======================================================================
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
======================================================================
On 7/12/13 7:50 AM, Ron Jacobs wrote:
http://stillhomeron.blogspot.com/2013/07/was-that-really-antiwar-movement-look.html
In my opinion, it is virtually impossible to oppose the machinery of US
imperialism without an anti-imperialist understanding of the US role in
the world. Any other approach limits the success and the goals of any
antiwar movement.
---
Actually the millions of people who took part in the Moratorium protests
against the war in Vietnam in 1969 had virtually no understanding of
imperialism. They were tired of the killing and a typical activity
consisted of walking down the main street of some small town carrying a
candle. But it was the sheer force of the mass action that finally began
to turn the tide against the war-makers.
Back in 1967 when I was about to join the SWP, I was also in touch with
the Progressive Labor Party through a Bard graduate who was at the New
School with me who was in their periphery. His favorite mantra was about
the need for "an anti-imperialist anti-war movement" being carried out
by the PL wing of SDS. The anti-PL wing had at this point given up on
mass actions. PL was for demonstrations but only if they were organized
around "radical" demands that supposedly made the connection that the
USA was an imperialist power. They never produced the kinds of numbers
that could have an impact on the war but they did bring some impatient
students around PL.
This is something I wrote to Marxmail in 2001, long before I began blogging:
On the Militant newspaper website (just updated), there are several
letters complaining about the lack of antiwar coverage:
http://www.themilitant.com/2001/6542/654235.html
Party leader Jack Willey answers them with an article that claims
that the SWP's fight is against "imperialism" and not the war:
http://www.themilitant.com/2001/6542/654236.html
How said it is to hear these sorts of ultraleft arguments in a time
of such deep crisis. Back in 1967, when I first came around the
American SWP, I asked Dan Styron whether the Vietnam antiwar
demonstrations the party was building were sufficiently
"anti-imperialist". He explained to me that they were *objectively*
anti-imperialist in the sense that if they became massive enough,
they could affect the course of the war. If they could help the
Vietnamese throw out the USA, then this would be the greatest blow to
American imperialism in its history. He was, of course, correct. The
reluctance of the USA to commit ground troops in Afghanistan is a
sign that the "Vietnam syndrome" is still in effect. This kind of
help is much more meaningful than empty verbal radicalism.
One supposes that the SWP can do little else at this point. It is not
as if they had several thousand members who could change gears. This
is a creaky old sect that is hardened in its ways. Even if Barnes
woke up tomorrow morning and had a change of heart, he and his troops
would not be able to carry out a new orientation. When your entire
political life revolves around selling the collected speeches of your
cult leader to fellow workers, then you lose the kinds of skills
necessary to build demonstrations or organize mass rallies.
Political suicide is not a pretty sight.
________________________________________________
Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu
Set your options at:
http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
