[Marxism] ANSWER's Ultraleftism -Why isn't UFPJ supporting the March on the Pentagon?

Lance Murdoch lancemurdoch at gmail.com
Sun Feb 18 20:41:47 MST 2007


On 2/18/07, jollyjack at riseup.net <jollyjack at riseup.net> wrote:
>
>    Those of you that were in the SWP during the VietnamWar should
> know that attempting to build a broad mobilization against the war in
> Iraq with ANSWER's shopping list of demands (listed below)is what is
> the cause of the division in the antiwar movement. That, combined with
> calling on people to stay and "force congress to vote no on war
> funding"( why not call for a general strike!), dooms this action to
> failure.

You accuse ANSWER of Manichaeism, but do not say much about the other
side of the coin, the Manichaeism of UFPJ.

"ANSWER's shopping list of demands...is what is the cause of the
division in the antiwar movement."  Sorry, but this does not make much
sense.  I can see it causing some things to happen and some things not
to happen, but not a "division" in the antiwar movement.  There seems
to be this idea that UFPJ's choices are either complete cooperation,
or even fealty to ANSWER, or that UFPJ has to make a complete break
with ANSWER.

In fact beyond a complete break, I have seen UFPJ trying to sabotage
ANSWER over and over again.  You could even say that one of the
reasons the UFPJ was created was to sabotage ANSWER, especially if you
examine the creation of the UFPJ.  This latest call for a march on the
day after an ANSWER march is just the latest sign of this.

The UFPJ is not forced to the choice of either fealty to ANSWER or a
complete break (and in reality, attempted sabotage) from it - there
can be agreements, levels of cooperation etc.  I had a very
short-lived job once of knocking on doors and asking for money for one
of Nader's organizations.  The group had informal agreements with
other fund-raising groups on which days and areas they'd raise money,
so as they wouldn't step on each others toes.  UFPJ's leadership will
not even participate in this low level of cooperation, and this latest
action seems to reinforce the idea that they are just out to sabotage
ANSWER.

This is not to say that ANSWER's strategies are necessarily correct
and so forth, but even if they were not winning strategies, that still
would not justify UFPJ's actions with regards to ANSWER.




More information about the Marxism mailing list