[Marxism] Re: WWP does it again

Linda Jansen ljansen12 at yahoo.com
Thu Oct 6 13:56:15 MDT 2005

Below is a link to a Seattle Weekly article written by Geov Parrish.
He is constantly harping on the idea that ANSWER scares away the
"mainstream people" who might otherwise attend a demo.
Here's my letter to the editor in response:
Geov Parrish Phoning It In on the Antiwar Movement
Geov Parrish drags out his original column about the lack of creativity
of the antiwar movement and reworks it for the umpteenth time to 
criticize the Seattle march on Sept. 24.  Geov one-note didn't even 
bother to listen to the speakers apparently.  He didn't notice that 
[US Representative Jim McDermott--not exactly a Stalinist--spoke 
about an exit strategy (rather than troops out now which was the 
prevailing sentiment of the march).  He didn't notice that Lisa Gill, an 
active member of Military Families Speak Out, spoke about 
the hardships this illegal war is working on the soldiers and their families.  
Instead he noticed that there were speeches on racism.  Oh, gee, 
that's not relevant to a march calling for the end of a war 
promulgated by a predominantly white, militarist country on the 
Black and Brown people of two countries that had nothing to do 
with the attack supposedly underlies the invasions of Afghanistan 
and Iraq.
He does state that local ANSWER organizers are "oblivious to 
the politics" of their parent organization.  Clever backhand insult 
to some dedicated people who gave thousands of people a 
chance to send a message to our elected representatives and 
also to Iraqis and Afghanis (and yes, Haitians and Palestinians) 
who are suffering under immoral occupations staffed and funded 
by the US and its allies.
The SNOW coalition is indeed faltering as Geov points out.  My perspective
 is that part of the reason for that is that while SNOW did endorse 
the Sept. 24 march, it did not actively promote it as it has with 
past marches, probably excusing itself for all the reasons that 
Geov throws out about the so-called radical politics of ANSWER.  
ANSWERs slogans are radical, if you use the dictionary definition 
of radical: getting to the "root" of the problem.  Since most 
Americans are "oblivious" of charges of Stalinism made against 
ANSWER, they only see the radical slogans.  And it is my belief 
they identify with them.  Isn't common sense that if an occupation 
of Iraq and Afghanistan by brutal US forces is wrong, then the 
same type of occupation is wrong in Haiti and Palestine--which 
we fund, if not contribute troops to? 
Geov needs to rethink his uncreative criticism of the 
antiwar movement.

The U.S. is not color-blind.  It's colored blind.  Ishmael Reed

More information about the Marxism mailing list