Monday, March 19, 2007
Anti-war protest and Bush's Bikers
This Saturday demonstration against the Iraq war much smaller than expected and much smaller than the January 27 rally. It was hard to get a sense of the actual number but I would venture under 30,000; probably less. A lot of it had to do with the weather. The northeast was pounded by surprise flurries the evening before, causing dozens of buses to cancel. Most DC demos rely on northeast turnout, so the cancellation had a definite effect. In addition Saturday was brutally cold. Another factor was the split between the two main coalitions, United for Peace and Justice and International ANSWER with the latter organizers of Saturday's demonstration preferring "purer", more radical politics.If ANSWER was looking for a more radically rhetorically event, than they certainly got it. The majority of demonstrators were college students, many belonging to one or another radical faction. Anti-capitalist slogans and revolutionary banners were plentiful. Most of the speakers belonged to one another ANSWER aligned group and they peppered their speeches with anti-imperialist slogans and talk of various non-Iraq war causes like the Cuban Five or the Palestinian right of return.I don't want to make it seem that the whole event was dominated by the radical left. There were many good mainstream speakers, including Salt Lake City Mayor Ross C. "Rocky" Anderson and many veterans, trade unionists and religious activists were in the crowd. And the anti Iraq war movement continues to be much more than just rallies in DC.But all in all, the event had the tone of a revolutionary left gathering as opposed to an anti-war demonstration.For ANSWER and the various radical groups in attendance that was their intention. According to the New York Times: “It is about radicalizing people,” Mr. Becker (Brian Becker, leader of International ANSWER) said in an interview. “You hook into a movement that exists — in this case the antiwar movement — and channel people who care about that movement and bring them into political life, the life of political activism.”Also notable about the rally was the large number of counter-demonstrators. Various conservative bloggers and the right-wing protest group and organizer of the counter demonstration Move America Forward had put out the rumor on the internet that protestors were planning to deface the Vietnam Veterans memorial. Needless to say there is no evidence that any anti-war protestor advocated this, nor has the memorial ever been
defaced in any anti-war demonstration. I will write more about these groups latter but suffice to say the “Gathering of Eagles” is a front for Bush conservatives who were trying to mobilize Vietnam era veterans under the guise of “defending the memorials” and “supporting our troops” to back George Bush's surge. For example the founder of Move America Forward is one Howard Kaloogian, former member of the California State Assembly who launched the recall Grey Davis movement. Their chairperson is one Melanie Morgan, right radio talk show host who’s according to the Move America Forward website:"When President Clinton engaged in a series of criminal acts and then tried to
use his Administration to cover it up, Morgan rose up and led thousands to the
streets to demand Clinton’s impeachment.”
I don't remember thousands taking the streets in outrage over Clinton's marital infidelities but maybe I was listening to too much NPR at the time.While not outnumbering the anti-war protesters by any means as claimed by Fox, they were a sizable contingent and created some problems for the anti-war protesters by blocking them from getting to the rally site and yelling 
obscenities at them.Of course Fox News and conservative bloggers were all over them, claiming as “Gathering of Eagles” booster Michelle Malkin does that they are the "silent majority no more."Malkin and Kaloogian no doubt hope they can play at being Nixon by bringing in a new generation of blue collars to back the President's war policies, but the fact is the “silent majority” of Americans are still on the side of the protesters. Over 60% of Americans oppose sending more troops to Iraq with the 59% saying we need to pull out our troops out as soon as possible. And we can not forget that the Democratic landslide in November was largely the result of voter frustration and opposition to continuing the war.
Part of Nixon’s genius was that he managed to tap into middle America that both opposed the Vietnam war and anti-war protests (nearly 77% by 1968) dominated by student radicals by promising “peace with honor” which turned out to be a way of escalating the war while reducing the number of ground troops. The anti-war movement does not have that problem. Most Americans oppose the occupation and Bush has been so broke in terms of political capital that it would be impossible for him to swing the public behind him again.
obscenities at them.Of course Fox News and conservative bloggers were all over them, claiming as “Gathering of Eagles” booster Michelle Malkin does that they are the "silent majority no more."Malkin and Kaloogian no doubt hope they can play at being Nixon by bringing in a new generation of blue collars to back the President's war policies, but the fact is the “silent majority” of Americans are still on the side of the protesters. Over 60% of Americans oppose sending more troops to Iraq with the 59% saying we need to pull out our troops out as soon as possible. And we can not forget that the Democratic landslide in November was largely the result of voter frustration and opposition to continuing the war.Part of Nixon’s genius was that he managed to tap into middle America that both opposed the Vietnam war and anti-war protests (nearly 77% by 1968) dominated by student radicals by promising “peace with honor” which turned out to be a way of escalating the war while reducing the number of ground troops. The anti-war movement does not have that problem. Most Americans oppose the occupation and Bush has been so broke in terms of political capital that it would be impossible for him to swing the public behind him again.
"Gathering of Eagles" Engage in a Friendly Discussion with Anti-War Protestors
Still the appearance of Bush’s biker brigades indicates that the anti-war movement can not afford to outdistance the American public through ultra-radicalism or small scale direct action. In some sectors of the movement,-not only among the sectarian groups-there is increasing talk of using the politics of guilt as a device to mobilize people and needing to up the ante and turn protest into resistance. Even Cindy Sheehan, whose powerful appeal to many Americans who were unsure about the war was based on her ability to represent those mothers who have lost children in Iraq has let her self “become radicalized” spending more time during her speech talking about the problems of imperialism than the actual war itself. As one anti-war student organization put it:
"We refuse to be subtle in our outcry against this war, we refuse to do nothing and be silent while people are killed in our name for profit for the rich and we refuse to be sent overseas in a war for oil."
Besides being incorrect about the facts on the ground (most Iraqis are dying in the same of one of two branches of Islam at this point), such language is moralizing and self-isolating. The pressure to end this war is felt by many. America can only move forward and develop new standing in the world until the occupation is over. And the majority is with
us on this but we can’t afford to leave them behind in a quest to radicalize a small section of activists. We don't need more radical resisters; we need more letter writers, email forwarders, meeting hosters and precinct captains.
Besides being incorrect about the facts on the ground (most Iraqis are dying in the same of one of two branches of Islam at this point), such language is moralizing and self-isolating. The pressure to end this war is felt by many. America can only move forward and develop new standing in the world until the occupation is over. And the majority is with
us on this but we can’t afford to leave them behind in a quest to radicalize a small section of activists. We don't need more radical resisters; we need more letter writers, email forwarders, meeting hosters and precinct captains. The problem is not that if we radicalize the anti-war movement it will create a backlash, turning middle Americans on to the war and Bush. The whole war is too much of a disaster and Bush is just not credible enough for that to happen. The problem is that if the anti-war movement artificially cuts off all bridges of communication through ultra radical language and actions, Americans will just end up tuning it out. The anti-war movement must play a role but it needs to meet people where they are, not where its organizers may be.
Labels: anti-war movement, Gathering of Eagles, International ANSWER, Move America Forward
# posted by Gang of One @ 7:26 AM 
