Re: [Peace-discuss] Convergence of the [independent] left and the R[ƎVO˩]UTIONARY right

Sun Oct 26 17:38:05 CDT 2008

I love these metaphors, Wayne -- very clever!! 

Friends,
The problem as I see it is that when members of disparate groups come together to focus on the issues where there's agreement -- e g ending the war(s) -- it can become a problem when a) the means for acheiving ends are markedly different, or b) when individuals from disparate groups try (intentionally or otherwise) to impose fringe views on the group. I think this is what some peace groups ran into when coordinating rallies w/ ANSWER, and it definitely weakened the overall peace effort. AWARE is definitely not in that league, but even (especially?!) small groups (like AWARE) can be destroyed by factions and in-fighting w/in the group. So I think it's important that we focus on what unites (the majority of) us, and pull together to accomplish the things we (well, most of us!) believe in. All things considered, I think AWARE is doing a pretty good job.
 --Jenifer

--- On Fri, 10/24/08, E. Wayne Johnson <ewj at pigs.ag> wrote:

From: E. Wayne Johnson <ewj at pigs.ag>
Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Convergence of the [independent] left and the R[ƎVO˩]UTIONARY right
To: "Ricky Baldwin" <baldwinricky at yahoo.com>
Cc: "Peace Discuss" <peace-discuss at anti-war.net>
Date: Friday, October 24, 2008, 11:32 AM

Getting people to come together can be a bit like herding cats.

But one has understand the difference between managing cats and cattle (or sheep).

Sheep are easily managed and great at groupthink but they are only dimly aware of their surroundings.

Activated sheep (cats) know what's going on but are not so easily managed.

Ya sure cant drive cats through a gate, but they can be drawn to something they all want.

The big picture issue as I see it, is that "we" need a large enough critical mass of support and infiltration toward
anti-war and related ideas that "they" can't possibly ignore us like they have grown accustomed to do.

Ricky Baldwin wrote: 

I think this "convergence of left and right" has been a compelling symbolism for some time, and not always as well-intentioned as this (e.g. fascism, National Socialism in particular).  I think it's worthwhile in the sense that disparate movements can cooperate when they agree - sometimes, but it's difficult to generalize this kind of thing.  The particulars matter.

I think we should welcome the fact of diversity in the anti-war movement.  Our protests, for example, have always been open, and all attempts to regulate them have ultimately failed.  That's something to be proud of.  (Our meetings are a different story, perhaps for another time.)  And when Carl and others point out conservative dissent, dissent within the military or intelligence hierarchy or among the troops or anywhere else that the uninformed might not expect to find it, it's a great thing.  It's useful in literature, on signs, in letters to the editor, public discussion, anywhere.  I was glad to see Ron Paul supporters join AWARE protests, meetings, etc., and I did think Paul's popularity was - in part - one more indication of growing anti-war sentiment in white "Middle America" - among other things.

A public forum with someone from the Ron Paul camp, a Green, and a socialist of some variety, talking about different reasons to oppose the war, would probably be useful, just for example.  This kind of cooperation can often be productive.

On the other hand, 

I happen to think there are probably very few of us who think we should do this kind of thing all the time. 

 Ricky Baldwin

"Only those who do nothing make no mistakes." - Peter Kropotkin 

From: David Green <davegreen84 at yahoo.com>
To: E. Wayne Johnson <ewj at pigs.ag>
Cc: Peace Discuss <peace-discuss at anti-war.net>
Sent: Friday, October 24, 2008 8:09:10 AM
Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Convergence of the [independent] left and the R[ƎVO˩]UTIONARY right

Why are we buying into mainstream constructs of far left and far right? For that matter, why are we buying into the mainstream definition of mainstream? Which "far" stands for democracy? Which is willing to listen to the people rather than doctrine?

DG

From: E. Wayne Johnson <ewj at pigs.ag>
To: Peace-discuss <peace-discuss at anti-war.net>
Sent: Friday, October 24, 2008 12:59:30 AM
Subject: [Peace-discuss] Convergence of the [independent] left and the R[ƎVO˩]UTIONARY right

During the debate tonight Ralph Nader mentioned the Convergence of the Left and the Right.

I dont have his exact words here before me but my interpretation is that the activist movements among the
progressive (left if you will) and the libertarian (right, but not the neocon right) bring convergence on many issues.

Chuck Baldwin is a Christian and protege' of Ron Paul and is about as conservative and libertarian as anyone can be.

It was Nader who remarked how they actually agree on so many issues and brought up the notion of convergence of right and left.

Interestingly the notorious criminal "mind" of the neocons, Bloody Bill Kristol, also noted several months ago that the far left and the far right
"meet" with each other and disagree with the policies of the neoconservatives.

Ron Szoke addressed a similar notion on one of the AOTA programs, something along the lines that people who
are intellectually honest and informed will agree more than they disagree.

There are issues of definition of terms, language, etc. and there are hot-button issues on which the Progressives and the R3volutionaries
disagree, but close inspection will reveal that there is diversity of ideology and background among the members of each group but
somehow they manage to find one another and self-assemble.

It is truly a good thing if we can manage to set aside the areas about which we disagree  or have difficulty in communicating about,
and focus on melding and networking the forces of groups promoting the doctrine of goodness.  Most of the time
it's pretty easy to decide.  War is bad. Corporatism is bad.  Social injustices are bad.  Police state is bad.  Poverty sucks.
The MSM sucks. Commercialized repetitive mediocrity sucks.

Peace is good.  Cottage industries and personal innovations and small shops are great.  Getting along with one another is wonderful.
Sharing is cool.  It's more fun when we share with our friends.  Books and videos and computers are good.  Independent  media outlets
are essential to our well-being.

There are literally thousands and thousands of patriots on the r3volutionary right who believe in most of what the progressives stand for and they
are networked and well organized.  None of the ills which have caused progressives and patriots to organize themselves are going to go
away when the Bush regime leaves office.

There is a tremendous opportunity for broad-based coalition building around key and vital issues like t3h war, the police state and other issues,
provided that we are able to lay aside as yet unresolved differences.

Captivity in one ancient sense in the Aramaic dialects meant a splitting or dividing.  Thus when prisoners from an army were captured, the sense was that
they had been split off from the core army.  The same root term is used to describe the splitting of a large stream into smaller streams as the flow
goes around rocks, sand bars, etc that divide and separate the streams.  Likewise the same Aramaic root describes the division of a flame into tongues of
flame.    That information elucidates an encouraging non-zionist reading of Psalm 126:

When the LORD turned again the captivity of Zion, we were like them that dream.
Then was our mouth filled with laughter, and our tongue with singing: then said they among the heathen, The LORD hath done great things for them.
The LORD hath done great things for us; whereof we are glad.
Turn again our captivity, O LORD, as the streams in the south.
They that sow in tears shall reap in joy.
He that goeth forth and weepeth, bearing precious seed, shall doubtless come again with rejoicing, bringing his sheaves with him.

Reading this with sense of the turning again the captivity as a re-uniting of the enlightened and awakened, reuniting the
divided streams into a single mighty river.  Check a map, they streams unite as they move south, and in the case of Ps126, the
united streams are flowing into a desert land.

_______________________________________________
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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/archive/peace-discuss/attachments/20081026/4f6d5e3f/attachment.htm