[Marxism] UFPJ leadership divides the antiwar movement

ethan young ethanyoung at earthlink.net
Sun Jan 15 14:45:47 MST 2006

 Aw, c'mon. WW started ANSWER. They led it. 
Now they're outside it. UFPJ never joined it, 
and have a history of strife in dealing with it, 
and have explained why relations are strained. 
We all know why WW is no longer in ANSWER. 
We know because we've seen this acted out a million 
times. But they still pretend that a split isn't 
worth mentioning and all is anti-imperialist unity 
against the heinous liberals,  

UFPJ is the larger, and most widely recognized 
peace coalition. Realistically, unless UFPJ falls 
apart, the groups that aspire to being the left 
wing of the peace movement will continue to take 
part in its actions, whether or not UFPJ accepts 
ANSWER's terms.



Ethan Young writes: "Speaking of disingenuousness, the poster does not
mention  the source of this statement: it's a Workers World editorial.
Needless to add that WW doesn't explain why they left ANSWER, as they
call on readers to demand that UFPJ accept ANSWER as an ally."

Huh??? Maybe time for new glasses, Ethan. From the original post: 

*  *  *

  The pages of this newspaper have advocated and encouraged anti-war
unity with ANSWER and all other progressive and anti-imperialist
forces, and will continue to do so where appropriate in the interests
of the struggle. Organ izational questions must be subordinated to the
task of ending the occupation.
  In that regard, we encourage the movement to call to task the
leadership of UFPJ and force them to reverse this divisive policy. The
solemn duty to get U.S. imperialism off the back of the Iraqi people,
to bring the troops home, and to defeat U.S. schemes to impose an
"Iraqization" of the occupation requires the strongest unity,
independent of the parties of the war makers. 

*  *  *

Seems pretty transparent to me.


More information about the Marxism mailing list