5 Reasons ANSWER is not the answer

The military aggression of the United States Government has led to a resurgence of street protests and anti-imperialist action. In the United States, diverse organizations have mobilized to oppose global rule, whether corporate or military. Unfortunately, International ANSWER has acted to ensure that it monopolizes the planning of national anti-war demonstrations. We should not allow our feelings of urgency let ANSWER dictate the course of the current anti-war movement. While WE do most of the hard work of getting people in the streets, THEY take all the credit. This declaration does not seek to create an alternative anti-war movement, but to create an anti-war movement that is strengthened at the roots by including diverse voices in a PUBLIC decision making process.

1. Lack of Participation- In the last year ANSWER has capitalized off the need to fashion an immediate response to George W. Bush's cowboy militarism by positioning itself as the sole decision maker. While this has shown to be shrewd organizing on their part, it betrays a strong belief in top down decision making by a small group. Instead of mimicking a coalition by seeking a large number of signatories to legitimize their effort, ANSWER should accept the fact that a dynamic and thoughtful anti-war movement will only come from wide ranging participation in the decision making process. ANSWER must give up its monopoly over the decision making process and open meetings up to all of the diverse groups involved in building a strong anti-war movement.

2. Lack of Creativity- While keeping eager and excited protesters at a rally to hear umpteenth speakers may give ANSWER ample opportunities to hit us up for money, it does little to ensure a positive protest experience. Many frustrated activists have tried to inject satire, camp and civil disobedience to these actions. Their actions are welcome to bored protesters, but not sufficient. While protests need to respect the safety of all involved, they also need to do more than herd folks from point A to point B. Also, who needs slogans shouted at them? Don't we already know why we're there? Monotony and sloganeering are not successful organizing strategies. No more sound trucks, no more bullhorns!

3. Destructive Past Practice- Over the years, ANSWER has alienated numerous social groups because of their overly aggressive and selfish organizing activity, including acts of physical intimidation and misinformation. ANSWER should understand that it exists to further social justice, not its own ends. Although WE do the majority of the organizing by renting buses, writing articles, planning teach-ins, posting flyers and braving arrest, ANSWER takes all the credit. Just look at all the posts that defend ANSWER by saying that they get tens of thousand to protest. WE are the tens of thousands, and WE do this out of OUR OPPOSITION, not because ANSWER tells us!

4. Alienating Policy Positions- For some reason ANSWER adheres to the old adage that "the enemy of my enemy if my friend." This makes for an over-simplicity which is neither necessary nor effective. Combating US imperialism does not require defending odious figures like Saddam Hussein, or characterizing North Korea as a "people's paradise." Clearly, these dictators are ideologically diverse, and so repudiation of ANSWER for actively supporting them is not red baiting. While every coalition will have and should respect differences of opinion, no movement for social justice can abide the enshrinement of despotism here or abroad.


5. We Can Do Better- There are already other coalitions which are ready to create an anti-war movement that is committed to the principles of participatory decision making and organization. The various organizations which form the coalition supporting www.unitedforpeace.org represent both diversity and cooperation. Below is a list of the various groups involved in this group that stands as a viable alternative to ANSWER. Some organizers worry that such a shift will take away from this brilliant and growing movement, it won't. As we grow, we must know when to shed our skin! The time to do away with the monopoly of ANSWER is now and the way is easy. However, the fact that no single group should have sole decision making authority means that ANSWER would participate in future coalitions as well.

Remember our purpose, continue to struggle against War and injustice! See you on the streets!

It is beyond me why we need to keep having divisions such as this.
Who cares who takes the credit? The credit for the more than half a million people that marched that day belongs to every single individual who went to the demonstrations.
We need to unite around our common goals if we expect to have any chance of success, not start fighting between each other!

I agree with the original poster. ANSWER has done nothing but hold back the anti-war movement. They waste peoples money and they get NOTHING done! they don't even allow civil disobeidance. it's a nice way to control the masses, keep them at a permited event, have them walk around, and have this war continue.
ANSWER is NOT the answer.

Today there is significant level of popular opposition to the war in Ireland, in Britain, across Europe and even in the United States. The question is how is that discontent going to express itself? With marches and speeches? Which do what exactly? Does anyone really think that it makes the slightest bit of difference, that all of a sudden the rulers of our world, fattened on the blood of a hundred countries, will suddenly turn heel at the sight of how ever many thousand protesters!
What does marching do?

(1) Those of us who have been around the block far too many times know only too well that the purpose of such events is nothing to do with stopping war and everything to do with building the membership of leftist political parties. If you don’t believe me go to one and see if anyone is trying to collect your name and address, and see what they do with it.

(2) Furthermore such events are actually functional to capitalism, resting as it does on ideas as much as force (which is always the last resort). Legally marching, much like standing for election, is merely helping to promote the illusion that we live in some kind of free society. One where we choose our rulers, and where our rulers will respond to petitions and assemblies of persons asking them gently to stop this or that or to do this or that (of course an actual free society would have no kind of rulers). As the organisers of these events know that this is not the case (they claim after all to be revolutionaries), this is further evidence of the truth of the first point.

(3) Thirdly such events re-produce the hierarchy of capitalism, with a passive mass receiving the wisdom of a few chieftains on a podium.

What can direct action do?

(1) Get results! Anyone that doesn’t believe me, ask yourself this question: Why is that both halves of the adult population have the vote ? (for what it’s worth). Enough people in Shannon, enough times, inflicting enough costs on the government and there would be no more military re-fuelling. Just as enough people not paying the water charges had them scrapped.


(2) Empower people, rather than disempowering them through the sort of hierarchy described above. A free society can only be created by millions, and not only when millions have the desire, but when millions have the confidence. Through small victories won through our own hands (i.e. direct action) we gain such confidence.

What we do not mean by direct action are those actions which are not open to mass participation, and which relegate people to the status of spectators watching individual heroism. We do not think you need training to participate.

Some leftist groups criticise direct action as elitist. The same ones that follow the teachings of the man that wrote:

“The revolutionary party (vanguard) which renounces its own dictatorship surrenders the masses to the counter-revolution . . . Abstractly speaking, it would be very well if the party dictatorship could be replaced by the ‘dictatorship' of the whole toiling people without any party, but this presupposes such a high level of political development among the masses that it can never be achieved under capitalist conditions.” (Trotsky, 1937)

Elitist! Beside me at both of the two recent actions at Shannon were people who had never taken part in ANY demonstration ever before, what an arrogant condescending attitude these leftists have.

The call has gone out for a demonstration at Shannon, on Sunday, December the 8th., at 2pm. A Grassroots Network for Peace is in the process of establishing itself, as a means of communication for people into direct action, democracy, and kicking Washington’s legions out of county Clare.

in response to Daniel Morduchowicz, it isn't about taking credit. it's about understanding what these people history is, and what their politics are and whay they are capable of doing, especially the very anti-democratic practices.

follow the history here:

http://authoritarianopportunistswhocozyuptogenocidaldictators-forpeace.org/

000