[Peace-discuss] Obama and the anti-war movement

Sat Aug 27 14:41:14 CDT 2005

Identity Politics: Since this is something that so clearly differentiates 
the American Left from the Left in most other countries, I believe that it 
must have a role in explaining the feeble state of affairs here.
Lefty politics in the United States boil down primarily to not what one does 
nor believes, but what one says or looks like: and whether it fits a 
stringent script of what is allowable (or even cool...)

One in a long list of examples: Hunter S. Thompson was widely shunned by the 
American Left for being a critic of PC-politics and for being a gun 
advocate. He didn't fit the scripted identity perfectly, so thus was written 
off despite being one real institutional pain in the ass to Richard Nixon 
and the cultural cleansing of successive conservative administrations.

1968 was an important turning point, and can probably be read as partially 
"where the left went wrong." As syndicalists and situationists were flirting 
with control of the Parisian state apparatus,, "radicals" in the US were 
experimenting with acid and long hair. The Americans weren't talking about 
struggle against the state and business interests: their focus was cultural 
revolution.

The slippery slope was then in place: from there on "cool" has been the goal 
of budding Leftist children. But it wasn't just the radicals who wanted to 
be "cool," the parties in power would love for an opportunity to align 
themselves with this all-powerful identity. Over time, monied interests 
fully took control of the minions, as now "cool" is handed down by the 
corporate thugs in charge...largely emanating from that ever godly presence, 
MTV.

Identity Politics run completely contrary to the goals of the Left, which 
should be understood as greater democratization and economic equality. PC is 
one way to seem "cool" at UFPJ conferences and the like. But if we actually 
want to liberate Iraqis from the American yoke, it might require being a bit 
more innovative than PC allows.

cheers,
mer

>From: "Robert Dunn" <prorobert8 at hotmail.com>
>To: galliher at uiuc.edu, peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
>Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Obama and the anti-war movement
>Date: Sat, 27 Aug 2005 15:21:12 +0000
>
>
>
>
>
>Carl, i for one, am in full agreement with you. It seems that the PC 
>liberals are so adept about not offending anyone that is not a White 
>Heterosexual Male is inhibiting actual critical discussion and inquiry. So, 
>if someone does not like what you have to hear, instead of coming up with a 
>logical, rational counterargument or syllogism, they just go into ad 
>hominem attacks with McCarthyite charges of racism, sexism, homophobia, 
>anti-Semitism, etc. when i attended the UFPJ conference in Chicago back in 
>2003, i was astonished on how they spent an entire half day bickering over 
>"representation." A pro peace conference turned into a charade of political 
>correctness and fights over "identity" quotas in the leadership. Carl, this 
>is one of the reasons why the "Left" irritates me. Instead of having a 
>unified theme or goal, more time is spent on petty identity politics, Maybe 
>that
>is why the "PaleoCons" seem more appealing to me right now. What can save 
>the "Left" is to unify, judge individuals as individuals, and give 
>criticism when its due, and praise when its due. Stop with this constant 
>white heterosexual male confessionals that are meaningless when you have a 
>more important task ahead of you, stopping the NeoCon globalists! You work 
>on getting them out of the liberal side, ill work on getting them out of 
>the Conservative movement. I am reading Pat Buchanans,"Where the Right Went 
>Wrong." It talks about the NeoCon takeover of the Conservative movement. I 
>wish someone on the Left could write an expose on "Where the Left Went 
>Wrong." Because, im seeing both sides being hijacked by the same 
>"anti-Christ" if you will permit the expression. What is interesting, is 
>that locally here in the Inland Empire of Southern California, the John 
>Birch Society is sounding more anti-war then when Robert Welch first 
>started.
>Yes, the John Birch Society while still very secretive, is a part of the 
>anti-war right, same with New Right founders Paul Weyrich, Phyliss Schlafly 
>sp?, and even some members of the "Christian Right" are critical of the 
>NeoCons.
>Regards,
>Robert
>
>
>
>
>From:  "C. G. Estabrook" <galliher at uiuc.edu>
>To:  Peace Discuss <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
>Subject:  Re: [Peace-discuss] Obama and the anti-war movement
>Date:  Fri, 26 Aug 2005 17:41:23 -0500
> >"...we need to treat black politicians differently than white
> >politicians..."
> >
> >That's dangerous, Al.  Are you really saying that we should
> >say to Obama, "Look, your views on the war are as bad as the
> >typical white Democratic senator, but since you're black, we
> >won't condemn them quite so clearly"?  That's patronizing, if
> >not hypocritical or worse.
> >
> >And where does it stop?
> >   --to Hillary: "Look, your views on the war are as bad as the
> >typical male Democratic senator, but since
>you're a woman, we
> >won't condemn them quite so clearly"?
> >   --to Joe Lieberman: "Look, your views on the war are as bad
> >as the typical gentile Democratic senator, but since you're
> >Jewish, we won't condemn them quite so clearly"?
> >
> >I suppose we could concentrate on (while male gentile) Richard
> >"The Troops are Nazis" Durbin, as the guy in the DI called him
> >this morning.  --CGE
> >
> >
> >---- Original message ----
> > >Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2005 16:37:23 -0500
> > >From: Alfred Kagan <akagan at uiuc.edu>
> > >Subject: [Peace-discuss] Obama
> > >To: peace-discuss at chambana.net
> > >
> > >Of course, individuals are empowered to write whatever they
> >like in
> > >their own names, but when it comes to an AWARE position, I am
> >sure most
> > >of
>us want to be more deliberate. We have already got quite a
> >bit of
> > >feedback on how we approached the Obama event, and I have
> >participated
> > >in several very useful and self-critical discussions.  I am
> >looking
> > >forward to further discussion at our meeting on Sunday night.
> > >
> > >I think we are very lucky that several members of the
> >African-American
> > >community have come forward to tell us about their reactions
> >to the
> > >event.  We need to pay attention and digest these perceptions.
> > >Immediate defensive reactions can't serve our purposes.  We
> >need to
> > >seriously think about how we get to where we want to go, that
> >is, we
> > >need to find ways to reach people who may be receptive to our
> >politics
> > >but
>don't read what we read, watch what we watch, and discuss
> >what we
> > >discuss all the time.  Our own perceptions of how we organize
> >are
> > >limited. Constructive criticism from outside can be quite
> >valuable.
> > >
> > >I think we have already learned that the African-American
> >community
> > >sees Obama very differently than most of us in AWARE.   Obama
> >is seen
> > >as an advocate for African-Americans on domestic issues.  I
> >haven't
> > >carefully studied his record, but I imagine there is good
> >reason for
> > >this perception.  Even if he doesn't have much of a record
> >yet, he does
> > >talk the talk and he is convincing.  He gives a good speech.
> >  He is
> > >seen as a bit of hope rather than
>politics as usual.
> > >
> > >If we are going to be serious about our anti-racism work, we
> >need to
> > >understand these perceptions and build our message around
> >what folks
> > >are thinking.  I am not suggesting that we change our
> >opinions, I am
> > >suggesting that we need to organize better.  We need to
> >clearly state
> > >our anti-racist views at the same time we advocate our anti-war
> > >positions.  We need to show some respect for Obama's domestic
> >agenda
> > >and advocacy for the black community at the same time we try to
> > >influence him to change his foreign policy positions.  We
> >need to
> > >remind him of his anti-war position before the war, and urge
> >him to
> > >reconsider.  As a politician, he should
>not want to be too
> >far behind
> > >his constituency for a long period of time.  I don't think we
> >should be
> > >calling him a warmonger, rather we should be trying to engage
> >him in a
> > >productive dialog to show him the winds of change.
> > >
> > >To sum up, we need to be sensitive to the perceptions of the
> >black
> > >community.  To be taken seriously by the black community, we
> >need to
> > >treat black politicians differently than white politicians.
> >We need to
> > >clearly state our anti-racist values in the course of our
> >work.  We
> > >need to forthrightly criticize in a constructive way, with
> >the ultimate
> > >aim of changing Obama's and others' foreign policy positions.
> >  We need
> > >to engage black
>politicians, not beat them up.
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Peace-discuss mailing list
> >Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> >http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
>
>

>_______________________________________________
>Peace-discuss mailing list
>Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
>http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss

_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! 
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/