Just a comment about the grumbling and groaning about “other issues” “hijacking” the anti-war protests today in Washington.
First of all, the only sustained coverage I had here in Canada was via C-SPAN online. Unfortunately, our public broadcaster, CBC, is on strike or they would have covered it too. So, after checking out some blogs today, I was troubled by some of the complaints made about speakers who talked about what’s going in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, Haiti, Cuba and whatever else came up. I listened to the crowds groan when a Palestinian approached the podium to speak, interrupted by one of the organizers who had to ask them to show some respect.
To the people in that crowd and to those who only had coverage from C-SPAN like me, read on…
- You could have walked away. No one chained you down there.
- If you’re anti-war, you’re anti-all-war and if you don’t think that what’s going on in Gaza relates to the US or is not warmongering that’s killed who knows how many people in the name of raw aggression, read this article now. You’ll see exactly what was going on there as the crowds in DC moaned and groaned about the situation being a “distraction from the REAL message”.
- All we got was all we got as far as media coverage went. Don’t blame C-SPAN. They don’t have the resources of CNN and other networks who could have and should have been there in full force.
- Whether you know it or not, the message got out today. Who knows? Maybe some in the crowd and those who watched C-SPAN learned something new about what’s happening in other parts of the world. I hope they did. I know I did.
- You talk about a fractured Democratic party in a state of confusion about its message. Take a moment and think about that: are you part of the problem or part of the solution? Do you aid in spreading the confusion or do you really want to spread a cohesive message?
Here’s the gist of this: you work with what you have and you make it work. The protests worked. If you say they didn’t, that’s the message the American people will get – loud and clear. How messed up is the Democratic party? It will continue to be as messed up as each supporter makes it.
Look at the big picture. Control the message. Don’t wait for others to do it. If the Dems stand for civil and human rights, justice and freedom – say it loud and say it with certainty. If you don’t, no one will listen.
…it would say “STOP the circular firing squads! You’re killing the message.”
Hey there – the great thing about it was you looked around and you saw America. Diverse and beautiful. YOung and old, black and white, …. everyone loving and hugging – even those gas masked warriors gave hugs. Gays and Lesbians, monks and babies.
It was a tide of diversity. When I first planned on going I didn’t want all the various messages… but I’m so glad they were there because that is what makes this country so special – the mozaic of US 🙂
It was beautiful and I met so many and I learned several new ideas that I hadn’t thought too much on.
During the speeches – the march was happening. Cspan covered what was going on at the elipse… but the people were marching and coming back to the monument.
They did speak of the direspect that had happened earlier while mostof us were marching.
Tonight the speech/concerts were about opening our minds
Jello is great:) – so much to write about and I can’t even begin to touch it.
CodePInk, I was with Ry and BrotherFeldspar and I could see them and … they understood my need to go be with them. I ran up and didn’t even have to ask and two said “come on in sister” and we marched to the start of the elipse. We headed back when CP was stopped due to scheduling and route redierctions. (sorry Ry’s laptop not used to it – typo hell LOL)
I must say the route and the start were very ackward. But standing in the street – you go to meet many many many Americans of all types and walks.
OK – I gotta sleep or else. Take care Catnip
Thanks Janet. I’m really looking forward to reading more about your experiences. Sleep well – you deserve it!
This is absolutely untrue. During Vietnam and in all the years since, I’ve hated being branded “anti-war”. I was “anti” the Vietnam War and I’m “anti” Bush’s criminal invasion of Iraq.
Pete Seeger said it right (paraphrasing here) – If someone flew over my house trying to drop napalm on my children I’d try to shoot him down with anything I could get my hands on.
If my country is invaded by armed marauders, any alternative to war is unacceptable to me.
has been taken over by armed marauders, I think the last line of your post violates the Patriot Act and sedition laws.
for my country against anyone who would destroy it.
Anyone.
so you are fighting with anything you can get your hands on against the people who are currently destroying it, are you?
If your answer is no, I am not going off to a gun show and buying a shoulder launched missle and/or other huge munitions, you just might be a little less “war for defense always” than you think.
Just saying.
between fighting effectively and a suicide attack. Even professional soldiers hold their fire or retreat at times.
I thought that line would raise some objections after I wrote it. How is it not logical though? If you’re anti-war you are anti-all-war. If you’re anti-Iraq-war, you’re anti-Iraq-war. If you’re anti-war-unless-someone-drops-napalm-on-your-house, well, you get the picture.
As far as being “branded”, you are what you say you are. If you feel someone has “branded” you (which reflects a negative connotation), take your power back and ask yourself how bad it is to be thought of as anti-war. I don’t have a problem with the phrase and I don’t let those who would choose to “brand” me define what it means for me personally.
Like I said, Democrats (and all people on the left) need to stop being so scared of being marganilized for speaking loudly about basic human rights. Lead, follow or get out of the way.
is that when one is branded as being “anti-war,” the implication is that they are not pragmatic. And yes, it is possible to oppose the war in Iraq and still think that war is sometimes inevitable and justified. I opposed this invasion in Iraq from it’s first inkling and protested it, and sent out blanket emails, and wrote my reps, etc. I did everything I could, personally, to stop it. But, I think it would be ludicrous to call me anti-all-war, as I am married to a US Marine. Ultimately, I had to drive him onto the base one night so that he could board a plane to fight in a war we both felt was idiotic. The reason that wars like Vietnam and Iraq muster such opposition is that they cannot be demonstrated to be vital to our self-defense. But, there are other times when there is unchecked aggression and you have no choice but to fight. In a sense I guess you could say my husband and I are anti-war in that we think that war is an awful thing and should only ever be a last resort. But, we also believe that are things worth fighting and dying for.
when one is branded as being “anti-war,” the implication is that they are not pragmatic.
And implications are only valid to those who accept them.
In a sense I guess you could say my husband and I are anti-war in that we think that war is an awful thing and should only ever be a last resort. But, we also believe that are things worth fighting and dying for.
That’s what I meant about defining it for yourself.
I don’t “get the picture”, whatever the hell that means. I’m anti-war when the war is a war of aggression and not of defense.
I’ll bet I’ve been speaking loudly in defense of human rights longer and louder than you have.
As for “lead, follow or get out of the way”, well that’s just plain simple-minded.
I appreciate criticism, but I do not appreciate it when it’s thrown at me in the style you have just shown. That was uncalled for.
This isn’t some kind of pissing contest. It’s about serious debate on serious issues in which participants are to be treated with respect. If you’re unable to show me that consideration, please move on.
You call me illogical, powerless and scared and then you accuse ME of showing a lack of respect.
As for “lead, follow or get out of the way”, well that’s just plain simple-minded.
What’s “plain simple-minded” about it if I may be so bold as to ask?
What is the other option?
If I’m as “plain simple-minded” as Thomas Paine, the originator of that quote, I can live with that.
the words, just the context.
who was doing his best to start a war – without which we wouldn’t be having this conversation.
Speaking of which, is there room in your “left” for people who are not anti-all-war, or do we have to pledge our troth to Mohandas Ghandi before gaining admittance?
I leave you the final word.
I don’t mind quoting a great thinker even if I don’t agree with all of his or her views. Who knows? I may even quote you someday. 🙂
There’s room in my left for everyone who wants to be there – even the violent, anarchist nutjobs – because they teach me to hold strong to my non-violent principles if I want positive changes. (Was that Ghandi-like? Sorry).
Thanks for the debate.
I’m not anti-WAR, i’m anti-IMPERIALIST.
That being said, the vast majority of wars are wars of conquest, and I oppose all of those.
Interesting opinion, thank you.
You talk about a fractured Democratic party in a state of confusion about its message. Take a moment and think about that: are you part of the problem or part of the solution?
Both.
Did you see any prominent Democrats at the rally? Any of the headliners for ’06 or ’08? No. In fact, they ran out of town.
What I did see is thousands of Americans doing some heavy lifting. Heavy lifting to turn out the disabled, the elderly, and people who (I’d guess) would not normally have the discretionary income to make it to DC for a day or two.
I also saw lots of special interest groups — the Palestinians just one of many. If there was a voice that dominated with their own message, I’d say it was the unions (damn, they were loud!) — and “We Want Union” was hardly the theme of the rally. But to take this a bit further, what I saw was the ‘rank and file’ of America.
The ‘rank and file’ have traditionally found a voice in our representative democracy by banding together into special interest groups. What do you say to them when the Dem’s ‘new message’ is that special interest groups are part of the problem, not the solution?
Where were the Democrats yesterday? Far away, analyzing, from a safe vantage point, how to take advantage of the growing anti-Iraq war sentiment.
Is the problem the media? Well, the Washington Post, in my opinion, has given fair and balanced coverage, both before and after the rally.
No, the problem here was finding the Democrats. The headliners who want us to vote for them and donate to their campaigns. I’d also add to the list all the onliners who sniffed that they wouldn’t participate because “Free Mumia” types might be there. They too were keeping their safe distance but undoubtedly will pen more anti-Iraq diatribes for our reading pleasure in the future — from the safe vantage points of their computers.
Where were the Democrats? Dunno, but I do know when we’ll see them again: when they call for us to seed their coffers. They’ll want us do so in spite of their contempt for us — despite the stink on us for having (gasp) stood in the general vicinity of a “Free Mumia” type. And the manner in which we should seed their coffers is that which is most convenient for our “Fighting Dems” — free of association, of gender, of special interest. Of course, there is no reason why the Democrats should even need to craft a platform when that which has been decreed to sustain them has been stripped of identity entirely.
Great post from the perspective of one that was there. Did you all know that our reps are taking tomorrow off. Some stupid excuse was given. They are taking the day off when so many of their constituents had planned on showing up at the Capitol building offices they occupy that we pay for to question them about where the reps stand. They are absent on both sides of the aisle. They only want to hear from us when we have signed a nice big check to the campaign coffers. They keep telling us just be quiet until ’06 and then we will tell you what our message is. Well, for me their resounding silence speaks volumes to me.
They’re taking the fucking DAY OFF???
What excuse? I need to hear this now, because I willt ear each and every one of them a new one.
Well, it looks like the House will be back on the floor at 2 pm tomorrow — perhaps the protestors could chase them around DC in the am??
Hmmmm, but the Congressional Calendar says that there will be no VOTES until 6:30 p.m. on Tuesday — off to check the Senate!
On the Senate website it says they will be going in to exectutive session at 1 pm Monday for the consideration of John Roberts…..
I heard it at the rally here yesterday. When the speaker brought it up(she was great)the crowd booed very loudly!
Oh, do you mean your reps. in California?
Maybe they mean to take the day off from floor activity so that they can be IN their offices when people come to talk with them??
ahahahahahahahh [manical laughter]
Yeah right. That will be the day that hell freezes over, when they actually listen to us. I write all the emails I possibly can and always get the standard response, we got thousands of emails and cannot respond to all of them….blah, blah, blah!
goes to the first poster who recognizes the source []
Tell the rabble to be quiet,
We anticipate a riot
This common crowd,
Is much too loud.
Tell the mobs who sing their song
That they are fools and they are wrong,
They are a curse.
They must disperse.
Clue: think faith-based </snicker>
[
] The rewards for pop culture knowledge are meager, sorry!
Used to sing through the album when I was young. 🙂
No, the problem here was finding the Democrats.
My point was this: you are “the Democrats”.
When you leaders don’t show up on any front to speak for you, you have to speak for yourself. That’s what happened yesterday in a massive way. The leaders are not the party – you are.
we elect our own candidates. Only if we have representation in our government. Only if primaries are fair and not pre-determined in outcome.
Leaders in absentia don’t cut it. There’s no difference between Bush running away during a time of crisis and these losers. I didn’t meet any candidates, either.
I was standing in front of Freedom Plaza and watched a bus come in. The bus driver, an elderly African-American, went to open the baggage compartments which were filled with signs, not luggage. A particularly tattered group rolled off the bus. After all was said and done, one person went up to the driver with a bundle of dirty bills — “we took up a collection, this is for you.” He smiled warmly — the peaceniks weren’t so bad! I think he ‘honked for peace’ on the way out. And I’m glad that wad of bills went to him and not one of our “Democrats”.
Metaphorically speaking, we should be supporting those who will drive the bus to safety when needed, not the hiding cowards who don’t suffer the consequences of their shallow, short-sighted and selfish actions.
What I am seeing as part of the problem it is the special interest monies that “choose” our candidates for us. Guess what? I don’t care for most they are “choosing” for us these days. So my question is how do you fight the guys with the big bucks that decide who they are going to drive in the primaries or 06 elections?
for starters, on the assumption that discussing a new party doesn’t give us the instant gratification fix needed for online discourse 😉
Collectively, Americans need to agree that the current system is undemocratic. With the high disapproval ratings of Congress, this should be a no-brainer. In the short term, I plan on educating myself on Clean Election reforms, which apparently have been successful in Maine, for example, in that the small donor contributer actually can make a difference.
Metaphorically speaking, we should be supporting those who will drive the bus to safety when needed, not the hiding cowards who don’t suffer the consequences of their shallow, short-sighted and selfish actions.
Amen to that.
Catnip, I read your diary and the comments so far and I think you raise valid points that have troubled me for awhile. If you can’t find a leader, ‘be one’, if a better one rises up, then you may want to follow or you may want to continue to lead, but important thing is not to sit and wait for a leader.
This whole deal is not about Democrats/Republicans to me, it is about ‘people’ and how to get the ‘power’ back to the people, the good and caring people on both sides in this country.
I think this is a good place to remind people of the plans by Vote to Impeach,site.
Whether Congress is taking the day off or not, this can still be done, and it is something for all of us ‘desktop computer’ people to do that we can do so well, send emails.
BTW, if you do a goggle search for anti war march, you will find newpapers all over the country have picked up the AP or Reuters story and printed it.
I should add to my last comment that newspapers around the country have posted their own ‘local anti-war march stories” as well as the DC story.
I for one am going to do everything I can to vote Landrieu and Vitter out of office in Louisiana. No more republican lite, when it comes to Landrieu, and there are plenty more pissed off as hell with her and Vitter.
The question is, what system do we create in the place of our current, cronied, elitist, monied system that looks out for itself, the low income and middle class be damned?
The question is, what system do we create
Start from the bottom by supporting principled people and the system changes itself.
I have no problem with the profusion of alledgedly off-topic issues, mostly because I think that issues of global political injustice are interconnected and help make the case for why this particular war can’t be seen merely as the good fight gone bad.
I do, however, have a real problem with the quality of the speeches made, at least the few that I heard. There was too much shouting and sloganeering where there should have been simple education.
Many of the issues raised were totally unfamilar to many people, myself included. (I haven’t given the Philipines a second thought in years, probably since the eighties.)
Now, when you get a bunch of screaming radicals (and I mean that respectfully, for they have every right to be both) to represent causes no one’s heard of, it’s a lost opportunity to actually sensitize people to injustice.
I mean, I suppose the speakers were trying to energize the crowd, but I’d submit that you can whisper and energize a crowd, provided your speech is well-crafted and your cause righteous. Moreover, by whispering, as if grieving, rather than shouting, as if militant, you’re much more likely to strike a deep, human chord with people.
I would envision such a speech as being something like a courtroom procedure, wherein specific charges against US policy are read slowly and in all solemnity, so people can actually absorb them.
I really think the left needs to start training armies of activists in the art of public speaking.
Send ’em to me — I’ve taught English public speaking to Japanese college students — I can teach and empower any one!
I love to watch someone come into thier own while talking effectively about something they really believe in to a live audience…best teaching experience EVER!
I have been shocked for years that one of the top fears of Americans is speaking in public — what a shame!
Send ’em to me
If any more people move into your house, you’re going to have to buy a bigger one. 🙂
Honey, we don’t own our house!! Whatever gave you that idea??
😉
And, to be honest, that suits me fine right now….
I don’t own one either. If you do invest though – buy a hotel. 🙂
You’re so kind-hearted and generous with your space.
I liked the mix. I think the unpredictability added to the interest. Some people just snooze through what they think is educational.
All in all, I’ll take any of those speakers over Bush and his smirky, scripted crap any day.
(I do see your point. You just get what you paid for sometimes). 🙂
I liked the mix. I think the unpredictability added to the interest. Some people just snooze through what they think is educational.
I admittedly only saw about a half hour of the thing, in a couple of sittings, so maybe I just saw the ranting moments.
But I totally agree that unpredictability is good and that the ranters and the educators could well complement each other. In that case, I think the event should be produced with all the care that would go into a symphony. Figure out who’s who and put them up in the most artful possible arrangement, designed, of course, for maximal oomph.
All of which has me thinking, generally, about the place of sophisticated political pageantry in our society. The French Revolution had David, the Third Reich had Leni Riefenstahl, both of whom were enormously talented and visionary artists.
Who’ve we got? And does it matter? Would we want a Leni Riefenstahl to produce our demonstrations if one were available?
Would it make a difference? I tend to think that more attention to detail, a greater pursuit of excellence in all aspects of what we do, as a movement, would only help.
Thoughts, opinions?
Masses and mobs of people have no obligation to fit into the strategy developed by some political party, or to meet standards of behavior or performance of either the educated elite or the commercial media.
The people are what they are. They just are.
(In part, that’s why the framers protected government from the people as much as they did.)
But it’s the job of political parties to attract and represent the people. The less effective they are, the more likely they are to see masses of people in the streets doing those maddening and unryly things the people do at such times.
The short-term burden here is not on the people to obey and follow, it’s on the organized parties to represent and lead.
Masses and mobs of people have no obligation to fit into the strategy developed by some political party, or to meet standards of behavior or performance of either the educated elite or the commercial media.
No one’s talking about obligations, just recommendations. But your point that this is what democracy looks like begs the question. It presumes that the purpose of the demonstration is to demonstrate democracy itself, rather than a particular message. Is that the point? That deserves a little consideration, I think.
Also, certainly, the element of spontaneity and even unruliness is what democracy looks like, in a manner of speaking, but the fact is that the event is highly organized. It’s not, essentially, spontaneous. That said, the question of control and organization is really not whether, but how much. I’m simply wondering if more control and organization wouldn’t ultmiately prove more effective of the ultimate goal, which is ending the war, not parading democracy.
Does that make sense?
God, there’s no way to make this sound unsnarky, but here it goes anyway
How did the protests “work” exactly?
And isn’t the “if you say they didn’t…” bit a lot like Bush’s “clap louder for Tinkerbell” theory on Iraq? That volume can act as a substitute for good strategy and tactics? We shouldn’t clap louder, we should change and get smarter and learn from our mistakes.
How messed up is the Democratic party? They think this protest worked. That’s how messed up.
How did the protests “work” exactly?
The protests, attended by hundreds of thousands all over the world, got the message out that the Iraq war was a mistake and that the ineptitude, inhumanity and aggression of the coalition governments involved will no longer be tolerated.
We shouldn’t clap louder, we should change and get smarter and learn from our mistakes.
That was the message.
How messed up is the Democratic party? They think this protest worked. That’s how messed up.
Explain to me how they didn’t.