Is it possible to have a rational, two-way dialogue about the protest?

I am pessimistic today. But I would like to try it. I propose that DUers on both sides remember that the vast majority of us have been anti-war for at least as long as it was clear the PNAC-ers were gunning to have another one in Iraq. The vast majority of us opposed the war in March, April, and May while Saddam was still visibly in power. The vast majority of us have opposed the war after Flyboy declared "Mission Accomplished." The vast majority of us want the US troops out of Iraq and the Iraqi people to be in charge of their own destiny.

Is there anyone who disagrees with any of these points?

So the debate that has been raging for two days about the protest on Saturday is not about the illegality and immorality of Bush's Iraq war. The debate is about the usefulness of last Saturday's protest, given that A.N.S.W.E.R. sponsored it. As an A.N.S.W.E.R. skeptic, I will say that I've been glad for their skill at organizing mass rallies where the anti-war viewpoint can be expressed freely. I attended several of their rallies myself, and considered attending this one. (I didn't, more for economic and nonpolitical reasons than political ones.) But I believe strongly that DUers have a right to criticize A.N.S.W.E.R. as well as the protest. We're not fascists here. We're democrats, and we should be strong enough to withstand dissent and argument without resorting to emotional appeals.

I haven't been spending tons of time on DU recently, having been working on a web site, a dissertation, going to the protest, and trying to have a bit of a normal life.

What is the issue here?

That protest is over - the folks who attended were psyched, and nobody I know takes ANSWER very seriously.

My dad, a West Point graduate and certified bush-hater, mention the folks who said "for our warriors, against the war."

So from a pr point if view it worked.

as always. My feeling is that A.N.S.W.E.R. is fucked up, but that doesn't make the idea of protest fucked up. It seems that some who didn't go to the protest are focusing entirely on A.N.S.W.E.R., and people who did go to the protest are pissed for having their own protest ignored by fellow DUers.

I've been going to anti-war protests since before ANSWER showed up in our coalition.

I've also been involved in outreach for a couple of coalitions. That's why I focus on ANSWER - I've sat on committees with the only two ANSWER / WWP people who appear to exist in my town.

the A.N.S.W.E.R. thing again. I find this amusing: in a society where everyone's gas, shoes, kitchen plastics, and foreign policy cuddle up against and come from every imaginable despicable force on earth, people choose to get self-righteous about one certain set of ideologues. I have no problem with criticizing the politics of A.N.S.W.E.R.; I would criticize them myself. But that a political activity that one believes in gets reduced to this issue says a lot. If I want to march, I'll march and if I don't, I won't. No organization owns me. If people are so incensed, they ought to get up off their sofas and organize their own ideologically pure rally on D.C. I'd march in that, too, if I wanted.

I'd take the hysterical gnashing of teeth more seriously if it weren't so selectively applied.

But does anyone seriously suggest a poster can't criticize A.N.S.W.E.R.? If that's the case, then that's silly too.

I think she'll know.

The problem is that if someone criticizes ANSWER, they're accused of red-baiting and being squeamish about working with communists, or worse, supporting the occupation of Iraq.

Any organization organizing a protest should see that the time of the protest is used to FOCUS on the advertised message. Saturdays protest was all over the place. What happened to Protest the WAR.? message was lost in all the 'other' issues. BTW- what the hell could be more important than a war? ... (civil marriages, PETA, Mumia? I don't think so)

I was accused of sowing the seeds for the murder of protesters by defending critics of A.N.S.W.E.R.

to consider the zource. especially in this case.

there are a LOT of socialists and marxist on this board. they don't usually proclaim same but they are here none the less. they are in America and are American citizens but they hate their fellow Americans and this country/system in general.

I have a problem with people who grandstand.

I think that is nonsense.

Where do you draw the line with your definition of "America hating"? Does your wide net include democratic socialists as well? What about communitarian communists? Anarcho-syndicalists?

I'd like you to be more specific if you're going to throw the "America hating" epithet around, because THAT is the behavior of ideologues, IMHO. :grr:

But I certainly never said ANYTHING even remotely about any of the marchers. The only thing I talked about was the bizarre arrangement of the speakers.

unless he/she screwed up and responded to me thinking I was you.

:crazy:

have a right to voice apprehensions about ANSWER and their role in the marches -- heck, I am one of those people myself -- just so long as that criticism is not used to label us marchers something we may not be.

I marched on Saturday in the SF ANSWER/UFJP event and that should no way infer that I support in any way the killing of American soldiers.

And if I say I'm not a fan of many of ANSWER's policies that doesn't make me a imperialist/conservative.

I want us the hell out of Iraq and I want Iraq in the hands of the UN until the Iraqis can create a government that will have all their peoples' interests in mind.

I don't know what the heck that makes me.... sane, maybe?

Just not on DU.

this is DU.

There will always be at least 8 sides to any discussion.

it's the zealous refusal to see any side but one's own.

those who took the time and spent the money to attend these Demostrations have come back to DU and not been supported. Barraging folks with articles about A.N.S.W.E.R.'s affiliates doesn't do much to raise the spirits of those who were trying to do a good thing for world peace and to bring attention to folks of the immorality of this war.

Arguing over ANSWER's groups instead of focusing on postitive efforts of DU'ers just dispirits us all. And, I agree that the vast majority of us have opposed this war, but it's looking like we have many new members who support it and are trying to use the Repug's line that to "Protest the War is a Protest against our Soldiers." When we start seeing that here, it's a real low point.

Some new members don't realize how much some of us worked our hearts and computers out trying even to Petition the UN through Move On.org by sending faxes and e-mails to the French and German Ambassadors, fgs! We listened to hourse and days of Senate/House hearings on the Iraq Resolution. We faxed/phoned/e-mailed our Reps to keep us out of this war. That was supporting our Troops! We didn't wan't them to go there in the first place!

I feel like I'm living through some time warp and we are back to Viet Nam where even the people we "hang" with are now calling people who didn't support the Iraq invasion somekind of Saddam sympathizers like they called Viet Nam Protestors Mao supporters and Ho Chi Min sympathizers.

I hope those who attended the protests will know that you were there for those of us who couldn't make Washington and SF. We've been doing what we can with our own ongoing protests in our hometowns. And, even that gets very discouraging when people hurl insults out of car windows and give "the finger."

We need to buck up each other and not tear each other apart on this. This is supposed to be a Democratic Group and not all Democrats were against going into Iraq, but most here were, and I would hope that others would not insult us.

"but it's looking like we have many new members who support it and are trying to use the Repug's line that to "Protest the War is a Protest against our Soldiers." When we start seeing that here, it's a real low point."

I sincerely do not enjoy saying this, but yes - there is a certain number of new prolific posters who do just that. One only needs think back to the recent protests of last spring and compare what we are reading today - a HUGE chasm of thought has developed within DU, and it's disheartening to say the least.

Great post, KoKo; great post Burt.

There are many here who oppose the war in Iraq with as much vehemence as we oppose ANSWER.

Sorry, but I am NOT willing to allign myself with all of the random wacko causes of the world. I don't want to Free Mumia. I don't support the Iraqi "resistance." And I happen to like Israel.

So kudos for those who went, but don't expect the rest of us to support your choice with out pointing out what ANSWER really is.

You assume that critics of ANSWER haven't done their own work and butt-busting for the anti-war movement.

Some of us critics have done more than pay money to go to marches. That's exactly why we're frustrated with ANSWER. Ahem.

is the right's way of diminishing the whole protest. It's how they feed their simple minded followers the red meat to get them pissed at war protesters. It is nothing more than that, and it is working.

Believe me, I will protest when I want to and so will most if not all people here, REGARDLESS of whether ANSWER is involved or not. They really have nothing whatsoever to do with it, except that they happen to be there too.

That is the main reason, I believe, that you get flamed for giving credence to the ANSWER/Commie angle. Because it is just that, an angle. An angle used to discredit ALL the protesters. So, by taking up the phony, right wing, ANSWER=Communist therefore the protesters are really just communists banner, you become suspect. As it should be.

a great service by organizing these demos so skillfully, they've done a disservice by not giving due respect to the massive numbers who swell their ranks at all of their demos and who are not A.N.S.W.E.R. members. Let's face it, hardly anyone goes to an A.N.S.W.E.R. rally because of A.N.S.W.E.R.'s politics.

And if you're wondering why I'm using the word A.N.S.W.E.R. so much, it's because I've cut it and am pasting it every time I want to mention A.N.S.W.E.R. Does that A.N.S.W.E.R. the question?

There is a difference between red-baiting coming from the right, and sectarian groups trying to dominate coalitions and operate them in an un-democratic fashion.

Ask anyone who has experience in actual coalition work.

It's frustrating when you're trying to put together a leaflet, but you spend four hours re-writing every sentence because it doesn't fit with the agenda of the vanguardists dominating the meeting.

It's frustrating when people stop showing up for organizing meetings because every time they do, they are shouted down by political cult members.

I've seen coalitions get wrecked by front groups.

Although I'm no fan of ANSWER and would not otherwise seek to associate myself with them, I applaud their efforts for doing the hard work to organize many of these protests. UFPJ may be more "mainstream" than ANSWER -- but ANSWER was the group that was doing the hard work from the beginning, before UFPJ came into the picture.

My problem lies with the representatives of every single leftist cause under the sun that selfishly use a demonstration against US invasion and occupation of Iraq as a forum for advancing their cause. I don't personally have anything against all of the "Free Mumia" activists, all of the Fair Trade activists (I'm one myself), all of the "Free Leonard Peltier" activists, all of the "Israel out of the Occupied Territories" activists, or what have you. But I am INCENSED at their selfishness in muddling the message of a demonstration against US occupation of Iraq.

If they want to talk about their own pet issue, then they should organize their own damned event! I'm not going to show up at a "No GM foods" rally with a sign against US imperialism. So likewise it's completely wrong and counterproductive for them to show up with a sign for their pet cause to an anti-imperialism protest!

THAT is my main gripe with the way that this protest was carried out, and it is also why it's difficult for me to get excited about it. The main messages (US out, UN in; Bring Our Troops Home; Bush Lied, They Died; etc.) are all lost amongst a cacaphony of competing placards and banners. :shrug:

It's been the criticism all along. It wasn't so noticeable to me when the war was heating up, because it felt like such an emergency, people were more focused just on the fact that there was a protest and on how massive it was. I do wish the message were made more clearly. I wish A.N.S.W.E.R. did not provide a smokescreen for the real, diverse group of protesters to get lost behind because the media can't see past the Trotskyism.

... all with signs saying things like, "US out, UN in" or "Bush Lied, Soldiers Died" or "Osama bin Forgotten" or something of the same vein, I can almost guarantee you that people would start to take notice. I'm talking about just everyday people passing in the street. Hell, we might even get media coverage out of it!

I don't blame ANSWER. I blame all of the other protestors who are just too dense or selfish to realize that for these protests to be effective, they have to have a pointed message.

Get that pointed message, and you'll begin to see even MORE "mainstream" people coming out of the woodwork. And at that point, the fact that ANSWER is a protest organizer will no longer be a factor.

Last winter, it really didn't matter who was speaking on the platform; most people present were there for the same reason: to try to stop the war. This fall, the movement is less focused. Virtually everyone on DU, I would wager, wants the troops out of Iraq. The question is when. Some people believe it is irresponsible for the US not to fix what it broke and to leave before being certain that no bloodbaths will occur. In other words, there is some reasonable disagreement over what is to be done. A.N.S.W.E.R. clearly wants the US out now, unconditionally. That's a nice idea, but what would a sudden pull out mean? If civil war breaks out, wouldn't the US be partly responsible? Given that the US is damaged goods no matter what, what is the most responsible course of action for it in Iraq?

The left needs to battle out these ideas and questions among ourselves. Reasonably.

You are right that there are many differences between protestors on what exactly should be done. But the one thing that unifies us is that we are AGAINST the invasion and occupation as it is currently being carried out.

However, I fail to see what "Free Mumia" or "Pro Reproductive Choice" or "Anti-GM Foods" or any of these other causes represented have the SLIGHTEST to do with presenting a message related to opposing the US invasion and occupation of Iraq. :wtf:

THAT is my beef with some of the protestors. Like I said -- if they want to have a march centered around their specific issue, they should organize their own march. Just don't show up at a rally opposing US imperialism and pollute the message to the point that it is indecipherable to an outside observer.

Better to use a sharp one. Better to be precise.