"Regulated Resistance" - Is the Anti-War Movement Compromised?

[Newtopia]

"Regulated Resistance"
Is it possible to change the system when you are the system?
by Charles Shaw, Newtopia
April 27th, 2005

Does the American “anti-war movement.” really have the ability to bring about change when they are closely monitored, financed, and regulated by the same system they purport to oppose? (Pt.1 in a two-part series)

“In February of this year, United for Peace and Justice (UFPJ), a coalition of more than 800 peace and justice groups throughout the United States, held their second annual Assembly to hear and vote on proposals for a 2005 “action plan.” With the war in Iraq fast approaching its second anniversary, and the larger “War on Terror” crossing its third and half year, close to 500 delegates from 275 member groups traveled to St. Louis in the hopes that the “anti-war movement”—which emerged with unprecedented speed and size just prior to the US invasion of Iraq in spring of 2003—could be resuscitated. Despite impressive beginnings, the movement as a whole has yet to make any significant impact on US policy, or achieve any lasting public resonance. More disturbing is the fact that since Bush’s victory in November, it has gone completely MIA.”



FULL ARTICLE: http://www.newtopiamagazine.net/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=30&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0

[Newtopia]

1. .

:)

[Newtopia]

2. .

.

[Newtopia]

3. Hey

Appreciate the kind words. Spread the word around. And just you wait for Pt. 2! Hoo-whee, I aint making any friends for sure. ;)

[Newtopia]

9. .

,

[GreenInNC]

4. Hey there Charles

Sometimes you got to tell the King he has no clothes. Keep it coming.

[Newtopia]

5. They always say the truth hurts

this is one of those times

[Newtopia]

12. Thanks to you sir

:)

[K-W]

6. You dont change America's mind by asking politely.

We are so caught up in the backlash against radicalism in philosophy and action that we dont realize that its radicalism that works and attracts people. Its what has made movements for peace and justice so powerful in the past and in a cruel twist of fate, also what made the backlash so powerful.

In the end, when you force the issue of peace, you piss people off, and a minority gets extreme hatred for you, but the majority of people arent so twisted and havent interanalized militarism. But if you never force the issue, nothing will happen.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

7. Absolutely. Counting on politicians is fruitless.

The people have to lead for anything to get done. The vocal minority will become the majority only if we continue to force the issue. The civil rights movement, anti-Vietnam war movement, wasn't successful because of politicians but in spite of them.

[Newtopia]

8. Here's another comment

This is from the comments section on Newtopia (you are all welcome to go there too :) )

by Mike_Schaefer ([e-mail]) on Apr 26, 2005 - 09:34 PM
(User information | Send a message) http://www.stlimc.org
(IP: 198.209.226.132)
This I agree with:

"the Democratic Party is not particularly interested in peace. So long as the “anti-war movement” remains in bed with the Democratic Party, regardless of whatever dubious claims they make about the anti-war sentiments of “the rank and file” of the party, they will never be permitted to address the legitimacy of the Leviathan."

However, I think lobbying and direct action are not mutually exclusive. Also, I don't think the resolutions UFPJ or NION or ANSWER adopt mean squat. On a level of pure principle, I am unequivocally anti-imperialist, as should the rest of the anti-war movement be, but most U.S.ers will not resist because their aren't enough U.S. soldiers dying and the economic effects are being hidden through government borrowing. That doesn't mean we should wait and sit on our hands, just that we should have realistic expectations.

And not go at fellow progressive throats thinking "your Dem voting is holding back the revolution" or "your street takeovers are scaring away mainstream people."

[graphixtech]

26. Powerful article!

Great job of saying exactly what needed to be said. Especially appreciate
your calling them on their wimpy rejection of the modest 911Truth proposal.

Mustn't offend the 'delicate sensabilities' of the UFPJ puff leadership . . .

:hi:

[KoKo]

10. Excellent read for those of us who protested over and over against Iraq

Invasion. Much food for thought in this article.

Good to keep it kicked because it's got alot of competition out there on the Forums, today.

[Newtopia]

11. Consider this kicked

And I agree, this is of vital importance and needs to be really discussed by anyone who opposes the Leviathan.

if you don't know what the Leviathan is, please read. ;)

[KoKo]

19. Kick..........for the next day crowd.

[Newtopia]

20. Kick...

Again. Man, there is a lot in General Discussion.

[Doc Bottom]

13. Yep

The peace movement is so busy denouncing any member who might go so far as to block a street, or otherwise inconvienence anybody, that the whole business is rather gutted.

Resist! But don't make a fuss.

Heh.

[Newtopia]

14. Oh my

Aint that the trooof... :)

[Lilith Velkor]

15. Or denouncing meat eaters

Because if you oppress animals and oppose the war, yer a hypocrite.

Feh.

[Doc Bottom]

25. Oy, don't get me started

The vegan animal-rights crowd get so damn moralistic they're cutting their own throats.

They've already done a fine job of breaking the environmental movement -- the animal rights environmentalists are so busy hating on the hunters (who are, to a man, deeply interested in protecting wildlife and wilderness) that we now have AR "environmentalists" who spend more time denouncing meat-eating "conservationists" than actually working to protect habitat.

I once had a very charming conversation with one of this ilk. She informed me that it was indeed preferable to pave wildlife habitat and put up a Wal-Mart than to allow hunting, because with Wal-Mart, only one generation of animals would suffer and die. "It's better never to live at all than to suffer and die?" I said. "Yes," she said. I jumped up and hollered, "Whoopee! Then it's abortions and heroin for the lot of us!" and that was the end of that little encounter.

Ducks Unlimited and the Peregrine Fund have done a hell of a lot more for animals than PETA or the USHS.

[Lilith Velkor]

27. Abortions and heroin for all!

I'm adding that to my list for T-shirt designs, thanx.

And I'm sure the deer appreciate being hit by cars instead of shot :grr:

My favorite of this charming ilk is a tie between a "compassionate" cat-killer and the fellow who said that only vegan animals deserved to live. We shoulda started hunting these assholes a decade ago, and the terribly sad thing is that I'm only half kidding when I say this.

Meanwhile, they've thrown a rather large wrench in local anti-war organizing. And Iraqi children keep dying while they go on about the fucking chickens.

[Doc Bottom]

28. I want a t-shirt

with a picture of a spirochete on it, and the slogan, "Sex is unsantitary."

To drift off the topic. :)

[Lydia Leftcoast]

16. The biggest obstacle is people's desperate desire to believe

that their country "means well." :-(

[nolabels]

21. We are victims of our instincts and emotions

Relates back to the need to have resolve and security. The afternoon soaps, crime drama or news cycles on the screen keep this idea keyed into people. This is not a unique phenomena, in other countries they sometimes eat it up even worse. India is a prime example, they live and die for the drama.

[DerekG]

17. To tell you the truth, I don't even think many liberals are anti-empire

Seriously, just try and post a thread that makes the (correct) assertion that Clinton and Albright have as much Iraqi blood on their hands as Bush and Rice. Trust me, if the thread didn't sink like a stone, than it would be rife with messages containing the words "flamebait" and "troll."

Just try and suggest that perhaps Harry Truman didn't have the best interests of the American people in mind when he and his Cold War cadre set in stone the national security apparatus. I guarantee you that the same posters who (rightfully) decry this "War on Terror" would bend over backwards to defend the poisonous legacy of "Give 'em Hell" Harry.

I don't know what's more astounding: that liberals still believe in the Democratic Party, or that they still believe in "guns n' butter."



I swear, the only people who seem to know how this empire operates are either leftist radicals or anti-statists of the libertarian right.

[Newtopia]

18. You hit the nail on the head

The Romans invented, and the British (through the intercession of the Central Banks of Europe like the Bank of England (Rothschilds) perfected a concept known as "Divide and Rule". This almost flawless strategy kept indiginous populations perpatually divided and fighting each other, rather than recognizing they were being completely exploited by a ruling Oligarchy of the rich and powerful, and hence, rising up against them.

This dynamic was picked up by the American Empire and wielded since the end of WWII, and is in place today not only across the world but here at home.

Fundamentally, there is no difference between "Republicans" and "Democrats". We are all people, we all have families, almost all of us believe in god and country (in varying degrees of course), and we are all equally exploited, looted, and oppressed by our ruling Oligarchy, known as Corporations, the uberewalthy, and their elected official lackies.

Nothing will change in America until we recognize this and all of us Americans connect on a profoudly HUMAN level.

I also recommend reading this.


One State, Two State; Red State, Blue State: The Myth of a Divided America
April 26, 2005

BY NORMAN COUNCIL - We are invited on an almost daily basis to believe that America is divided. Speakers and writers as diverse as conservative Gertrude Himmelfarb (in her book One Nation, Two Cultures) and John Edwards (with his “two America’s” stump speech), are convinced and convincing in their assertions of this polarization.

FULL ARTICLE:
http://www.newtopiamagazine.net/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=29&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0

[IrateCitizen]

22. Conundrums and such facing UFPJ...

Charles, I think you hit on some pretty important points with this. I certainly know about many of the "inner workings" of UFPJ, and I'll just leave it at that for the time being without being more specific.

One of the dilemmas faced by a national organization by UFPJ is that it is a broad coalition. In order to defeat the war drive, member groups (for the most part) realize that we need to enlist the support of a broad constituency. Naturally, one of the downside effects of this is that it results in a general "watering down" of efforts so as to not offend the more "mainstream" participants or people/groups we're trying to enlist.

I appreciate that you brought up the banner, "We the People Say NO to the Bush Agenda". This came up in a conversation I had with another prominent member of UFPJ in which he expressed his problems with the banner. It should say, "We the People Say NO to the MILITARIST Agenda", or the "IMPERIALIST" agenda. What many either fail or refuse to realize is that the overall agenda, regardless of whether Bush or Kerry would have won, would not be all that much different.

Of course, that brings up the whole idea of ignoring reality, which a previous poster expressed quite succinctly in describing what happens here if you say that Clinton and Albright have blood on their hands vis a vis Iraq, or that Democrats have been just as complicit in the American imperialist adventure as Republicans, and continue to do so. The simple fact is that most liberals LIKE imperialism, even if they don't readily admit it. They like the benefits it brings in cheap oil (yes, even now) and more consumer goods than they could ever hope to use. They also like it from the standpoint that it gives them something to feel good about in their mundane and soul-crushing daily lives -- that they live in the country that is "Number one" in the world.

One of the efforts of UFPJ that I have felt positive about is that of trying to diffuse the mobilization efforts. It is easy for people to gather in NYC or SF and protest the war -- there, they are just an anonymous number. But to mobilize and organize a local demonstration is another matter -- it requires people to stand up in front of their friends and neighbors and state publicly their opinion and feelings. Of course, such efforts can also pay HUGE dividends in getting people to realize that they are justified in feeling negative toward this war.

Hell, this is the problem anytime you get to such large-scale projects. Gene Sharp has demonstrated so much in his works, such as Social Power and Political Freedom. The challenge is, how do you create autonomous, localized groups that can coordinate with each other on the level necessary to take on a centralized power structure in a day of media and message consolidation without compromizing the spirit of those localized groups? If you have an answer to this, I'd sincerely love to hear it, because I'm pretty much at a loss.

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[BeFree]

24. Extra point kick!

One: The Lynch-mob mentality of the American people after 9/11 has not nearly subsided enough for the likes of massive anti-war feelings to take hold. Hell, only 50% believe * lied about WMD.

Two: the Pro-war types do carry an intimidating force with them. They accept death for those who stand opposite their ilk. Clearly, it takes real fighters to confront the pro-war people, and those real fighters have, as stated, a terrorist label affixed to them, and have been shunned.

Three: The movement two years ago was bolstered by a feeling that we may just have been able to stop the invasion: that was a great motivating factor. That factor is gone, a new and improved (grin) motivation must surface in order for the movement to grow.

Peace.