elections don't mean anything!] I think these people are 
>cavalierly irresponsible. I am glad to hear that Francis Fox Piven is not 
>among them.
>
>As to whether our electoral politics is harming the antiwar effort, I have 
>no evidence whether it is or is not. So far as I can tell, AWARE's efforts 
>have not diminished because of the electoral campaign.  People come and 
>leave movements such as the antiwar movement---or P4---for various reasons, 
>and it is too simple to say that they have left because of a particular 
>reason. That there are not now 10 million people protesting, still, around 
>the world (or 200 on North Prospect) against U.S. aggressive and bloody 
>wars cannot be attributed to U.S. electoral politics.
>
>  I think that those who say that our electoral politics have hurt the 
>antiwar effort often have other oxes (oxen?) to grind, in particular that 
>they detest Kerry and would like to see him lose---"no loss" they would 
>say. [Nader is a special case. ]
>
>I admit to some hope, if not optimism, that some things might be better for 
>Iraq and foreign humanity more generally once the Bush junta is no longer 
>in power. It is a possibility, not a probablility, especially if the 
>antiwar movement maintains pressure. Kerry will not be ignorant of how much 
>his election is due to the antiwar sentiment. In any case, the issue is not 
>now resolvable.  Even if Kerry wins, we certainly will have to keep up our 
>protests and resistance, as you suggest, to U.S. imperial strategies. No 
>argument there!
>
>Mort
>
>On Oct 10, 2004, at 4:45 PM, Ricky Baldwin wrote:
>
>>
>>I'm not sure which part you think is nonsense, Mort,
>>but I think we've just said that it is important to
>>defeat Bush -- just not our ultimate goal.  I'm not
>>sure I would have said, as Mahajan does, that the
>>antiwar movement has "collapsed," but has certainly
>>lost a number of people.  And I think Ken is right
>>that if Kerry wins, we will lose even more of our
>>supporters even though our cause will be no less
>>urgent.
>>
>>That's not to hope that Kerry loses, of course, just
>>to point out the necessity of clarifying that a Kerry
>>win is not the ultimate goal of the antiwar movement
>>and that our demands remain the same in that event.
>>There is a grave danger in some of the rhetoric that
>>has bounced around the left, including this list,
>>about how much difference a Kerry win would really
>>mean (to the extent of claiming that the Sept 11
>>terrorist attacks might not have happened if Gore had
>>been president).
>>
>>Francis Fox Piven, by the way, would prefer that Nader
>>not be running.  She says we should defeat Bush and
>>then "raise hell" with Kerry.  And since you ask, she
>>suggests that to be effective the antiwar movement
>>would need to disrupt the flow of military supplies,
>>for example.
>>
>>I don't think we are ready for that, but that
>>shouldn't change our analysis of what's needed.  I
>>might imagine other ways, like blocking recruitment
>>efforts, but again I do not think we are there yet.
>>That's simply wat the history of movements teaches us,
>>according to Piven.
>>
>>Meanwhile, I think you can understand our frustration
>>with Kerry.  You are quite frustrated with some of us,
>>too.  I also get frustrated.  These are tense times.
>>But the work we are doing here is worth it, I think.
>>
>>Ricky
>>
>>--- "Morton K. Brussel" <brussel4 at insightbb.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>I think much of this is nonsense! What does Mahajan
>>>recommend aside
>>>from facile generalities? He seems to be saying that
>>>trying to defeat
>>>Bush isn't worth the effort, because it detracts
>>>from other antiwar
>>>activities; we must be more militant. Evidently, his
>>>mind doesn't
>>>encompass the possibility that people in the antiwar
>>>movement can do
>>>more than one thing at a time; they can march in
>>>demonstrations, make
>>>protests, throw sand in the system, and still
>>>work/want to defeat Bush
>>>in the election. Chomsky, Zinn and many others,
>>>evidently, according to
>>>Mahajan are deflected by meaningless electoral
>>>politics to the extent
>>>that they are rendered ineffective. As Nader has
>>>claimed.
>>>
>>>Moreover, I am disturbed that many of "us" seem far
>>>more intent upon
>>>castigating and ridiculing Kerry than in being
>>>concerned about another
>>>Bush term. I get the feeling they will feel (smug?)
>>>satisfaction if
>>>Kerry loses, because obviously he isn't their man,
>>>and in any case
>>>their mantra is "not a dimes worth of difference".
>>>This seems to be
>>>fashionable by a segment of what can be called the
>>>totally
>>>irresponsible, almost Machiavellian, left.
>>>
>>>Sorry for my venting, but that's the way I feel at
>>>this juncture. I
>>>cannot help but fear for the supreme court, nuclear
>>>warfare, women's
>>>rights, civil rights, and other issues which will
>>>put us all in danger
>>>for an undeterminable future with a new Bush term,
>>>and I am not looking
>>>forward to that possibility in the hopes that the
>>>revolution will
>>>finally arrive thereafter. The social advances In
>>>the U.S. in the 30's
>>>occurred while a Democratic administration was in
>>>office, and the reign
>>>of fascism occurred in Europe at that time came
>>>after the malaise and
>>>disintegration of the 20's.
>>>
>>>Apologies to Francis Fox Piven, whom I admire also,
>>>but what specific
>>>actions does she recommend beyond what people are
>>>already doing to
>>>"throw sand in the gears of the war machine"?
>>>
>>>MKB
>>>
>>>On Oct 9, 2004, at 3:36 PM, Ricky Baldwin wrote:
>>>
>>>>Well, we hope so, anyway.
>>>>
>>>>And I think Carl is right.  Mahajan has an
>>>excellent
>>>>point, although I think we will need to go a bit
>>>>further to have a noticeable impact.
>>>>
>>>>For example, I just interviewed the respected
>>>>sociologist Francis Fox Piven (Poor People's
>>>>Movements, The Politics of Turmoil, Why Americans
>>>>Don't Vote, etc.), who has made a life's work of
>>>>studying movements, as the subtitle of one of her
>>>>books says, "how they succeed, why they fail."
>>>>
>>>>She pointed out, among other things, that "...what
>>>>that movement did was express opinion.  They
>>>marched
>>>>in large numbers, they rallied, and it was a kind
>>>of
>>>>voting, voting in the streets.  I think a
>>>successful
>>>>antiwar movement has to act in ways that throw
>>>sand in
>>>>the gears of the war machine.  Resistance has to
>>>be
>>>>more serious."
>>>>
>>>>And in fact that is what her research shows, time
>>>and
>>>>again: opinion is one thing and it depends on
>>>whether
>>>>anyone cares about your opinion, but disruption is
>>>>impossible to ignore.
>>>>
>>>>Food for thought.
>>>>
>>>>Ricky
>>>>
>>>>--- jencart at mailstation.com wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Exactly.
>>>>>
>>>>>Plus lemme add that our protests might have an
>>>>>impact on Kerry.  The largest protests in history
>>>>>have had zero impact on Bush.
>>>>>
>>>>>Jenifer C.
>>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>>From: "C. G. Estabrook"
>>>>><galliher at alexia.lis.uiuc.edu>
>>>>>Sent: Oct 8, 2004 1:00 AM
>>>>>To: Peace-discuss at lists.cu.groogroo.com
>>>>>Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] What do we do now?
>>>>>
>>>>>Getting the Bush administration out of office is
>>>>>important, but not
>>>>>"irrespective of Kerry's positions and
>>>statements."
>>>>>The reductio ad
>>>>>absurdum is obvious: would voting against Bush
>>>still
>>>>>be appropriate if
>>>>>Kerry were a Nazi?  But of course he isn't, and
>>>on
>>>>>some matters (mostly
>>>>>domestic) the Democrat policies are to be
>>>preferred.
>>>>>Moreover, the
>>>>>election is a referendum on the Bush
>>>administration,
>>>>>and they shouldn't
>>>>>win it.
>>>>>
>>>>>But Mahajan is no fool. He makes some explicit
>>>>>suggestions of what we
>>>>>should be doing, given that (as Chomsky recently
>>>>>remarked) "elections are
>>>>>a matter of secondary significance: what's far
>>>more
>>>>>important is to build
>>>>>a democratic culture, in which they will be
>>>>>meaningful.  But they are not
>>>>>of zero significance.  In a swing state, anything
>>>>>but a vote for Kerry is
>>>>>in effect a vote for Bush.  Those who want to
>>>help
>>>>>give the Bush crowd a
>>>>>mandate can do so if they like, but they should
>>>not
>>>>>delude themselves
>>>>>about what they are doing."
>>>>>
>>>>>Mahajan writes, "Everything that happens in Iraq
>>>>>should build our base. We
>>>>>must mobilize against bombing of civilian areas
>>>and
>>>>>build our base. We
>>>>>must mobilize against torture and build our base.
>>>>>Right now, we must
>>>>>mobilize against Bush administration plans to
>>>>>manipulate the January
>>>>>elections in Iraq (and the upcoming election in
>>>>>Afghanistan). Any election
>>>>>held under military occupation is illegitimate.
>>>But
>>>>>we can't stop the
>>>>>elections in Iraq.  Thus, we have to mobilize to
>>>>>ensure that the
>>>>>elections, while remaining illegitimate, are as
>>>free
>>>>>and fair as possible.
>>>>>In the process, we bring into the movement people
>>>>>who believe in democracy
>>>>>but were unsure about the occupation; we may even
>>>>>derail plans to fix the
>>>>>elections."
>>>>>
>>>>>Allowing for the unlovely (and faintly
>>>oxymoronic)
>>>>>expression "build our
>>>>>base," we can still draw from this exhortation
>>>>>rather specific suggestions
>>>>>about what AWARE's media and publicity campaigns
>>>>>should be about this
>>>>>winter. There's in fact some interesting
>>>convergence
>>>>>on the overall goal:
>>>>>see the piece by the eminently middle-of-the-road
>>>>>Stanley Hoffman (as it
>>>>>happens, a former teacher of mine) in the current
>>>NY
>>>>>Review of Books ("Out
>>>>>of Iraq," http://www.nybooks.com/articles/17470).
>>>>>He says that the US
>>>>>must treat Iraq as De Gaulle did Algeria -- which
>>>>>would mean "giving up
>>>>>the less-talked-about but central US aim of
>>>turning
>>>>>Iraq into a
>>>>>US-dominated satellite, with American bases,
>>>>>American companies in charge
>>>>>of its oil, and a compliant regime" -- a position
>>>>>contrary to Kerry's too,
>>>>>of course, which we should be talking about.
>>>--CGE
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>On Wed, 6 Oct 2004, Morton K.Brussel wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>I find articles like this frustrating. As if
>>>>>getting Bush out of
>>>>>>office is not important, irrespective of Kerry's
>>>>>positions and
>>>>>>statements (There is only one way.) If Mahajan
>>>>>believes that he is a
>>>>>>fool.  Moreover, it is one thing to say what we
>>>>>all SHOULD be doing,
>>>>>>as outlined towards the end of his piece, but
>>>the
>>>>>main conundrum is
>>>>>>HOW to achieve what he recommends. He complains,
>>>>>but offers nothing on
>>>>>>this HOW question. Should we storm the White
>>>>>House, the local armory,
>>>>>>stop traffic, distribute pamphlets, write
>>>letters?
>>>>>What? People are
>>>>>>acting, contrary to his thesis. There is no
>>>>>collapse of the antiwar
>>>>>>movement so far as I can see, but some lack of
>>>>>focus because our
>>>>>>challenge now is how to change an ongoing
>>>>>situation, not how to
>>>>>>protest a specific event such as the start of an
>>>>>invasion.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>MKB
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>On Oct 6, 2004, at 12:31 PM, C. G. Estabrook
>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>[The following is the text of a radio
>>>commentary
>>>>>by Rahul Mahajan,
>>>>>>>whose blog Empire Notes is quite good.
>>>>>>>He seems to me here to make suggestions
>>>>>>>of the sort of thing AWARE should be doing this
>>>>>fall and winter. --CGE]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>	Collapse of the Antiwar Movement...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>>Peace-discuss mailing list
>>>>>Peace-discuss at lists.cu.groogroo.com
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>http://lists.cu.groogroo.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
>>>>>
>>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>>Peace-discuss mailing list
>>>>>Peace-discuss at lists.cu.groogroo.com
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>http://lists.cu.groogroo.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>__________________________________
>>>>Do you Yahoo!?
>>>>Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We
>>>finish.
>>>>http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>Peace-discuss mailing list
>>>>Peace-discuss at lists.cu.groogroo.com
>>>>
>>>
>>http://lists.cu.groogroo.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>__________________________________
>>Do you Yahoo!?
>>Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.
>>http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
>>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Peace-discuss mailing list
>Peace-discuss at lists.cu.groogroo.com
>http://lists.cu.groogroo.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss

_________________________________________________________________
FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar – get it now! 
http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/