A word of preface: If you think what Team George has done in Iraq is a good thing, that the occupation there seems to be unfolding as well as can be expected and that objections to what’s going on are unpatriotic, betray the troops and give aid and comfort to the enemies of civilization, The headline above isn’t meant for you. From you I expect whining. I expect abundant outrage each and every time protesters gather for a few hours of dissent. How dare they!? You just go right ahead and keep spouting your jingoistic delusions. This message isn’t for you.

If, however, you’re one of the majority of Americans who thinks the war in Iraq was a “mistake,” that it isn’t worthwhile staying there, and that the U.S. should withdraw its troops soon or immediately, I don’t want to hear any more of the caterwauling I heard from you yesterday and today about how the antiwar movement’s protests suck and aren’t focused enough and include too much over-the-hill hippie nostalgia, too much drumming, too much talk about causes other than getting out of Iraq and too damned many boring speakers. Because if you’re against what’s happening in Iraq, you’re the antiwar movement. You don’t have time to be kvetching; there’s too much work to be done.
Look. You won’t find a fiercer critic than me of the pro-Maoist politics of the folks who founded and still exert significant influence in A.N.S.W.E.R. Months before the Iraq Attack, I railed about why we who opposed what Bush was preparing to do should be concerned that A.N.S.W.E.R.  was quickly becoming the leader of the antiwar movement. I’ve been on the far left for most of my adult life – the social-democratic far left – and I’ve had more than my share of run-ins with the likes of these hopeless zealots with their totalitarian notions of how human societies ought to be governed. I’ve watched their ilk wreck coalitions, turn minor disputes into blood feuds, spread grotesque lies about events I witnessed firsthand, voice support for ruthless dictators and terrorists, and present themselves as the ideological cutting edge of a revolution that would, were it successful, send people like me – much less the more moderate among you – to the wall with a blindfold. I. am. not. their. friend.

But guess what? A.N.S.W.E.R.  has done yeoman’s work at making the antiwar protests happen. Except for United for Peace with Justice, nobody else even comes close to the diligence and skills and hours that A.N.S.W.E.R. has brought to the effort. So, why should anybody be surprised that their protest agenda is going to be implemented? That speakers from groups included on their steering committee get billing on the stage? That issues you consider to be peripheral – or not related at all – to U.S. policy in Iraq are going to be part of the program? It’s not as if they didn’t advertise the demands of their protest long beforehand.

If, every time you go to one these protests, you come away grinding your teeth, or you grind your teeth just thinking about going, so instead stay at home and check for television coverage of the protest that will make you grind your teeth, I have some suggestions: Don’t go. Don’t think about going. Don’t watch the (paltry) coverage of those who do go.

Instead, found a group of your own or join one you can agree with and get yourself added as the group’s representative to the A.N.S.W.E.R.  steering committee so you can influence the coalition to stick to one subject, Iraq. Or, build a nationwide counter-coalition to A.N.S.W.E.R.  and steal their fire with protests that are bigger and better organized and deliver only the message you want them to say. Goooood luck.

Or, since the chances are about 100 to 1 that you live in a city or town where A.N.S.W.E.R. doesn’t have a presence, organize locally or join an existing local organization that challenges Bush’s policies in Iraq. Then when the call to protest comes along, don’t go to DC or New York or wherever the national demonstration gathers. Instead, put hundreds – or thousands – of people into the streets of your own city. Show the Administration and all Americans that the antiwar movement is everywhere.

Still not to your liking? Think street protests are in and of themselves counterproductive even if there’s no reference to Palestine or Haiti and the only speakers are grandmothers and war veterans and ex-generals? OK. But that doesn’t let you off the hook.

There’s this corrosive myth that all we 1960s anti-warriors did was organize bigger and bigger protests, spending the rest of our time smoking spliffs, stringing beads and dropping into the occasional college class. In fact, 99% of what the antiwar movement did had nothing to do with protest marches. And so it should be now.

Effective opposition to this war can be built in myriad ways. Even if you’ve only got three hours a week to devote to the cause, you can play a part. And remember, compared to those of us who opposed the Vietnam War, you’ve got an advantage, a majority of Americans already think this war’s illegal, a mistake, or, at best, gone bad. Now what needs to be done, in addition to swelling that majority, is to turn their opposition into policy changes.

I’m sure you can come up with some innovative ways to do both. But here are some – both old and new – to choose from:

Vigils: In front of your church, your school, the local National Guard armory or a well-traveled street corner, set aside a time each week to silently witness your objections to Bush’s Iraq policy.  Or ask people to Honk! if they oppose that policy. If you think that’ll make a better image, wear a suit or a dress and urge those who join you to do likewise. Fly an American flag or two. Or drape a couple of “transfer tubes” with flags. Write a cogent leaflet and pass it out. Engage passersby. Get news coverage.

Speakers: Some Americans obviously still aren’t against Bush policy in Iraq. Or they are, but they don’t yet understand its full parameters and effects. Hire a hall or schedule a room in your church or rearrange the furniture in your basement and bring a speaker who knows what s/he’s talking about. A veteran, a reporter, a Congressperson, an expert in Middle East studies, one of the many Iraqis in America who oppose the occupation. Make it formal or informal, whatever best fits your community.

Teach-ins: If you’ve got more energy, bring lots of speakers. Make it an all-day affair. Find some of the best Op-Eds and other analyses of Iraq policy, print them up and staple them together and pass them out to all comers. (It’s best to get a copyright release, but this is not difficult.)

Adopt five people to persuade: Commit yourself to changing the minds of five other Americans. A neighbor, a co-worker, a drinking buddy, a parent, the woman who sits in the third pew of your church, the fellow you always run into at Starbucks.

Adopt an editor, producer or publisher: Writing succinct, fact-filled letters to the editor is always a good idea. But if you live somewhere there’s a newspaper editorially committed to Bush’s Iraq policy or a local channel that presents lop-sided view of what’s going on in Iraq, make contact with someone in authority. Engage them. Interview them, ask them out for coffee or lunch and persuade them. Getting an appointment may be easy or difficult. No matter the depth of your knowledge and understanding of Iraq policy, changing their mind will probably stretch your persuasive abilities.  

Adopt a Congressperson: If your Senators or Representative already oppose U.S. Iraq policy, lucky you. Your task will merely be to persuade them to  change their words into tougher words and those words into action. If you’re stuck with somebody who’s firmly in the Bush camp, your work will be tougher because you’ll have to find a way to convince them that their failure could have career repercussions. Think about finding an aide in your target Congressperson’s local office. Present your case to her or him. Leverage your conversations into contact with an aide in the national office, and, eventually, if you’re relentless, into contact with the Congressperson. Show up at the Congressperson’s speaking engagements. Ask a tough, politely worded question. Go for a follow-up if you can. Don’t heckle, don’t call Bush a war criminal, don’t debate other people in the audience. You’re at the wrong forum for that.

Adopt an antiwar candidate: No matter how much energy you put into it, some Congresspersons are going to be incorrigible. Every one of them should have an opponent come the next election.  Volunteer to help them, contribute money, organize fund-raisers, walk precincts, write their speeches, lead or join their advance team.  

Adopt a veteran or the family of someone serving in Iraq: One longstanding complaint of the Vietnam era antiwar movement was that it denigrated American soldiers. Unfortunately, there’s some truth to this, although the widely believed myth that antiwarriors spat upon thousands of returning veterans has repeatedly been debunked. In fact, it was the government that did the spitting, failing initially to consider post-traumatic stress disorder as real, fighting against claims of harm caused by Agent Orange, under-funding veterans’ hospitals and doing next-to-nothing about veterans who had difficulty finding jobs or wound up on the street.

As we know quite well, this Administration, which loves to parade around with soldiers for political advantage, has done a rotten job of equipping them adequately in Iraq or meeting their needs when they come home, and has treated them with disdain when they’re not as visible as they are up on a red-white-and-blue podium. Opponents of the Bush policies designed to press forward PNAC’s vision of another century of intervention should never blame what our misleaders command on the soldiers who are commanded.

That’s the short list. Hate all these ideas? Then brainstorm your own idea.

If all you come up with are more complaints about how the antiwar leadership is doing everything wrong, then I’ve got another suggestion for you: shut the fuck up.

[Cross-posted at The Next Hurrah]