Mother Jones on SF's Anti-War "Radicals"

Louis Proyect lnp3 at panix.com
Mon Mar 31 07:25:11 MST 2003


viveka wrote:
>
> So from a practical standpoint, what do we DO with the radical element, the
> supporters of Mumia, the people with dreadlocks, the anarchists, etc?  If
> the movement is to be inclusive, must we not include them as well?  Isn't it
> Mother Jones that is causing divisions among the anti-war movement by
> attempting to discredit those who participate in the movement in a more
> radical fashion?

I question how radical these folks are. The last thing the antiwar
movement needs is temper tantrums in the name of peace. I really have a
strong objection to the kind of action that was organized in NYC last
week, when such folks chained themselves across 5th Avenue. Some poor
shmuck who is simply trying to make a dentist's appointment is not going
to be appreciate being caught in a traffic jam. I do think that civil
disobedience is a useful tactic. When I was in CISPES, we used to get
arrested (although not me personally) sitting in the doorway of one
building or another in Federal Plaza downtown. That's where these folks
should go in fact.

Chuck Zero, who is an anarchist red-baiter par excellence, is totally
frustrated because the movement is operating in a much more disciplined
fashion. For him an action is successful only if some windows and heads
get broken. We have to isolate such opinions in the movement because
they interfere with the deadly serious goals we have set for ourselves,
namely the mass mobilization of the people of the world against
imperialist war.


--

The Marxism list: www.marxmail.org





More information about the Marxism mailing list