Much has changed since I spoke to the National Assembly last July. The peace and anti-war movements were at their lowest point of energy since the initial invasion of Afghanistan. This piece some what contrast now and then. The first portion is from my analysis in July 2009. It has been changed a bit for present tense. The second half is from a piece I recently wrote examining the movements today.
In a conversation I had with Bob Wing, founding Co-chair of UFPJ before last year's conference, he pointed out to me that there was no longer a center of power to the left of President Obama. At least, that is the way I heard his comments. I thought he was right, and that it helped explain the political challenge the peace/anti-war movements faced in mobilizing allies in the wider social and economic justice movements to resist the current wars and occupations.
Then and today the economy has pushed the average person into discomfort about their economic position at best. Millions have lost their jobs, are underemployed or are awaiting the possibility of being evicted from their foreclosed homes. Then people were looking to government/the new Administration to solve these problems. Additionally, after eight years of struggle merely to defend the status quo, many organizations and people in economic and social justice struggles, were engaging with Congress and the Administration, in order to move forward their individual issues, pushing the war to a second or third tier issue on their agendas. Make no mistake, the wars/occupations were still of great concern to people, but home comes first. This, in many ways, freed the U.S. government to conduct foreign policy as it chose. As a result, to many it appeared that the progressive left and in particular the peace and anti-war movements had lost momentum.
At that time and still to some degree, most of the peace/anti-war movements’ allies were in the Obama orbit. The movement of allies’ attention from the wars/occupations disempowered the peace and anti-war movement thereby empowering Obama, making his “movement” the strong grouping on the left. The only place economic and social justice advocates had relative organized collective power was around the war. In my estimation they dis-empowered themselves by engaging with the Administration piecemeal instead of using the war as a lead to push through other reforms.
This is a quote from my talk in July of last year. "Because we are weak does not mean that we are no longer needed. Sometime in the near future as it becomes clear that the Obama Administration will not bring the full change sought by economic and social justice advocates, they will turn to build a new progressive power nexus to pull elected officials more consistently to the left. The fact that economic and social justice struggle are all connected via peace and anti-war, our continued resistance to the war policies and our efforts to make visible these connections and our coalitions building provides fertile political space for the emergence of this new left configuration.
Today
A majority of U.S. Americans want to see the occupation of Afghanistan end. Obama has failed to deliver the change he promised. We have ongoing dire economic woes and the emergence of political movements driven by fear like the Tea Party. All this has created new political space which I think provides a unique opportunity to create a political force that goes beyond other attempts in US history to build a coalition with a progressive agenda.
Although our domestic allies continue to engage government piecemeal, the leaders and organizers understand that no matter their feelings of hope or disappointment with the current administration, a peoples’ movement must emerge to force change. The 2010 U.S. Social Forum in Detroit brought together thousand of grassroots activist across a wide spectrum of struggles. It was a unique opportunity for activists to step outside their lanes and cross fertilize, beginning the process of visioning strategies to shape our common future.
A direct example of struggles stepping outside of their lanes to build a peoples’ movement will be the October 2
nd One Nation mobilization in Washington D.C. to demand jobs, education investment, affordable housing, immigration reform and a shift of resources from war to human needs.
What now for the Peace and Anti-war movements?
What should the anti-war and peace movements do to forward our goals? We must continue to do many of the same things we have always done.
We must keep the wars visible. With so few U.S. Americans bearing the direct burden of the wars, the wars and the soldiers fighting them are nearly out of sight, out of mind. Not feeling and seeing the cost confront them in their living rooms, kitchens and bedrooms; it is easy for people to believe the wars are proceeding well and rationalize them as necessary.
Vigils, protest of all sizes, direct action and demanding redress from all levels of government are essential. With people focused on immediate challenges to find a job, save their home and make ends meet, the importance of our efforts to keep the wars in the public eye is greater than ever.
After their disappointing issue by issue efforts to engage government, our allies sensing the need to unite are ready to hit the streets again, but this time around domestic issues with jobs at the forefront.
We must join together to build a people’s movement, but this time the war will not be the center of organizing efforts. We will not be in the lead. Nevertheless our focus on war and U.S. Imperialism is central to our domestic problems.
We must provide relevant and timely information to our allies about the huge waste of money, material and human resources on war that should be invested in people. We must do a better in job of turning our rhetoric connecting domestic economic issues to war issues into common strategy and action with our domestic allies. This means we must listen and find ways to be in support of economic and other struggles with our message.
But perhaps our most important task is to envision and model a better world, a better way to solve conflicts and a more sustainable way to live. This includes how we interact and relate to each other as individuals, as philosophical and political rivals in our movements, and yes, even to war mongers and our detractors. Gandhi said, “Be the change you want to see in the world,” and A.J. Muste said, “There is no way to peace, peace is the way,” both speak directly to the process needed to end wars and find peace. And guess what? We have total control of this approach to change. We need no one to join or agree with us. It is an individual challenge and journey. It is the toughest but most relevant and rewarding action to take.
I will see you in the streets, and on the road of peace.
Then and today the economy has pushed the average person into discomfort about their economic position at best. Millions have lost their jobs, are underemployed or are awaiting the possibility of being evicted from their foreclosed homes. Then people were looking to government/the new Administration to solve these problems. Additionally, after eight years of struggle merely to defend the status quo, many organizations and people in economic and social justice struggles, were engaging with Congress and the Administration, in order to move forward their individual issues, pushing the war to a second or third tier issue on their agendas. Make no mistake, the wars/occupations were still of great concern to people, but home comes first. This, in many ways, freed the U.S. government to conduct foreign policy as it chose. As a result, to many it appeared that the progressive left and in particular the peace and anti-war movements had lost momentum.
At that time and still to some degree, most of the peace/anti-war movements’ allies were in the Obama orbit. The movement of allies’ attention from the wars/occupations disempowered the peace and anti-war movement thereby empowering Obama, making his “movement” the strong grouping on the left. The only place economic and social justice advocates had relative organized collective power was around the war. In my estimation they dis-empowered themselves by engaging with the Administration piecemeal instead of using the war as a lead to push through other reforms.
This is a quote from my talk in July of last year. "Because we are weak does not mean that we are no longer needed. Sometime in the near future as it becomes clear that the Obama Administration will not bring the full change sought by economic and social justice advocates, they will turn to build a new progressive power nexus to pull elected officials more consistently to the left. The fact that economic and social justice struggle are all connected via peace and anti-war, our continued resistance to the war policies and our efforts to make visible these connections and our coalitions building provides fertile political space for the emergence of this new left configuration.
Today
A majority of U.S. Americans want to see the occupation of Afghanistan end. Obama has failed to deliver the change he promised. We have ongoing dire economic woes and the emergence of political movements driven by fear like the Tea Party. All this has created new political space which I think provides a unique opportunity to create a political force that goes beyond other attempts in US history to build a coalition with a progressive agenda.
Although our domestic allies continue to engage government piecemeal, the leaders and organizers understand that no matter their feelings of hope or disappointment with the current administration, a peoples’ movement must emerge to force change. The 2010 U.S. Social Forum in Detroit brought together thousand of grassroots activist across a wide spectrum of struggles. It was a unique opportunity for activists to step outside their lanes and cross fertilize, beginning the process of visioning strategies to shape our common future.
A direct example of struggles stepping outside of their lanes to build a peoples’ movement will be the October 2nd One Nation mobilization in Washington D.C. to demand jobs, education investment, affordable housing, immigration reform and a shift of resources from war to human needs.
What now for the Peace and Anti-war movements?
What should the anti-war and peace movements do to forward our goals? We must continue to do many of the same things we have always done. We must keep the wars visible. With so few U.S. Americans bearing the direct burden of the wars, the wars and the soldiers fighting them are nearly out of sight, out of mind. Not feeling and seeing the cost confront them in their living rooms, kitchens and bedrooms; it is easy for people to believe the wars are proceeding well and rationalize them as necessary. Vigils, protest of all sizes, direct action and demanding redress from all levels of government are essential. With people focused on immediate challenges to find a job, save their home and make ends meet, the importance of our efforts to keep the wars in the public eye is greater than ever.
After their disappointing issue by issue efforts to engage government, our allies sensing the need to unite are ready to hit the streets again, but this time around domestic issues with jobs at the forefront. We must join together to build a people’s movement, but this time the war will not be the center of organizing efforts. We will not be in the lead. Nevertheless our focus on war and U.S. Imperialism is central to our domestic problems. We must provide relevant and timely information to our allies about the huge waste of money, material and human resources on war that should be invested in people. We must do a better in job of turning our rhetoric connecting domestic economic issues to war issues into common strategy and action with our domestic allies. This means we must listen and find ways to be in support of economic and other struggles with our message.
But perhaps our most important task is to envision and model a better world, a better way to solve conflicts and a more sustainable way to live. This includes how we interact and relate to each other as individuals, as philosophical and political rivals in our movements, and yes, even to war mongers and our detractors. Gandhi said, “Be the change you want to see in the world,” and A.J. Muste said, “There is no way to peace, peace is the way,” both speak directly to the process needed to end wars and find peace. And guess what? We have total control of this approach to change. We need no one to join or agree with us. It is an individual challenge and journey. It is the toughest but most relevant and rewarding action to take.
I will see you in the streets, and on the road of peace.
