[Peace-discuss] Re almost anti-war

[Dan Schreiber]

I don't want to belabor this too much, but I don't believe MoveOn advocated
for the Iraq war, and is now concerned about saving face because of it.  

MoveOn seems similar to me to the half a dozen other
liberal/progressive/leftist organizations that I get email from.  I remember
them organizing a bunch of vigils when Cindy Sheehan first broke onto the
national scene.  It may be that their primary focus is electing Democrats,
but that shouldn't disqualify them from being part of the antiwar movement.

This isn't to defend MoveOn against criticism that they are too cautious or
mainstream, although that doesn't bother me if it is true.  I just wish we
could join with natural allies, rather than attack them for not being as
aggressive as we want them to be.  If there is to be a long term peace
movement in this country that sustains itself, we need a bigger tent, not a
smaller one. 

Dan



> -----Original Message-----
> From: peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net [mailto:peace-discuss-
> bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of David Green
> Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2006 11:40 AM
> To: Bob Illyes; peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Re almost anti-war
> 
> I think that part of the motivation might be that some
> of us would like to distinguish among those who oppose
> the war on pragmatic grounds (it didn't work), in
> contrast to those who opposed it on principled grounds
> (it was wrong). The former are trying to save face,
> and are more concerned with the fortunes of liberalism
> and the Democratic Party. The latter are concerned
> with setting an example that will prevent future wars,
> unlikely to be opposed by the former when push comes
> to shove at the New York Times. I think that this is a
> legitmate motivation for those of us who want an
> antiwar movement that will be able to sustain itself
> for future challenges. In terms of vision and
> strategy, MoveOn is not part of the antiwar movement.
> It's concerned about electing Democrats.
> 
> David Green
> 
> --- Bob Illyes <illyes at uiuc.edu> wrote:
> 
> > You're exactly right, Dan. The anti-war community is
> > being
> > serious damaged by people who think that if you
> > don't exactly
> > agree with them, you're a traitor to the cause.
> >
> > It is always worth asking who folks are working for
> > when such
> > conflict occurs. During Vietnam, people were paid to
> > promote
> > fighting inside the anti-war community. When peace
> > advocates
> > are at war with each other, their behavior is
> > inherently
> > contradictory, and one must question their
> > motivations.
> >
> > Bob
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Peace-discuss mailing list
> > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> >
> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
> >
> 
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss