[O29] Arabs and Muslims, "Middle America, " and building our movement

Wed Oct 5 17:36:29 PDT 2005

Hi Keith,
As one of the people who participated in the vote on Monday, and who voted
³against², I thought I should respond.

I voted ³no² based on procedure. It was my understanding that the demands
that the October 29 Coalition set for this rally occurred over two months
ago. There is still so much to do to get this rally to where it needs to be
and our energy needs to be focusing on pulling this thing together, not
voting on additional demands. We do not even have a permit yet for the
Common, we do not have a finalized list of speakers, and we need to raise
$13,000. We should all be focusing on making this rally happen rather then
all of this in-fighting and drawn out political discussions. We can have all
the demands we want, but without a permit, or funds, there will be no
organized rally.

I do not think that anyone that was at the meeting on Monday disagrees with
"Stop the racist scapegoating of Arabs and Muslims".  The vote was on
whether or not we were going back and re-examining our list of demands.
Clearly, with three weeks to go, we need to move on. I am sure that there
are other ways that we can bring any additional demands, especially this
one, to the forefront of our rally.

Chrystie

On 10/5/05 3:36 PM, "Keith Rosenthal" <keithmr81 at yahoo.com> wrote:

> Hey All,
>  
>    I just wanted to throw a couple of thoughts out there regarding the vote
> and discussion at Monday's O29 meeting concerning demands for this protest --
> specifically the demand: "Stop the racist scapegoating of Arabs and Muslims"
> also, since the political discussion around the demand was short and choppy in
> the meeting, i wanted to respond to several things here.
>    I think it was a mistake that this demand was voted down in a tie vote
> (9-9), and some of the justifications presented for why it should be voted
> down have the potential to set a bad precedent for our movement.  it was
> stated that we "don't want a radical protest, which will only draw 1,000
> people," "that we have to reach out to middle America," and that we should
> learn the lesson of the Vietnam antiwar movement which, "got the hard-hats to
> stop beating up the students, but instead join the students."  i think this
> perspective is erroneous and somewhat mythical.
>    First of all, i don't think we should have a laundry list of demands on the
> flyer, nor do i think we should talk about everything under the sun on the
> flyer.  but i don't think a demand around arabs and muslims is "beyond the
> pale," too radical, or will bring less people out to the march.  in fact, i
> think it can draw in more people pissed about the Patriot Act, Guantanamo
> mistreatment, and, of course, will draw in Arabs and Muslims, who just
> recently have been making pleas to Romney to stop the plan to wiretap local
> Mosques!  where is the antiwar movement on this question of the supposedly
> imminent and overwhelming threat that "Muslim and Arab extremists" pose to
> "our freedoms"?  the demand around Palestine at the September 24th protest
> certainly did not make that historic march any smaller, so why would a demand
> to stop anti-Arab racist scapegoating make our march any smaller?
>    Second, we ought to be less afraid right now of being "too radical."  the
> single-most important figure in revitalizing mass antiwar activity recently
> has been none other than that "raving radical" Cindy Sheehan, who supports
> Palestine, the Iraq resistance to occupation, refuses to vote for pro-war
> Democrats, and calls the current war "imperialist."  she is resonating with
> people because the reality is that right now, in the aftermath of the sinking
> occupation of Iraq and the Hurricane Katrina disaster, most regular people are
> growing increasingly fed up with this war and with everything having to do
> with the current government.  right now, people are increasingly fed up with
> even the Democratic Party for not taking a firm enough stand against Bush and
> the war because of their concern to not alienate "swing-voters in middle
> America."  
>    Finally, who is this mythical "middle America," and how do we win them?
> the reality is that right now, a majority of people are against the war and
> against Bush.  according to polls, 1 out of 3 people consider themselves part
> of the antiwar movement -- that's 100 million people nationwide.  in boston,
> that's roughly 200,000 people.  once we get these people organized, it will be
> easy from there to win the other antiwar 1/3 to our side.  also, who are we
> trying to win to this movement?  soccer moms (like cindy sheehan)?  sure!
> arabs, muslims, blacks, gays, women, students, latinos, workers, etc., (i.e.,
> the majority of people)?  we must!
>    And if i may ask, which hard-hats are beating up antiwar students today?
> it's my understanding that the AFL-CIO is against the war in Iraq (this
> includes organized construction workers, i believe).  remember, we are the
> majority!  soldiers and military families are increasingly on our side.  now
> is not the time for conservative, cautious moderation, but rather for bold,
> confident, and aggressive steps forward.
>    During the vietnam war, these so-called "hard hats" (do you mean workers,
> soldiers, what?), were not won over to the side of the "students" because the
> "students" moderated their message.  rather, they were won over to the antiwar
> movement because they simply grew more and more disgusted with the war and the
> government and felt they simply had to do something about it.  in other words,
> people were going through a process where they were beginning to think much
> more critically about the government, if for no other reason than because of
> the increasing reality of what the government was doing to the Vietnamese
> people and to the US soldiers.  this is precisely what is happening right now.
> the way we are going to win these people is not by moderating our message, but
> by taking every opportunity to expose every lie, smokescreen, and brutality
> that this government is carrying out in the name of this war . . . and in all
> of our names.  in so doing, we will give expression to growing millions of
> people disgusted by the government and simply waiting for someone to
> confidently address the government's barbarity, blow-for-blow (e.g., Cindy
> Sheehan).  
>    
>    In conclusion, i warn against the broader framework, justification, and
> implications used to defeat the demand on anti-arab racism at monday's
> meeting.  it sounds dangerously similar to the logic employed by Kerry
> supporters in the last election that we have to moderate our message to appeal
> to "swing-voters in middle-America" in order to win.  not only did that
> strategy, in fact, lead to a defeat for our side, but it also taught movement
> activists how to hold their tongues instead of raising their voices.  as the
> 2006 congressional elections begin to be talked about, we would do well to
> remember this lesson, and refuse this time around to repeat our mistakes.  the
> way to grow is to confidently fight for our principles and to win more people
> to them -- in tandem with their own developing criticisms of the war and the
> government -- and not by "moderating ourselves," "politically disciplining
> ourselves," or "holding our noses."
>    Again, this is not to say that we should have a laundry-list of every
> possible demand on the flyer.  but this is to say that we have little to lose
> and much to gain by adding clearly relevant demands and letting our movement
> take an increasingly critical posture towards the government's various
> policies and ideological buttresses.  and we ought to be wary of making
> arguments that would set a precedent for our movement to balk and moderate
> itself in order to appeal to some mythical "middle-America" at the expense of
> standing up for our beliefs and for those who are most oppressed and
> victimized by this war and this government.
>  
>  
> Solidarity,
> Keith Rosenthal
>      
>                  
>  
>  
>  
>  
> 
> Yahoo! for Good
>  Click here to donate <http://store.yahoo.com/redcross-donate3/>  to the
> Hurricane Katrina relief effort.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> O29 mailing list
> O29 at massglobalaction.org
> http://massglobalaction.org/mailman/listinfo/o29_massglobalaction.org
> 

-- 
Chrystie Hopkins
Managing Editor
Meniscus Magazine
www.meniscusmagazine.com

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://massglobalaction.org/pipermail/o29_massglobalaction.org/attachments/20051005/14a84d34/attachment.html>