gdunkel at mindspring.com (IAC/ANSWER)
mikedf at amnh.org
Sun Nov 3 10:52:53 MST 2002
Folks should READ before they get hepped up, and address what's actually
written (you too, Lou) and not something bothering them from some previous
posting. This writer's defense of ANSWER/IAC didn't even address Lou's
criticism, i.e. of the wisdom of housing two allegedly independent
At 01:59 AM 11/3/2002 -0500, you wrote:
>Date: Sat, 2 Nov 2002 22:35:00 -0500
>From: gdunkel at mindspring.com
>Subject: Re: No Subject
>On 2 Nov 02, at 17:07, Louis Proyect wrote:
> > Alas, the last thing that anybody can accuse ANSWER/IAC/WWP of is
> surfeit of
> > cleverness. For example, when you blithely refer to ANSWER as independent
> > from IAC and then house both organizations in the same office, it
> creates an
> > opening for a professional red-baiter from the Nation Magazine to hang one
> > of their slanders on. Of course, this is the sort of problem you create for
> > yourself when you are unaccountable. If you were working with people who
> > were not vetted from head to toe by WWP leaders, they might have the
> > gumption to tell you the truth, namely that it is stupid to put two
> > supposedly separate organizations in the same office.
>Where do you get off calling people stupid without making a trip to 39 W.
>14th St some Tuesday evening at 7 pm and seeing how the IAC actually
>You could look at it this way: the IAC is an organization with members,
>many of whom put it hundreds of hours building Oct. 26, and ANSWER
>is a coalition, whose members are organizations.
>You've got a certain model that you think the people doing the organizing
>should follow. Personally, I don't think the anti-war movement that is
>currently in formation is ready to adopt it. (This doesn't mean I think
>a model that ever would be worthwhile to adopt.)
>Why do you disparage the work that the people who are building the anti-
>war movement on the ground are doing by calling them "stupid"? Is it
>your way of expressing solidarity?
>Anyway, for all its sharpness, this has been a good discussion.
>By the way, Oct. 26 must have had a powerful impact -- tonight NPR
>actually retractred its report on Oct. 26, saying that it had erroneously
>reported that less than 10,000 people.
PLEASE clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.
More information about the Marxism