Just a reminder: Please join a General Strike on October 17, 2007 (anniversary of the original Solidarity strike in Poland) to protest the war and the inaction of Congress to rein in the Bush administration. If you can, stay home from work, school, trips to the mall, etc. that day and spend quality time with your family and/or friends on behalf of a more peaceful world. For more details go to Shut it Down October 17, 2007.
This image (and a similar version with a white background) which is available at Shut it Down October 17, 2007 may used however you wish. Download it from Shut it Down October 17, 2007 to place on your blogs. Download it to your computer and make posters or handouts using the image. Send the image with emails to friends, family and your local newspaper. Whatever you can do will be appreciated.
I know some will say that this effort will accomplish nothing. That too few of us will spread the word, and even fewer participate. All I can say to that is great things have small beginnings. This protest may start small, but there will be others to follow. I’ve already seen mention of another call for a general strike on November 6, 2007 by Garret Keizer in Harpers Magazine. Here are some other places where a general strike call is mentioned online: here, here, here, here, here.
It doesn’t matter which day ultimately becomes the BIG EVENT that gains media attention and coverage. What matters is that we keep trying until we get that attention, whether on October 17th, November 6th, or some other day.
Because it has become clear to me that we can’t depend upon the political leadership of the Democratic Party to stop Bush from spreading more wars in the Middle East, bankrupting our future and destroying the planet. They are either too craven, too weak or too opportunistic and calculating to take the steps necessary to stop President Bush from killing more people and committing more war crimes. Nor will the leading Democratic presidential candidates commit to withdrawing all our troops from Iraq, even by the late date of 2013! No, the Democratic Party offers us no solutions to the crisis we face as a nation.
As Seymour Hersh has made clear in his articles in the New Yorker, many military leaders are opposed to this administration’s Iran war plans, but they have been publicly silenced so long as they wear the uniform. And once they take the uniform off so that they can speak out? They have been ignored and/or smeared by the right wing crazy talk machine. Just ask former generals John Batiste, Wes Clark and Lamar Odom, to name just a few. So, no, we cannot expect the military to stop Bush either.
Which leaves it up to those of us who have warned all along about the perfidy of the Neoconservative agenda in the Middle East, and catastrophic consequences to allowing that agenda to continue to be carried out by President Bush and Vice President Cheney without any prior restraint from Congress. We are the ones who must find new ways to oppose the war and prevent a new war with Iran. We are the ones who must act to serve, and save, our nation from further degradation, moral, physical and spiritual.
We need mass action by an outraged citizenry, fed up with the failure of our politicians to end this constitutional crisis. A crisis caused by a power mad leader, who all but a few fanatics and zealots believe is a liar and a fool. A leader who effectively rules over us as a dictator because no one in authority will stand up to him, and no one in Congress will challenge him, despite the overwhelming desire of the American Public to see a stake driven through the heart of his disastrous war policies, his abrogation of our laws (including the Constitution), and his regime’s continuing and ever more numerous violations of our individual rights and liberties.
A General Strike, whether on October 17th or November 6th or whatever date you prefer, is a good way to start.
Thank you.
STRIKE!
Buhdy has called for Nov. 6 in his essay. I think we really really ought to get serious about voting with our dollars and have a lot of general strikes, not just one. Maybe one per month just to get the juices to flow with a lot of commentary about where our dollars are NOT well spent!
Please feel free to repost this story wherever you like.
I think it’s a great idea – monthly strikes – and I will be participating in this one on Oct17th.
STEVEN! — YOU ARE THERE– HAL-A-LOO – YA! I applaud you sir. one small step for man……!
might I suggest that since OCT 17 is one day before the SCHIP overide vote, the 17th might be a great day to have a mass call-in to every senator and representative to urge, demand, beg them to vote to overide.
Again sir- BRAVO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
This is a great idea. If the MSM can get involved in reporting it, it is more likely to have widespread success.
Whom will this hrt gthe most?
Let’s see. I would guess those most hard hit will be restaurant operators and workers in college towns — and I don;t think these people are building vacation homes on the beach in Malibu.
Next will be small business owners in general, who will certainly be happy to give up a day’s receipts, and will therefore rally to the cause with unbridled glee.
Of course, most of the workers who strike will hold jobs at or near the minimum wage, and they can ceratinly afford to go without a couple of meals.
Those with any real economic clout or power will hardly risk losing their job — they’ll all be at work.
National corporations — retail chains, hotels, airlines, etc. — will feel nothing.
Result: a lot of noise and bother with no effect but to harm those who can least afford it. This isn’t Gdansk, or Harvard Yard.
Maybe the best way to end a war is to win it. Of course, that means dealing with certain realities that most of us would prefer not to confront — that we have real enemies, that they are implacable, and that in order to beat them, we must first admit that they are enemies, and then — we have to kill them.
This is not likely to be a popular point of view here, I think.
How do you expect to win a war in Iraq? With a broken military? By paying Halliburton and Blackwater even more of our tax dollars? By continuing to run up the deficit? By shooting every person, man, woman and child in Iraq? In Iran? In Afghanistan? In the whole Middle East?
I can’t wait to hear your fabulous strategy for defeating this implacable enemy in Iraq, the one that didn’t attack us on 9/11.
No, I don’t think I would do any of those things, actually. But thanks for the fresh viewpoint; usually people just trot out the same old tired litany of cliched dogma.
Re: the soldiers’ quote — what exactly does that really mean? That soldiers are fighting and dying? That is how you actually do win a war, you know. Twisting that into some kind of justification for your point of view if a little sick, don’t you think? That’s his comrades’ blood you are painting yourself with; I’m not sure they would appreciate it.
Obviously, I don’t know how to win the “war” in Iraq, if that’s what it is. You don’t either. But I know how to lose it.
No one should ever start a fight like that without being fully committed to finishing it. We probably should have just hauled ourselves out of there as soon as we found Hussein, and let the Iraqis deal with their own mess. It is their own mess, you know.
I make no apologies for removing Hussein. But I am curious to know which “countries” attacked us on 9/11. I have my own opinions about state-sponsored terror, but I do not think that the US is any less hostage to the terrorists than the governments of the nations that “support” the terrorists. The terrorists blackmail the rulers, who are corrupt, and will pay any price to retain power.
The terrorists attack the West in order to drum up further funding from the corrupt, and support from the woefully ignorant stone-age stooges they wire up and explode like so many kewpie dolls.
This is a long and tedious argument. To get back to the beginning: how will your strike shorten the day by ten seconds? It won’t, you know. It’s just more pompous posturing and look-at-me self-righteousness from a bunch of people who exploit this situation for their own ends, which are hardly admirable, especially when, like you, they dip their banners in the wounds of the honored dead.
Dipping my banner in the wounds of the honored dead? You sir or madam are sorely mistaken about a great many things. Nothing I’ve written dishonors anyone, and ending the Iraq war would have no effect on the dead, honored or otherwise. Ending the war would save people who are risking currently their lives in a conflict that our own intelligence agencies admit has made us less secure from future terrorist attacks, and has created no measurable benefit to our national security.
If this is a war of the magnitude that some on the right claim, then why has no conservative called for re-instituting the draft? Why has there been no war surtax imposed to pay for the cost of this crusade? Why is there no rush among conservatives to join the military? Why instead do we keep sending the same troops back, over and over again, many suffering from prior wounds, from PTSD, from ruined families and shattered lives?
This war should never have been fought. Meanwhile the people who engineered the attacks on 9/11 who killed people I knew sit in relative safety in Pakistan, our purported ally in the war on terror, releasing tapes mocking us. Saudi millionaires continue to fund Al Qaeda. But you want us to win in Iraq? How? You can’t say. You are only able to come here and issue your rants and make your ridiculous claims of honor on behalf of people you don’t know but who you assume share your point of view and your goals for endless war in the Middle East.
You have no solutions, no answers, only ad hominem attacks against someone who you despise because his political views don’t square with yours. Pretty sad display, frankly.
I am sorry you consider my comments “ad hominem.”
Yet the flood of discredited cliches continue, and you again cite a soldier in distress.
I am “ridiculous, and my comments, which I think are reasoned, are “rants” (is this, I wonder, “ad hominem?”}
Your questions are simplistic (not ad hominem; my comment is directed at your logic); and beg many other questions.
Certainly I do not depise you. Many of your firmly-held convictions are alternative viewpoints I continually explore and consider. I seek a debate. I wonder at your reluctance to engage.
I respect your point of view, and, like you, am concerned. If I do not reflect your agony, or your vehemence, chalk it up to an old man’s reluctance to embrace any emotional point of view, however fervent.
Samuel Johnson once famously siad, “The great differences among mankind are about means, not ends.”
I am not your enemy.
“You” make no apologies for “removing” Hussein.
Yeah, like “you” had something to do with it.
As for Hussein being “removed’ Hussein wasn’t just “removed”, as you so fastidiously put it, he was killed – tried by a kangaroo court & then he was hanged by the neck until dead. Some might say for no greater reason than political vengeance.
As for soldiers’ deaths – yes, they may be required to win a war but the necessary pre-condition is that the war be worth winning. Soldiers greatly resent it when they see that their comrades lives are being spent for no good reason. This is why there is growing resentment within the ranks regarding *this* war.
As you have admitted, you don’t know how to win. Two key ingredients: 1) show up, 2) take some action.
I don’t believe a single one-day strike will end the war either – but a one day strike every month, and then every week, and then weeklong if required will get the attention of the Pelosis & Reeds & Hillarys of the world (it won’t get the attention of Bush, he is too far gone).
I agree with your point about soldiers’ “resenting” senseless death. All the more reason to try to find a way to give Iraq what it deserves — a working government and some measure of civil peace. This may be impossible. It may not be. You have made up your mind. I have not. No proof exists sufficient to confirm either position. In the meantime:
“It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us — that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion — that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain — that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom — and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.”
Curious how relevant those words are today, isn’t it?
Let us be clear – my view is that the lives sacrificed so far have been wasted. I would not waste more lives on an enterprise as ignoble & unworthy as
removing Saddam’s WMDsbringing democracy to the regionfighting ’em there so we don’t have to fight ’em heresmoking ’em outbringing ’em onavenging the attempt on the life of George Bush’s daddy.Next, if you want to draw an analogy, this is not like the Lincoln’s Civil War, or Roosevelt’s World War II for that matter.
This war is like McKinley’s petty & brutal war in the Phillipines, or maybe Johnson’s war in Vietnam (except that Bush had no ‘Great Society’ program to drag down – just a bunch of ‘have-mores’ to enrich).
Bush’s pronouncements have been much more akin to McKinley’s alleged
than to anything Lincoln has ever said.