If we don't like ANSWER's roll in the peace movement

[dsc]

then we need to put in the work ANSWER puts in so they aren't there anymore. ANSWER gets the permits, organizes the marches etc. This isn't a trivial undertaking. Once they do that they are going to get to run the speakers, it is that simple. If we don't like that, then we need to get the permits, organize the marches, etc. It really is that simple.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

1. Role

[meegbear]

2. Maybe they should make better rolls

Pillsbury is so corporate.

[Kolesar]

4. ha ha ha. That joke was played 10 minutes ago.

[meegbear]

9. I fell off my dinosaur when I first heard it

[Kolesar]

3. UFPJ was "the other organizer" for 9/24

...but they somehow decided to distance themselves due to disagreements (on speakers, I suppose). It was those same issues that led to flame war in a local group when discussing the rally. Someone you know from Geneva was in the middle of that row.

I watched most of the rally but tuned out and found something better to do by the end when they sent an endless series of speakers with brief and unfocused speeches up to the microphone. What did I miss?

[murdoch]

20. The real story on UFPJ

The march was ANSWER's idea. UFPJ has not organized an explicitly anti-war demonstration since I can't remember when. When ANSWER announced the march, UFPJ said it would do something in DC on the same day as well. I wouldn't say UFPJ decided to distance themselves due to something, UFPJ was never close enough to distance themselves to begin with.

UFPJ is the only other coalition that exists of any size. But it is too in the sway of people whose only thought is the next election, or also DLC DINO types. So it is rare for them to have the initiative to organize a large, explicitly anti-war demonstration.

So there we have it - ANSWER which has the problems people have noted, but have the work ethic and initiative to do these demonstrations. Then we have UFPJ, which has a larger base, but is too in the sway under the Joe Lieberman wing of the Democratic party which doesn't want anti-war demonstrations.

[tlsmith1963]

5. I'm Suspicious of ANSWER

When did they come into existence? Where do they get their money? To me they seem like a parody of what liberals are supposed to be, which makes me suspicious that someone like Rove may really be behind them. Hear me out. The neocons need a way to whip their followers into a frenzy against us. What better way than to come up with an organization that represents every "horrible" liberal cliche in the book? I mean it--we need to find out more about ANSWER.

Tammy

[tocqueville]

6. that's the people behind answer

Steering Committee:
IFCO/Pastors for Peace
Free Palestine Alliance - U.S.
Haiti Support Network
Partnership for Civil Justice - LDEF
Nicaragua Network
Alliance for Just and Lasting Peace in the Phillippines
Korea Truth Commission
Muslim Student Association - National
Kensington Welfare Rights Union
Mexico Solidarity Network
Party for Socialism and Liberation
Middle East Children's Alliance


The Party for Socialism and Liberation is a Marxist-Leninist political party in the United States that was formed in 2004 as the result of a split within the ranks of the Workers World Party. The San Francisco, Los Angeles, and Washington, D.C. branches of WWP left almost in their entirety to form the PSL, which appears to have experienced significant growth since.

The main publication of the Party for Socialism and Liberation, which reflects their political perspective, is their magazine, Socialism and Liberation. It is published monthly and can be obtained from a variety of bookstores throughout the United States, as well as through PSL offices.

The party is a fierce supporter of the government of Cuba, and while a critic of the current Chinese government, the party views the Chinese Revolution and Cultural Revolution favorably.

The PSL is also a member of the steering committee of the A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition.

WWP :

Although in origin a Trotskyist group, the WWP describes itself as Marxist-Leninist. WWP continues to make available the writings of many Communists including Trotsky, Stalin, and Mao. This combination of influences is unusual among left-wing parties. Many Trotskyist organizations seek out international affiliations, but WWP has organized solely in the United States.

The WWP agrees with Trotsky's description of pre-1991 Russia as being a "degenerated workers' state" and extend that description to countries such as Cuba, North Korea and China. Far more often, members of the party use the term socialist to describe such states, and they often support these states more energetically than do the orthodox Communist parties. Similarly, they support countries which they see as victims of American imperialism such as Iraq or Libya, but do not describe these state as being socialist. For an article on such states, see this. For an article on the party's opinion on the Tiananmen Square protests of 1989, see this. The WWP has defended political leaders such as Slobodan Miloševiæ and Saddam Hussein.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Workers_World_Party

[mcscajun]

8. Following one of the links from the Wiki article gets you this...

...I'm taking it with a grain of salt, as the group hosting the page has their own ax to grind. Still, it's worth taking into account. Emphasis mine.

International A.N.S.W.E.R. is not the answer. That is the conclusion which has been reached by the majority of the American anti-war movement after two years of ANSWER's efforts to "lead" the American anti-war and peace movements. ANSWER bills itself as a coalition, but it is nothing of the sort. ANSWER is a front group organized by Stalinists associated with the Workers World Party. ANSWER has led the anti-war movement around in circles for two years, continuing its practice of organizing safe protests which promote the organization, but do nothing to slow down the war or even bring us one day closer to abolishing the U.S. war machine. What's more, scarce movement resources have been diverted into ANSWER's organization, which has only helped promote the authoritarian politics of the WWP. ANSWER has squandered movement resources on symbolic protests in Washington and San Francisco which every seasoned activist can tell you are a waste of time. ANSWER isn't interested in ending any war--they want to be in control of any new social change movements that grow in the United States.

(snip)

The IAC are like the "Borg" of the Left. They always want to be friends with you and they want you to sign onto their projects. They get the momentum going for their projects by creating deceptive lists of endorsers and then they use this to manipulate other groups to sign on. A critical mass develops behind their event, which ends up being big enough to give the IAC the credibility that it is really interested in. As one activist recently explained:

"The IAC made a point of contacting many groups to sign on to International ANSWER. They immediately contacted various groups in the New York area for support and got it. They got folks as individuals to sign on and listing their organization (for informational purposes) which gives the illusion that those groups were for ANSWER even if those groups hadn't had time to even make a decision yet. They were willing to have anyone sign on, no litmus test of political principles required. Pacifists groups like the Jonah Catholic Worker House in Baltimore, or WWP's ideological rivals in the Freedom Road Socialist Party. For each name they got added to their list of endorsers, that gave them more clout as being the first big demonstration against the war."

(snip)

The IAC is also known for the timidity of its protests, which are typically permitted, symbolic affairs that involve endless hours of speakers and a permitted march. The IAC actively discourages all forms of direct action, including civil disobedience. The IAC actively participates and cooperates with the police at all stages of protest organizing. One of their frequent tactics is to take out permits for all the public spaces that other protest groups might be using for a large mass action. They then play "permit broker" in order to gain influence among other protesters.

much more here: http://www.infoshop.org/texts/wwp.html

[Fla Dem]

23. But where is the underlying funding, organization? How can as a diverse

group as this possibly organize, fund raise, coordinate, etc without some pretty powerful entity behind them pulling the strings. While each group may be a legitimate organization unto themselves, where is the glue that holds them together? These groups are so narrowly focused I find it impossible to believe that even if they pooled all their resources, they would be able to pull off what they obviously have. To suspect this group is secretly funded behind the scenes by a RW think tank, is not beyond the realm of possibility. For just the reasons previously stated, to portray Anti-war anti-administration protesters as loony radical left wing fringe groups. This is quintessentially Karl Rove; dirty trickster extraordinaire.

[mcscajun]

30. Because the Workers World Party is behind the IAC...

...and IAC is ultimately behind our domestic A.N.S.W.E.R. and because As WWP is not a registered PAC or non-profit (501(c), etc.), ultimate sources of their funds remain substantially obscured.

In short...their funds could come from anyone, anywhere, and we'll never know.

[mcscajun]

7. Then more of us need to get involved with UFPJ

'cause they are the other major organizer.

They need the bodies and the funds to beat A.N.S.W.E.R. to the gate, so to speak.

[Walt Starr]

10. IMO, P.N.A.C. secretly funds A.N.S.W.E.R.

because no organization is doing more to defeat the anti-war movement than A.N.S.W.E.R.

[Violet_Crumble]

12. Plus they're commies! We all might get Commie Germs!!!!!!

Are you talking about the same ANSWER who organised a highly successful protest that I've been reading about in between the incessant whining about ANSWER?

Violet...

[KittyWampus]

14. Very Few DU'ers Are Afraid Of "Commie Germs" So Why Not Stop Trying

to play that canard? I've seen you post it several times and it's less then clever or even relevant.

And calling the protest "highly successful" would have to ignore ANSWER's endlessly shrill speakers whom most protestors weren't interested in.

IIRC, the UFPJ was a co-sponsor of this past event. And THEIR participation was what was highly successful. That would be the Anti-War March.

Lastly, tell me where ANSWER gets their funding. To have such a large, efficient organization requires money. I've read here in the last day that noone even knows where their money is coming from.

Many DU'ers excoriated Nader for taking GOP money in the last election.
We would mostly all agree finances of an anti-war group or ANY political group should be TRANSPARENT.

If ANSWER has nothing to hide, then they should publish a list of where their funding is coming from.

[Violet_Crumble]

26. Some of them sure act like it...

Actually I only posted this once, so why not stop trying to exaggerate? If you want to talk about something posted way more than several times that's less than clever or relevant, how about you take a squizz at the obsessive fear and hatred of communists....

No, calling the march highly successful is to not ignore the hundreds of thousands of people that turned out and didn't sit around on the computer whining at the top of their lungs about how much ANSWER sucks....

btw, I don't give a shit where ANSWER gets its funding. Why? Are some big bad nasty commies funnelling them money? ;)

Violet...

[Terran1212]

16. I'm starting to think a neo-COINTELPRO is funding Democratic Underground

Almost no one at the actual march actually complained about ANSWER. It seems DU is fomenting the Left and trying to break it up.

Enough with the infighting.

DU's complaining about ANSWER is being more disruptive than ANSWER itself.

[Mari333]

18. The march was wonderful, it was the PR that sucked

because all the mainstream media focussed on was the ANSWER speakers, and thats all America got to see on TV. Bad PR.

[Terran1212]

19. Actually -- NO

CSPAN gave all the speakers equal time, and almost no one watches CSPAN. All other MSM including the BBC (which interviewed me) never mentioned Cuba or Palestine or Venezuela or Haiti. They all focused on Sheehan.

But having all the other issues there allowed us all to come together for many different causes -- to better inform all the attendees, who are very interested in global justice.

[Mari333]

17. agreed Walt..they are Roves wet dream

[moddemny]

27. because no organization is doing more to defeat the anti-war movement...."

than A.N.S.W.E.R."

I just got back from D.C., ANSWER definitely alienated a lot of the protesters I spoke too, no one wants to say it openly or loudly at the march because they are afraid of ruining the spirit of the rally but pull them aside and they will let you know how they feel about ANSWER. All the people here who are saying people who have a problem with ANSWER are just trying to cause infighting or redbaiting are clueless, if they can't see what alienates people that's their problem. ANSWER is slowly dong a lot of subtle damage to the anti-bush movement.

For the people who realize ANSWER is a hypocritcal organization you should still try to get to the marches. Once you get away from the speakers its becomes a true people event on the street. Chant your own slogans and don't let ANSWER make you stay at home. Inform the other protesters what a corrupt organization ANSWER (and it's hypocrisy) is and help build an alternative to it in whatever way you can, money, time, etc.

[laura888]

11. Ummm.... this post was about organizing other marches

Read the post again. It basically says:

If you don't like what ANSWER is doing, then organize your own march.

It really is that simple.

so - no more bashing ANSWER in this thread, please (there seems to be plenty of those already).

Instead talk about how you're going organize your own protest.

[dsc]

13. thank you that was my exact point

I am no big fan of answer but I think it is nothing short of churlish to let them do all the work and then bitch when they decide to run the march they way they see fit. If answer is a problem then organize without them next time.

[KittyWampus]

15. UFPJ Was The OTHER Organizer. The SUCCESSFUL One.

ANSWER had control of the speakers and showed no discrimination to whom it was given to. To call those speakers, except for a few like Jackson and Sheehan, successful is delusional.

The anti-war MARCH was what really drew the crowd. and UFPJ should take credit for it.

I will donate to UFPJ if they hold a protest that excludes the power hungry Stalinists.

[dsc]

21. It is nothing about sucess or lack therof

They did get the permits and thus controlled the speakers. My point is that in the future if others wish to control the speakers then they need to do the work.

[KittyWampus]

24. Agree With You Entirely. Very Lucid Thought. However, ANSWER isn't

the ONLY group involved with organizing yesterday's event.

And that touches on your point.

You speak of finding an alternative. There WAS an alternative involved yesterday which was UFPJ.

[moddemny]

28. "except for a few like Jackson and Sheehan"

There were a few good speeches after Jackson and Sheehan but it did start to go downhill in many ways after they spoke.

[ChiciB1]

22. Posted This Somewhere Else... You Do It< If You Don't Like It!

I was there and even though people on TV saw a lot of "speakers" speaking, MOST OF US WERE MARCHING when the "alternatives" were speaking.

If you had been there, AND if they would have panned the MARCH, it would have been QUITE CLEAR, that the MARCH was an ANTI-WAR MARCH. I don't recall anytime when it was ANYTHING ELSE!!

So IF YOU CAN DO IT BETTER... get busy! And BTW, I'll support you and join in THAT MARCH!!

You want your cake, you know the rest!

Sorry for being so acerbic, but I thought it was extremely emotional, full of HIGH energy and it certainly made quite a statement! WAPO sure thought so too!! Haven't gotten to the NY Times, but bought a copy and will read it when I get a chance.

[dsc]

29. It was Pride weekend here so I stayed home

Had it not been Pride I probably would have traved to DC. I honestly have no idea how the march actually went since I didn't go, but my basic point was and is, that those who are complaining that Answer had such a large role, should get off their rears and organize if they wish to avoid that next time.

[RadiDem]

25. At least in L.A, they seem to have moderated their message

At the big L.A protest yesterday, I didn't see any 'official' ANSWER Free Mumia signs, nor the large ANSWER banner urging 'solidarity' with the North Korean People.

There were plenty of 'Palestine' signs though.

[mike_c]

31. ANSWER is getting people into the streets FAR more effectively...

...than anyone else-- including Cindy Sheehan et al-- by orders of magnitude. They are one of the most important organizations in the antiwar movement. Until someone else can organize marches as effectively, ANSWER is the best friend the antiwar left has. And yes-- they are NOT a one trick pony-- they support MANY social justice issues as well as the antiwar movement.