[Peace-discuss] [Peace] This list is for brief announcements only
Ricky Baldwin
baldwinricky at yahoo.com
Thu Oct 21 12:48:59 CDT 2010
Let's not try to dodge the fact that AWARE folks have discussed this issue at a number of meetings and have consistently decided that the "peace" list is for announcements only, "peace-discuss" is for, like the name suggests, discussion.
At one time I was even given the task, at a well-attended meeting, of reminding people who send to the wrong list. A year or two later I had stopped doing this, and I was then asked to start up again. I have note been willing to do this job for some time, and I believe someone else did it for awhile, too. That person can speak up if they so choose.
But it's worth noting that this is not just an arbitrary 'Rule' for anarchists to resist along with corporate-government control of the world and its people. This is a purely organizational distinction agreed upon (repeatedly) at free and open meetings by autonomous human beings with the sole purpose of organizing information much as a person might designate one book shelf for Latin American history and another for African history.
It is no more oppressive than the Dewey Decimal System.
A number of AWARE supporters have expressed the desire to be informed of upcoming events they might actually be willing to attend without having their email clogged with discussion they are not at all interested in. They have given their email addresses or signed themselves up for one list or another with the understanding that the lists are organized as described above.
Emails of this type do appear on the "peace" list of course at times accidentally. Most people have been very gracious when informed of the organization of lists, even apologetic. All of us get excited about things people "need to know about" but to insist on sending discussion to the announce list after it has been made clear repeatedly is tantamount to unsolicited "junk mail" or "spam".
The effect is ultimately the same: people take steps to stop receiving the unwanted messages - the drop off lists, block email addresses, etc. And what has been achieved? If we knock on someone's door to discuss an issue and they tell us they do not want to speak to us, is it really useful to stand on the step arguing about it?
But these are people who ARE interested in anti-war events, events they might ATTEND. It's one thing to lose members/supporters because of taking a principled stand on an important issue: human rights, war, poverty, etc. But if AWARE drives supporters away just because they don't want a dozen emails a day full of bickering, the effort has decreased its numbers, and for what purpose?
Because factionalism is more fun than organizing is valued?
I suppose it works in one way: if we drive away enough people in our immediate vicinity we can always claim the whole movement has fallen apart, lost its nerve, been co-opted, etc., etc.
My 2c.
Ricky Baldwin
"Speak your mind even if your voice shakes." - Maggie Kuhn
--- On Thu, 10/21/10, C. G. Estabrook <galliher at illinois.edu> wrote:
From: C. G. Estabrook <galliher at illinois.edu>
Subject: Re: [Peace] [Peace-discuss] This list is for brief announcements only
To: "carol inskeep" <carolinskeep at yahoo.com>, "Gregg Gordon" <ggregg79 at yahoo.com>
Cc: "Peace List" <peace at lists.chambana.net>, "Peace-discuss" <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
Date: Thursday, October 21, 2010, 11:48 AM
Discussions of this nature belong in the election campaign.
---- Original message ----
>Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 09:38:24 -0700 (PDT)
>From: carol inskeep <carolinskeep at yahoo.com>
>Subject: [Peace-discuss] This list is for brief announcements only
>To: Gregg Gordon <ggregg79 at yahoo.com>, "C. G. Estabrook"
<galliher at illinois.edu>
>Cc: Peace List <peace at lists.chambana.net>, Peace-discuss <peace-
discuss at lists.chambana.net>
>
>Discussions of this nature belong on Peace Discuss.
>
>--- On Wed, 10/20/10, C. G. Estabrook <galliher at illinois.edu>
>wrote:
>
> From: C. G. Estabrook <galliher at illinois.edu>
> Subject: Re: [Peace] [Peace-discuss] Fw: Money Can't Vote
> To: "Gregg Gordon" <ggregg79 at yahoo.com>
> Cc: "Peace List" <peace at lists.chambana.net>,
> "Peace-discuss" <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
> Date: Wednesday, October 20, 2010, 11:09 PM
>
> First, Iraq and Afghanistan are both part of what the
> Pentagon calls "The Long War" (for oil) in the Mideast. So
> far, the US has killed a million people in Iraq under
> Clinton (whose Secretary of State said that the tens of
> thousands of dead children were "worth it"); a million
> under Bush; and apparently hundreds of thousands in AfPak
> under Bush and his third (Obama) term.
>
> That falls short of the perhaps 4 million we killed in SE
> Asia, but of course Obama's escalated murders in SW Asia
> are in no way justified by being fewer in number than
> Kennedy-Johnson-Nixon's in Vietnam.
>
> It's difficult to determine when the Long War begins, but
> it takes a tick up in the Carter administration when Carter
> (and Obama's) adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski sends Osama bin
> Laden and friends into Afghanistan (before the Russian
> invasion) "to give the Russians a Vietnam of their own," as
> he said at the time, in the most expensive CIA operation to
> date.
>
> If a Republican administration after 2012 brings Obama's
> AfPak war to an end, then we'll have a third example of a
> Democratic war concluded by Republicans in as many
> generations. But that may not be likely. The news suggests
> that the Obama administration is looking to expand the war
> with an attack on Pakistan and/or Iran. It certainly isn't
> looking to abandon the world's greatest energy-producing
> region.
>
> Control of Mideast energy resources has been a cornerstone
> of US foreign policy since 1945. Obama is simply lying when
> he says the war is to "stop terrorism" - it obviously
> increases terrorism - but he has to lie, because the only
> Constitutional authority he has to wage war in the Mideast
> is Congress' "Authorization for the Use of Military Force"
> of September 2001 - which is directed against terrorism.
>
> Something positive to do: years ago, there was a great
> debate in America, "How do we get out of Vietnam?" The
> best answer was given by Herb Caen: "Ships and planes."
> Load up the troops and bring them home. The Russians did -
> and survived and prospered from the end of their war.
>
> Eventually we did, but it took two presidents' being driven
> from office and (even more important) a revolt of the
> American conscript army to do it.
>
> Regards, CGE
>
> On 10/20/10 7:15 PM, Gregg Gordon wrote:
>
> So I conclude from your statement that you don't consider
> either Iraq or Afghanistan to be "major" wars. So why
> are you so worked up about them? I think you're just
> still mad at Lyndon Johnson.
>
> And please, don't accuse me of being some kind of racist
> who doesn't mind us murdering brown people. That is so
> lame. It's just that not all of us see the world in as
> simple terms as you seem to. Simple solutions are nice,
> but they're mainly for the simple-minded.
>
> All I'm saying is if you're so gung-ho on stopping the
> war, why don't you come up with something positive to do
> (as opposed to sniping from the sidelines) that might
> help get us closer to that goal? We'll all get behind
> you.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------
>
> From: C. G. Estabrook <galliher at illinois.edu>
> To: Gregg Gordon <ggregg79 at yahoo.com>
> Cc: Jenifer Cartwright <jencart13 at yahoo.com>; Peace List
> <peace at lists.chambana.net>; Peace-discuss
> <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
> Sent: Wed, October 20, 2010 5:10:40 PM
> Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Fw: Money Can't Vote
> You are aware, are you not, that America's major wars
> since WWII - called by synecdoche "Korea" and "Vietnam" -
> were started by Democratic administrations and ended by
> Republican administrations. Since the current Democratic
> administration has greatly expanded the killing in AfPak,
> it's hard to argue that they're going to reverse their
> policies. Voting for them is an acquiescence to those
> policies.
>
> To say of Obama and the Democrats, "Let them kill some
> Asians, because they might do some good someplace else,"
> is at best a counsel of despair, if not an outright
> criminal attitude. Particularly when it seems that
> they're doing precisely the wrong things elsewhere, too -
> not surprisingly, because they're working for the owners
> of the banks, the insurance companies, the oil and
> construction companies, etc. --CGE
>
> On 10/20/10 4:48 PM, Gregg Gordon wrote:
>
> Maybe because there are other important issues that she
> does agree with him on. The only way you're going to
> find a candidate you're in 100% agreement with is to
> run for office. If support for the war is an absolute
> deal breaker for you, fine. Not everybody sees it that
> way. But if you think the war will end sooner if more
> Republicans get elected, I think you're out of your
> mind.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------
>
> From: C. G. Estabrook <galliher at illinois.edu>
> To: Jenifer Cartwright <jencart13 at yahoo.com>
> Cc: Peace List <peace at lists.chambana.net>;
> Peace-discuss <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
> Sent: Wed, October 20, 2010 4:33:52 PM
> Subject: Re: [Peace] [Peace-discuss] Fw: Money Can't
> Vote
> This guy supports the war. I can't see why anyone on an
> anti-war list would contribute to him.
>
> On 10/20/10 4:28 PM, Jenifer Cartwright wrote:
>
> Another request for help...
> I love this guy!
> --Jenifer
> --- On Wed, 10/20/10, Rep. Alan Grayson
> <alangrayson at graysonforcongress.com> wrote:
>
> +------------------+
> |CallforGrayson.com|
> | |
> |[IMG] |
> | |
> |Make 10 calls now!|
> +------------------+
>
> Dear Jenifer,
>
> This election is about the people standing against
> corporate special interests, which are trying to
> bury me with lying ads because they know I can’t
> be bought. But money can’t vote – people can.
>
> This week is the first week of Early Vote, which
> means people in Central Florida are voting right
> now.
>
> Getting our supporters to the polls now could make
> up our winning margin, and that's why we need you
> calling supporters and asking them to vote.
>
> You can start calling whenever you like, but we
> really need people to start calling at 4 p.m.
> Eastern Time.
>
> Can you sign up for a shift today from 4-6 p.m. ET,
> or this evening 6-8 p.m. ET?
>
> We'll give you suggestions on what to say, and a
> reporting tool so it's easy to let us know how it's
> going.
>
> Thank you.
>
> Truth,
>
> Alan Grayson
>
> P.S. -- If you don't have time today, please sign
> up to make calls on another day between now and
> Election Day, November 2. Every voter you talk to
> will make a difference.
>
> Sign up now.
>
> Paid for and Authorized by the Committee to Elect
> Alan Grayson
>
> empowered by Salsa
> Web Bug from
>
> http://salsa.mydccc.org/dia/TrackImage?key=29044283
>
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss
>
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss
>
> -----Inline Attachment Follows-----
>
> _______________________________________________
> Peace mailing list
> Peace at lists.chambana.net
> http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace
>________________
>_______________________________________________
>Peace-discuss mailing list
>Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
>http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss
_______________________________________________
Peace mailing list
Peace at lists.chambana.net
http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/attachments/20101021/a173ce7a/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Peace-discuss
mailing list