[O29] please. this is not about getting a merit badge.

[Dave Cutler]

Just imagine all those so called "anti-war" people
voting for Nader or the green party instead of
pro-imperialist,military industrial
complex,AIPAC,warmonger Kerry.No more lame excuses
please!Don't be afraid to admit you're a proud
democrat.

--- gary hicks <gooberthink06 at yahoo.com> wrote:

> "Beware of the democrats for they are the enemy of
> the
> people."
>  
> all of them? without exception? even those of color,
> women, glbt, the poor --- working people all--- who
> might leave if only there were a mature
> non-sectarian left for these people to go to?
>  
> " They speak with forked tongues. Their lust for
> power knows no bounds."
>  
> probably true. but begs the question as to the
> left's attitude, engagement, etc. with power. so
> far, the track record seems to show that the left is
> afraid of power because of what the ruling class has
> done with it. there's been poor discussion of what
> good things a committed left might do with power. so
> we get stuck with this middle class moralizing about
> lust for power and have to make do with a mentality
> of protest. results: they rule. as to the forked
> tongue thing: it was originally attributed to white
> people as a whole. i fervently hope that's not true
> because i have no interest in telling my nationalist
> friends that the white man is the devil and that
> they were correct all along.
>  
> " We have but one choice overthrow the two party
> dictatorship.Until that time there shall
> be no peace."
>  
> us and what army?
>  
> in struggle,
>  
> gary hicks
> 
> 
> Dave Cutler <ds_cutler at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Beware of the democrats for they are the enemy of
> the
> people.They speak with forked tongues.Their lust for
> power knows no bounds.We have but one choice
> overthrow
> the two party dictatorship.Until that time there
> shall
> be no peace.
> --- gary hicks wrote:
> 
> > hmmm------------------------------
> > 
> > first i'm not aware that i was attacking keith
> > personally. i was referring to the political
> > behavior of a number of people in cadre
> > organizations. please read my remarks below
> > carefully.
> > 
> > second it's not about reducing the politics of the
> > march, whether i'm "for" or "against" troops out
> > now, or whether i'm "for" or "against" the
> struggle
> > against racism. for the record i'm FOR both of
> these
> > things.
> > 
> > finally, it's a good thing that this isn't about
> > merit badges. were it so, a whole lot of us
> wouldn't
> > make it to tenderfoot ---------------------- and
> > this is assuming we got beyond being brownies and
> > cub scouts! 
> > 
> > Anytime it is assumed that " by adding this
> demand,
> > we will double and triple our chances of drawing
> > people of color out to the protest who will see it
> > on the flyer and be immediately attracted", is
> > underestimating the difficulty of engaging
> multiple
> > generations of people who have read so many flyers
> > like the current ones and have been unimpressed.
> > Such assumptions also insult the intelligence of
> > people of color by assuming we'll read the stuff
> and
> > as if by magic we'll be at the bandstand on the
> > commons just rarin' to march, chant, and sing.
> > ipso, facto, ergo, movement! 
> > 
> > gary
> > 
> > Keith Rosenthal wrote:
> > hey,
> > please. this is not about getting a merit badge.
> > this is about the importance of the movement
> > understanding how racism, especially, against
> Arabs,
> > is inextricably linked to the war on Iraq, and
> that,
> > morally and strategically, if we are going to stop
> > this war, we have to forge a united, multiracial
> > movement, that stands against the scapegoating or
> > attacks on people of color as a way to divide and
> > conquer us. 
> > this is why i agree with Ty and others who have
> > argued that we should support this demand as part
> of
> > the protest. (and by the way, what are you talking
> > about, gary? you're trying to criticize and bait
> > me, as a white person, who is pushing for our
> > movement to publicly stand against racism? what
> > sense does that make? i'm arguing for this not
> only
> > because of my conversations with people of color,
> > including arabs and muslims in particular, but
> > because it's the right thing to do -- politically,
> > tactically, and strategically -- in order to build
> a
> > bigger, stronger protest and antiwar movement.) by
> > adding this demand, we will double and triple our
> > chances of drawing people of color out to the
> > protest who will see it on the flyer and be
> > immediately attracted. 
> > i'm curious, gary, are you worried that adding a
> > demand on racism will make the march too
> "radical?"
> > because this is the logic you used when arguing
> why
> > we shouldn't even support the demand "Troops Out
> > Now!" so i'm wondering if there is a similar line
> of
> > reasoning going on?
> > finally, it shouldn't be too difficult for us to
> > have a civil and fraternal debate on this matter
> > monday. the argument that says that if we open
> this
> > discussion and vote on monday we will create
> > "chaos," and "division," are, i think just as
> untrue
> > as the argument that says that if the US leaves
> Iraq
> > immediately it will create "chaos," and
> "division,"
> > (which are, by the way, thinly veiled racist ideas
> > that the Iraqis are incapable of handling their
> own
> > affairs without the US). 
> > if we can't discuss this together, how can we
> > expect to be able to discuss anything of
> importance
> > with each other in a civil manner? how can we
> > expect to be able to organize democratic and open
> > movements? we need to learn how to do this anyway
> > as we go about the business of coalition-building.
> 
> > we should debate, discuss, take a clear vote, and
> > then move on as one, united against the war,
> > whatever the outcome.
> > 
> > Solidarity,
> > Keith Rosenthal
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > gary hicks wrote: hi:
> > 
> > it has now become more than apparent that this
> > argument isn't about the demands of the march,
> even
> > though this is how it's being presented. 
> > 
> > this argument is all about a bunch of (mostly)
> white
> > folks purporting to be socialists, progressives,
> > etc. who for the life of them can't get a handle
> on
> > the centrality of the struggle against their own
> > chauvinisms.
> > 
> > this argument is also about folks with purportedly
> > socialist and progressive politics who for reasons
> > known only to god and their cadre leaders have GOT
> > TO BE the first kids on their block to come up
> with
> > a correct line on these matters. hence whoever
> > achieves this can go on to seize hegemony, power,
> or
> > whatever elusive bragging rights (or is it rites?)
> > and glory as long as folks listen.
> > 
> > finally, ty is more than right about how it has
> > taken this long to come to this point, since at
> > least 911. this is downright pitiful and
> > disgraceful. so---------------------
> > 
> > i agree with david that monday night is NOT the
> time
> 
=== message truncated ===



		
__________________________________ 
Yahoo! Music Unlimited 
Access over 1 million songs. Try it free.
http://music.yahoo.com/unlimited/