Quietly Calling for a National Campaign

March 16, 2005

The War Resisters League is part of a Nation­al Call for Non­vi­o­lent Resis­tance, though this is the first we at Non​vi​o​lence​.org have heard of it (lucky we surfed by this morn­ing, does the peace move­ment take pride in its insu­lar­i­ty?). See the “iraq Pledge of Resistance”:http://www.iraqpledge.org/ for more info. Unfor­tu­nate­ly with this lit­tle advance notice, we won’t be going to DC’s events this week­end. If any Non​vi​o​lence​.org read­ers do we’d love a report.

MoveOn at peace with War?

March 16, 2005

Over on Alter­Net, Nor­mon Solomon is ask­ing why the inter­net pro­gres­sive group MoveOn has dropped iraq from it’s agen­da: “When a large pro­gres­sive orga­ni­za­tion takes the easy way and makes peace with war, the abdi­ca­tion of respon­si­bil­i­ty cre­ates a vac­u­um. Iron­i­cal­ly, a group that became an inter­net phe­nom by rec­og­niz­ing and fill­ing a void is now cre­at­ing one.”

Seattle Five Years Later

December 6, 2004

It’s been five years since the instantly-famous world trade protests in Seat­tle invent­ed a new sort of activism. Angry con­fronta­tions with police dom­i­nat­ed the pic­tures com­ing from the protests. The protest marked the coming-out par­ty of the Inde­pen­dent Media move­ment, both both brought togeth­er and report­ed on the protests.
In the _Seattle Weekly_, Geov Par­rish asks “Is This What Fail­ure Looks Like?”:http://www.seattleweekly.com/features/0447/041124_news_wtogeov.php:
bq. But it’s one thing to shut down a high-level meet­ing for a day; it’s quite anoth­er to get your pri­or­i­ties enact­ed as pub­lic pol­i­cy. And so, in the half-decade since Seat­tle’s ground­break­ing protests, anti-globalization and fair-trade orga­niz­ers in the Unit­ed States have strug­gled to find ways to not sim­ply cre­ate debate but win.
I’ve always respect Geov, who’s been one of the rare paci­fist orga­niz­ers who’s act­ed as a bridge between the gray-haired old­line peace groups and the younger Seattle-style activists. So it’s kind of fun­ny to see his thought­ful arti­cle described by Coun­ter­punch this way. Read Charles Mun­son’s cri­tique, “Seat­tle Week­ly Trash­es Anti-Globalization Movement”:http://www.counterpunch.org/munson11302004.html.
The WTO protests were a land­mark and rad­i­cal­ized a lot of new activists. But despite being 99% peace­ful, they nev­er shook the image of the black-clad anar­chist spoiled brats throw­ing bricks through win­dows. Although I had friends who donned the black han­ker­chiefs, the black bloc always remind­ed me of the los­er high school kids who turn over dump­sters behind the 7 – 11; the high polit­i­cal rhetoric seemed sec­ondary to the joy of being “bad.” It was look-at-me! activism, which is fun and occas­sion­al­ly use­ful, but not the stuff to cre­ate fun­da­men­tal social change.
I par­tic­i­pat­ed in a few post-Seattle events: the anti World Bank protests in Wash­ing­ton DC and the Repub­li­can Nation­al Con­ven­tion protests in my home­town of Philadel­phia, serv­ing as an Indy­media work­er for both. I wit­nessed won­der­ful cre­ativ­i­ty, I mar­veled at the instant com­mu­ni­ty of the Indy­media Cen­ters, I was fas­in­cat­ed by the cell-phone/internet organizing.
But there was also this kind of nag­ging sense that we were try­ing to recre­ate the myth­i­cal “Seat­tle.” It was as if we were all deriv­a­tive rock bands try­ing to jump on the band­wag­on of a break­through suc­cess: the Nivana clones hop­ing to recatch the mag­ic. It was hard to shake the feel­ing we were play act­ing our­selves sometimes.
It’s good to hon­est­ly reflect on the protests now. We need to see what worked and what did­n’t. The fer­vor and orga­niz­ing strate­gies changed activism and will con­tin­ue to shape how we see social-change orga­niz­ing. The world is bet­ter for what went down in Seat­tle five years ago, and so is North Amer­i­can polti­cial orga­niz­ing. But let’s stop idol­iz­ing what hap­pened there and let’s see what we can learn. For we’ve bare­ly begun the work.

FBI Cracking Down on Indymedia?

October 13, 2004

The “Indy­media” move­ment of inde­pen­dent media cen­ters has been one of the most hope­ful ini­tia­tives for democ­ra­cy over the past few years. The Indy­media sites post sto­ries from ama­teur reporters, in print, video and audio for­mats. The region­al Inde­pen­dent Media Cen­ters have been par­tic­u­lar­ly active dur­ing large scale protests, cov­er­ing them with a range and detail seen nowhere else.
Now there’s dis­turb­ing news that the U.S. Fed­er­al Bureau of Inves­ti­ga­tion has “seized Indy­medi­a’s com­put­ers in Britain”:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3732718.stm. Details are lack­ing, but it cer­tain­ly looks like yet anoth­er chill­ing vio­la­tion of free speech in the name of “home­land secu­ri­ty.” Here’s anoth­er arti­cle, from a “local Indy­media Center”:http://www.phillyimc.org/article.pl?sid=04/10/08/1818236. More as this fright­en­ing sto­ry devel­ops. As we get infor­ma­tion we will par­tic­i­pate in any and all protests of this seizure. You can also check out thread on the “Non​vi​o​lence​.org Board”:http://www.nonviolence.org/comment/viewtopic.php?t=2663 (though much of it lame name-calling, sigh…)

NVA: US Military Draft Probably Isn’t Coming Back

August 26, 2004

Rick Jahnkow argues in May’s _Nonviolent Activist_ that there’s a “Decreased Like­li­hood of Draft”:http://www.warresisters.org/nva0504‑3.htm. There are many aging paci­fists that have become obsessed late­ly with the idea that com­pul­so­ry mil­i­tary ser­vice might be return­ing to the Unit­ed States. For exam­ple, I’ve watched the leader of one annu­al anti-draft work­shop pre­dict the draft’s immi­nent return year after year, in ever more excit­ed terms and won­dered what evi­dence this orga­niz­er has seen that I haven’t.
Jahnkow watch­es this issue as much as any­one in his work for the San Diego-based “Com­mit­tee Opposed to Mil­i­tarism and the Draft”:http://www.comdsd.org/ and he’s been watch­ing the hype build as he’s become more skeptical:
bq. Warn­ings about an impend­ing draft have been cir­cu­lat­ing on the Inter­net for months now. Some are tying a pos­si­ble draft to the elec­tion and pre­dict­ing with bold cer­tain­ty that con­scrip­tion will be intro­duced in 2005… The ener­gy that�s been gen­er­at­ed on this top­ic has been both amaz­ing and, I have to con­fess, some­what seduc­tive to anti-draft orga­ni­za­tions like the one for which I work.
Most of the peo­ple I’ve seen get excit­ed by a pos­si­ble return of the draft were in their teens back in the Viet­nam War era. Their orga­niz­ing some­times seems almost nos­tal­gic for the issues of their youth. They’re try­ing to save the cur­rent gen­er­a­tion from hav­ing to go through the same trau­ma. But the old­er activists’ anti-draft work is often patro­n­is­tic and self-congratulatory, for it does­n’t take into account the fact that younger Amer­i­cans don’t need saving.
The bot­tom line truth is that the Pen­ta­gon sim­ply could­n’t rein­state the draft. Jahnkow cites a recent CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll that found that 88 per­cent of peo­ple 18 – 29 oppose a return of the draft. There would be mass may­hem if the draft returned. While some young men would sure­ly obey, a huge per­cent­age would active­ly defy it. Even if only 10% dra­mat­i­cal­ly refused, the sys­tem would break down. This is a gen­er­a­tion raised in a post-punk cul­ture and many of its mem­bers aggres­sive­ly ques­tion author­i­ty. They were raised by par­ents who lived through the six­ties and saw wide­spread lies and abuse of pow­er, includ­ing the Viet­nam War and the Water­gate scan­dal. The media mythol­o­gy around sixties-era rad­i­cal­ism has kept us from real­iz­ing that there’s a base­line of every­day rad­i­cal­ism today that far over­shad­ows much of what was going on thir­ty years ago. The Pen­ta­gon knows this bet­ter than the peace move­ment does.
It’s not the only nos­tal­gic protest­ing this gen­er­a­tion is engag­ing in these days and I’ve com­pared revived orga­niz­ing around “phone war tax resistance”:http://www.nonviolence.org/articles/000230.php to “recy­cling dead hors­es.” I agree with Rick that today’s teens and twenty-somethings have real issues which we need to address. He says it so well:
bq. The lat­ter point leads me to the sec­ond rea­son why I have some neg­a­tive feel­ings about the cur­rent con­cern over the draft: Much of the anx­i­ety is com­ing from peo­ple who are ignor­ing the more press­ing prob­lem of aggres­sive mil­i­tary recruit­ing, which, among oth­er things, dis­pro­por­tion­ate­ly affects non-affluent youths and peo­ple of col­or. In essence, there has been a draft for these individuals�a pover­ty draft�and yet it has drawn rel­a­tive­ly lit­tle atten­tion from anti­war activists. There is a race and class bias reflect­ed in this that needs to be seri­ous­ly con­sid­ered and addressed by the gen­er­al peace movement.
“Here’s the link to his arti­cle again”:http://www.warresisters.org/nva0504‑3.htm
h4. Related:
* Last Novem­ber we pub­lished a provoca­tive arti­cle by paci­fist Johann Christoph Arnold argu­ing that “A Mil­i­tary Draft Would be Good for Us”:http://www.nonviolence.org/articles/000231.php and a per­son­al response piece I wrote about how the “pres­sures of a mil­i­tary draft”:http://www.nonviolence.org/articles/000231.php can force an eigh­teen year old to real­ly think hard about issues of war and peace.
* Non​vi​o​lence​.org has guide to issues of “mil­i­tary con­scrip­tion and con­sci­en­tious objection”:http://www.nonviolence.org/issues/conscience.php. We also watch issues of the “peace movement”:http://www.nonviolence.org/articles/cat_peace_movement.php, and tend to high­light gen­er­a­tional issues a lot.
* The Urban Leg­end debunkers at Snopes​.com have tracked and researched the “draft fear emails going around”:http://www.snopes.com/politics/military/draft.asp. They don’t think a draft is com­ing back and any time soon, cit­ing many sources.

Recreating the theatrical residues of history

April 3, 2004

On the Pick­et Line, a fun­ny post about the “cir­cus of the cur­rent pro­gres­sive movement”:http://www.sniggle.net/Experiment/index.php?entry=26Mar04
bq. In San Fran­cis­co, to be part of the anti-war, pro­gres­sive move­ment means to be shar­ing the stage with a whole bunch of unapolo­getic Stal­in­ists, para­noid schiz­o­phren­ics, ersatz intifadists, tin-eared rhetor­i­cal broken-records, insa­tiable identity-politics police, new-age gurus of every vari­ety, pub­lic­i­ty hounds, careerist Democ­rats, and the like… A super­fi­cial fetishiza­tion of the the­atri­cal residue of his­to­ry gets you a renais­sance faire, not a suc­cess­ful polit­i­cal movement.
The author also gives some hope­ful reports from a recent con­fer­ence he attended.

Collaring the Peacniks in Iowa

February 11, 2004

It’s get­ting “scary in Amerikkka when they start round­ing up peaceniks in Iowa”:www.nytimes.com/2004/02/10/national/10PROT.html
bq. To hear the anti­war pro­test­ers describe it, their forum at a local uni­ver­si­ty last fall was like so many oth­ers they had held over the years. They talked about the non­vi­o­lent philoso­phies of Mahat­ma Gand­hi and the Rev. Dr. Mar­tin Luther King Jr., they said, and how best to con­vey their feel­ings about iraq into acts of civ­il dis­obe­di­ence. But last week, sub­poe­nas began arriv­ing seek­ing details about the forum’s spon­sor — its lead­er­ship list, its annu­al reports, its office loca­tion –and the event itself.
Mild-mannered pro­test­ers wear­ing 1980s-style Guatemalan cloth­ing, talk­ing about Gand­hi and climb­ing the fences of Nation­al Guard bases are not a threat to state of Iowa. But this kind of strong-arm tac­tic is a clear threat free speech and a clear act of intim­i­da­tion to those who might join the peace move­ment. How sad. Unfor­tu­nate­ly I know lots of peo­ple who are already afraid to speak out to loud­ly – this will silence at least some of them.
Of course, it’s hard to get too worked up about Iowa sub­poe­nas, when much more seri­ous civ­il rights vio­la­tions have been going on since the start of the Afghanistan War. The “pris­on­ers of war” down in the Amer­i­can base at “Guan­tanamo Bay have been held with­out charge or tri­al for two years now”:http://web.amnesty.org/pages/guantanamobay-index-eng.

Religious Peace Left: Puny, Aged & Marginalized?

January 16, 2004

Jour­nal­ist Mark I. Pin­sky talks about the “state of the reli­gious left”:www.fortwayne.com/mld/newssentinel/7644649.htm :
bq. Left-wing reli­gious efforts at polit­i­cal mobi­liza­tion — where they exist — seem puny, aged and mar­gin­al­ized. After decades of rid­ing pop­u­lar social move­ments such as civ­il rights, the left splin­tered and now seems unable to regroup. Con­verse­ly, the GOP has co-opted the sup­port of reli­gious vot­ers by focus­ing their atten­tion on cul­tur­al and lifestyle issues — such as gay marriage.
Arti­cle found from a link on “The Right Christians”:http://www.therightchristians.org/ site, which has more com­men­tary on the sub­ject and a pro­pos­al to mim­ic the Dean Cam­paign inter­net orga­niz­ing to rebuild a pro­gres­sive Chris­t­ian left.