What Will It Take to Defeat the War? \r\nNot Another Popular-Front “Peace\r\nMovement,”\r\nMobilize the Working Class to Fight for\r\nPower!\r\nBreak with All the Capitalist Parties – For a Revolutionary\r\nWorkers Party!\r\nFor Workers Strikes Against the War \r\nDefeat U.S. Imperialism – Defend the Iraqi and Afghan Peoples\r\n<\/p>
The following leaflet was issued by the\r\nInternationalist Group\r\nat the antiwar conference called by the National Assembly to End the\r\nIraq War and Occupation held in Cleveland, Ohio on June 28-29. Over\r\nobjections from the conference organizers, the assembly voted to change\r\nthe name to National Assembly to End the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars and\r\nOccupations, and to emphasize the connection with U.S. backing for the\r\nZionist occupation of Palestine. The sponsors of the confab were so\r\nright-wing that they feared losing “unity” with Democratic supporters\r\nof Israel and the Afghanistan war! What did <\/i>not<\/b>\r\nchange at all was the\r\npopular-front character of the new outfit, tying it to the bourgeois\r\nparties despite the fig leaf of electoral “independence.” Making this\r\nutterly clear, it was decided <\/i>not<\/b>\r\nto call a national antiwar\r\nmobilization prior to the November elections explicitly in order to\r\ncourt those forces who wish to aid the Democrats (and therefore want to\r\navoid making problems for the presumptive Democratic nominee, Barack\r\nObama).<\/i> <\/p>
A “National Assembly” has called an “Open National Antiwar\r\nConference” in Cleveland to found a new antiwar organization, in\r\naddition to the various already existing coalitions. Its promoters,\r\nchiefly Socialist Action (SA) and several other self-described\r\nsocialist groups, expect hundreds of activists to attend the conference\r\nand deal with the debilitating problems facing the antiwar movement as\r\nthe U.S. terror war on the world is well into its seventh year. Many\r\nantiwar activists were disturbed when massive protests were held all\r\nover the globe on the fifth anniversary of the U.S. invasion of Iraq –\r\neverywhere except this country. “The absence of a massive united\r\nmobilization during this period in the United States,” says the call\r\nfor the Cleveland conference, “should be a great concern to us all.”<\/p>
The conference organizers say that the main reason that\r\nprotests were called off, that protests have dwindled in size, and that\r\nearlier antiwar marches, which were the largest in the history of the\r\nU.S., have failed to have any effect on the course of the war, is\r\norganizational: squabbles between narrow “sectarian” formations\r\nsupposedly stood in the way of united, “democratic” decision-making.\r\nWrong. The problem is political<\/i>. The reason that there were no big\r\nantiwar actions last March was because the main “coalitions” didn’t\r\nwant to embarrass the Democratic Party at the height of the primary\r\nseason. <\/p>
The January 2008 issue of Socialist Action<\/i> newspaper carried\r\nan exposé (“U.S. Antiwar Movement Falters: An Insider’s View”) of the\r\nmachinations of the leaders of United for Peace and Justice (UFPJ) to\r\nprevent a national antiwar mobilization last March, saying they sought\r\nto “focus on currying favor with the Democrats.” True enough, as far as\r\nit goes. Yet now, through the “National Assembly” it has initiated, SA\r\nis prepared to do the same thing it criticized the UFPJ for. Why is\r\nthere is no mention of Afghanistan in the conference call? Simple:\r\nbecause the Democrats are all for the war on Afghanistan. Any why does\r\nthe action proposal by the coordinating committee call for a national\r\nprotest only in Spring 2009? Because they don’t want to get in the way\r\nof Democrat Barack Obama’s election bid. Yet Obama is for escalating\r\nthe war in Afghanistan and says he is prepared to bomb inside Pakistan\r\nand attack Iran!<\/p>
So because the conference organizers, with all their talk of\r\nbeing “independent,” are bound by their bourgeois political loyalties,\r\nthey are set to repeat the policies of the present “antiwar movement”\r\nleaders, which will produce the same impotent failures as previous\r\nprotests. Albert Einstein is said to have defined insanity as doing the\r\nsame thing over and over again and expecting different results. If 20\r\nor so “mass mobilizations” since 2001 appealing to Congress to stop the\r\nwar have had no effect, how is a new national organization dedicated to\r\n“peaceful, legal” mass mobilizations of the same sort going to stop the\r\nwar machine? Answer: it won’t.<\/p>
Behind the seeming insanity is a program. “Though this be\r\nmadness, yet there is a method in’t.” This new effort at an\r\n“inclusive,” “independent,” “democratic” antiwar formation is actually\r\norganizing a coalition of class collaboration that is “inclusive” of\r\nthe Democrats and other capitalist parties. Look at the list of\r\nendorsers: it includes the “Progressive Democrats of America” (a group\r\nset up by the Democratic Socialists of America), the Duluth Democratic\r\nFarmer-Labor Party, various representatives of the capitalist Green\r\nparty, etc. But even if the bourgeois parties and politicians weren’t\r\ndirectly present, these coalitions are inevitably and invariably aimed\r\nat pressuring the capitalist rulers. <\/p>
Such popular fronts<\/i> serve to chain the exploited and oppressed\r\nto a wing of their exploiters and oppressors – i.e., the supposedly\r\n“democratic” or “anti-fascist,” “anti-imperialist” or “antiwar”\r\ncapitalists. And from Spain and France in the 1930s to Chile and\r\nPortugal in the 1970s, they always prepare the road to defeat by\r\nheading off revolutionary struggle. The vaunted “independence” of the\r\nvarious coalitions is a fig leaf to cover up the fact that they are in\r\nfact aiding the parties of war and racism. Yet the fundamental point is\r\nthat to stop imperialist war it will take international workers\r\nrevolution to bring down the capitalist system that generates endless\r\nwars. <\/p>
Otherwise, the perspective is for one imperialist war after\r\nanother, and one impotent antiwar movement after another. Look at the\r\nlist, just since World War II: Korea (1950-53, with U.S. troops still\r\nthere); Vietnam (1954 to 1975); Afghanistan (1980-1989); Cuba Bay of\r\nPigs (1961, followed by decades of economic blockade); Central America\r\n(1980-1989), Iraq, Gulf War (1990-91), Yugoslavia\/Bosnia (1995),\r\nYugoslavia\/Kosovo (1999), Afghanistan again (2001 to date), Iraq again\r\n(2003 to date), not to mention countless coups, “peacekeeping”\r\noperations and other U.S. imperialist interventions in Africa, Asia and\r\nLatin America. And the drum beat of war goes on. <\/p>
Ultimately, it points toward a new World War III against the\r\nU.S.’ present imperialist “allies” and rivals. The next step may be an\r\nIsraeli attack on Iran, backed up by Washington.We say: Iran, a\r\nsemi-colonial country, has the right to nuclear or any other weapons it\r\nneeds to fend off imperialist attack. Defend Iran against Israeli\/U.S.\r\nattack!<\/p>
The Trotskyists of the Internationalist Group, U.S. section of\r\nthe League for the Fourth International, put forward a program against\r\nimperialist war that is sharply counterposed to the bourgeois politics\r\nof all<\/i> the factions of the antiwar movement. Rather than peace parades\r\nthat appeal to Congress to moderate the war policy (“Troops out,”\r\n“Bring the troops home,” etc.), we seek to mobilize the international\r\nworking class at the head of all the exploited and oppressed to defeat<\/i>\r\nthe imperialists in this war, unleashing workers power through strikes\r\nagainst the war and refusal to transport war cargo, on the road to\r\nworld socialist revolution to overturn the capitalist system. This was\r\nthe program of the Bolsheviks, who brought World War I to an end by\r\nturning the imperialist war into a civil war, toppling the capitalist\r\norder in Russia in the 1917 October Revolution and unleashing a wave of\r\nrevolutionary agitation internationally. <\/p>
“Ridiculous!” “Ultra-left!” exclaim the self-proclaimed\r\nsocialists, even would-be “Trotskyists” who back this latest antiwar\r\ncoalition. These same people insisted that our call for workers strikes\r\nagainst the war<\/i> was utopian “pie in the sky.” But the IG fought for and\r\nplayed an important role in building the first-ever strike against a\r\nU.S. war by an American union. This past May 1, the International\r\nLongshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU) shut down every port on the West\r\nCoast against the war in Iraq and Afghanistan (see our extensive\r\ncoverage of this historic action in the current issue of The\r\nInternationalist<\/i>). While various reformist pseudo-socialists now want\r\nto praise the ILWU, trying to include it as one more sector of their\r\nantiwar popular fronts, we insisted from the beginning that strikes\r\nagainst the war must be directed against the imperialist parties of war\r\nand racism, leading to the building of a revolutionary workers\r\nparty. <\/p>\r\n“Mass Action” for the Democrats, or Workers Strikes Against\r\nthe War\r\n
The fundamental difference between powerless peace parades and\r\nmobilizing workers power is not on the plane of tactics or\r\norganizational structure. The difference is in the class content of the\r\nprogram against imperialist war. As the Trotskyists wrote in the 1930s\r\nas the local wars were spreading (China, Ethiopia, Spain) leading up\r\nthe second imperialist world war:<\/p>\r\n\r\n
“The most common mistake made in the attempted it struggle\r\nagainst war\r\ncomes from the belief that this exists somehow ‘independent’ of the\r\nclass struggle in general, that a broad union of all sorts of persons\r\nfrom every social class and group can be formed around the issue of\r\nfighting war, since – so the reasoning goes – these persons may be all\r\nequally opposed to war whatever their differences on other points. In\r\nthis way, war is lifted from its social base, considered apart from its\r\ncauses and conditions, as if it were a mystic abstraction instead of a\r\nconcrete historical institution. Acting on this belief, attempts are\r\nmade to build up all kinds of permanent Peace Societies, Antiwar\r\nOrganizations, Leagues Against War, etc.<\/p>\r\n
“This kind of attitude is about as effective as it for\r\ndoctors to treat\r\nthe high fever in acute appendicitis by putting the patient in an\r\nice-box. The only way actually get rid of the high fever is to remove\r\nthe cause of the fever – that is, to take out the diseased appendix.\r\nThe thing is true for war: the only way to get rid of war is to remove\r\nthe cause of war.”<\/p>\r\n
–War and the Workers<\/i> (1936)<\/p>\r\n The National Assembly calls to “bring the troops home now!”\r\nDespite\r\nwhat the opportunists claim, this is not the same as defeating U.S.\r\nimperialist war, “objectively” or otherwise. Hillary Clinton made the\r\npoint explicitly: “Senator McCain and President Bush claim withdrawal\r\nis defeat... Well, let’s be clear, withdrawal is not defeat. Defeat is\r\nkeeping troops in Iraq for 100 years. Defeat is straining our alliances\r\nand losing our standing in the world. Defeat is draining our resources\r\nand diverting attention from our key interests” (Boston Globe<\/i> 18 March\r\n2008). Barack Obama wants to disengage from what he calls the “dumb\r\nwar” in Iraq, albeit slowly and partially, leaving thousands of troops\r\nin the area, in order to wage what he thinks are “smart” wars against\r\nAfghanistan and Iran!<\/p> “Troops out” is an appeal addressed to the growing sector of\r\nthe\r\nimperialist bourgeoisie that sees the Iraq adventure as a failure and\r\nwants to rescue U.S. imperialism for future wars.<\/i> “Support the troops\r\nby bringing them home”? This is a red-white-and-blue loyalty oath<\/i> to\r\nU.S. imperialism. Bring the troops home to do what? Patrol the Mexican\r\nborder, as Republicans and Democrats (and the fascist Minutemen)\r\nsuggest? After Hurricane Katrina, the elite 101st Airborne division and\r\nBlackwater mercenaries were brought home, with orders from Louisiana’s\r\nDemocratic governor to shoot to kill<\/i> the stranded survivors!<\/p> The “theory” of “mass action” that the conference promoters\r\nexpound\r\nendlessly is a banality that explains nothing and conceals everything.\r\nIt will take “mass action” to stop the war, like it would take “motion”\r\nto travel to Alaska. But motion in what direction, in what sort of\r\nvehicle? Who’s in the driver’s seat, and who’s stuffed in the trunk?\r\nMass action of what class, with what program?<\/i> The conference proposes\r\n“The independent and united mobilization of the antiwar majority in\r\nmassive peaceful demonstrations.... Mass actions aimed at visibly and\r\npowerfully demonstrating the will of the majority....” But imperialist\r\nwars are not made by majorities, and they are certainly not ended by\r\npopular demand. The capitalists produce constant war to grab markets\r\nfor labor and industry away from their imperialist rivals.<\/p> Imperialist war can only be defeated with class war.<\/i> Talk of\r\n“majorities” peacefully persuading the (ruling-class) “minority” to\r\nwithdraw from Iraq by “demonstrating” that the majority is a majority,\r\nis a deception<\/i> that serves the ruling class by promoting illusions in\r\nbourgeois “democracy.” So what if the capitalists and war supporters\r\nare a minority? It hasn’t stopped them before. This minority rules\r\nthrough the capitalist state apparatus: it has the police, the prisons,\r\nthe courts and the armed forces at its disposal, as well as the\r\ncapitalist media as a platform for “opinion makers.” This minority\r\nmakes war to keep its heel on the necks of oppressed and exploited\r\nmillions. Nothing but smashing the capitalist system<\/i> will put an end to\r\nimperialist war. The “Progressive Democrats,” Greens and the phony\r\nsocialists<\/i> are opponents of workers revolution. Unity with them means\r\nendless war.<\/p>\r\nTwo, Three, Many Peace Parades, or a Revolutionary Workers\r\nParty?\r\n A little history may be in order here. Most of the key\r\norganizers of\r\nthe Cleveland conference are alumni of the Vietnam peace movement. Part\r\nof the motivation for this conference comes from a generation of\r\nex-members of the ex-Trotskyist Socialist Workers Party (SWP) who dream\r\nof reliving the halcyon days of their youth as leaders of the SWP’s\r\nVietnam-era National Peace Action Coalition (NPAC). They claim it was\r\nthe antiwar movement that stopped the Vietnam War. This is a willful\r\nrewriting of history, unless we are to believe that the National\r\nLIberation Front and North Vietnamese army were some sort of Quakers.\r\nThe U.S. imperialists and their allies were defeated militarily by the\r\nVietnamese workers and peasants, two years after<\/i> the U.S.’ official\r\nVietnam antiwar movement packed up and went home. The peace movement\r\nwas satisfied with the withdrawal of most of “our boys” while\r\nmass-murder bombing and a proxy civil war escalated. Trotskyist\r\nrevolutionaries, on the other hand, said that “our boys” were the Viet\r\nCong, and hailed the U.S. defeat in Vietnam, proclaiming “All Indochina\r\nMust Go Communist!”<\/p> Moreover, NPAC along with the Communist Party-dominated\r\nPeople’s\r\nCoalition for Peace and Justice (PCPJ) were the right wing<\/i> of the\r\nseething mass movement of potentially revolutionary discontent that\r\nexploded out of the black ghettos onto college campuses and into\r\nsectors of the working class. Just like today’s Cleveland assembly that\r\nrolls out the red carpet to the “progressive” Democrats, NPAC had\r\nDemocratic senator Vance Hartke on its governing board, even while the\r\nSWP piously intoned that its pop front was “independent” of the\r\nDemocrats. When leftists intervened in a 1971 NPAC conference to\r\nprotest the presence of the capitalist politician and CIA bag-man\r\nVictor Reuther, SWP\/NPAC goons viciously attacked them, throwing one\r\noppositionist through a glass door to defend their coalition’s\r\nbourgeois “respectability.” <\/p> At NPAC peace parades – which would vanish during\r\neven-numbered (i.e.,\r\nelection) years, just like the barely-moving “movement” today – more\r\nthan once the SWP set up daisy chains of marshals chanting “peaceful,\r\nlegal!” to try to divert and exclude demonstrators carrying NLF flags.\r\nIn his chronicle of the Vietnam antiwar movement, SWPer Fred Halstead\r\nadmits that as soon as U.S. troops were withdrawn, “Virtually all the\r\nlocal antiwar coalitions also folded up” (Out Now!<\/i> [1978]). Halstead\r\nalso records that “No mass socialist movement emerged from the antiwar\r\nactivity... Once the war in Vietnam was over, the organized movement\r\nagainst it ceased to exist. This was inevitable.” Inevitable, since the\r\nSWP’s subordination to Democratic “doves” made these reformists\r\nhardened opponents of revolutionary politics, or of any political line\r\nto the left of the “single issue” dictated by the need to keep their\r\ncapitalist “allies.”<\/p> The experience of NPAC should give pause to those radicals who\r\nwould\r\nseek to be the “left wing” of the Cleveland popular front. Any real\r\nstruggle against imperialist war is necessarily a class struggle<\/i> and\r\ncan only be waged in and through the mass organizations of the working\r\nclass. We do not present our revolutionary program as an “action\r\nproposal” to this body, since to do so would only prettify what is a\r\npopular front of class collaboration. It is necessary instead to break\r\nthe “alliance” that chains the workers to their war-making exploiters\r\nin the name of “peace.” Those who genuinely seek to put an end to\r\nimperialist war must break decisively with all the capitalist parties,<\/i>\r\nthe Green Party of longtime Democratic Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney\r\nincluded, and break with the popular front<\/i> embodied in the “National\r\nAssembly” and all the other “antiwar” and “peace” coalitions. Every\r\nlast one of them is beholden to the Democrats, the only difference is\r\nthe UFPJ is up front about it, while the rest (ANSWER, TONC, CAN, World\r\nCan’t Wait, etc.) try to disguise it.<\/p> The National Assembly in Cleveland has been founded with the\r\nparticipation of sectors of the Democratic War Party. It exists to\r\npromote “peaceful” mass demonstrations that never have stopped an\r\nimperialist war, and never will. It stabs the suffering people of\r\nAfghanistan in the back, ignores the war against blacks and immigrant\r\nworkers, and has nothing to say about the looming war on Iran, all for\r\nthe sake of unity with “broad progressive forces,” i.e. the capitalist\r\nDemocratic Party. And if the tame peace-crawls proposed by this\r\ncondominium of fake socialists and bourgeois politicians end up playing\r\nan ancillary role in the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq, this will\r\nonly set the stage for the next imperialist war<\/i> – which will also have\r\nits “mass action” antiwar movement, as will the next war, and the next\r\nuntil the whole system is brought down through socialist revolution.<\/p> Pacifism, especially in the “socialist” inflection with which\r\nSA and\r\nthe other opportunists preach it, diverts anger against the war into\r\npowerless “mass” lobbying in the streets. There is only one program to\r\nstop the imperialist war, and that is the program of revolutionary\r\nMarxism, i.e., Trotskyism. Every day that bourgeois coalitions for\r\n“peace” overshadow and crowd out class struggle against imperialist war\r\nwill be another day of unimpeded imperialist slaughter and barbarism.\r\nThe period in which the class traitors lead the “movement” nowhere must\r\ncome to an end. As the founder and longtime leader of American\r\nTrotskyism wrote during the Korean War:<\/p>\r\n\r\n “The class struggle of the workers, merging with the\r\ncolonial\r\nrevolutions in a common struggle against imperialism, is the only\r\ngenuine fight against war. The Stalinists who preach otherwise are\r\nliars and deceivers. The workers and colonial peoples will have peace\r\nwhen they have the power and use their power to take it and make it for\r\nthemselves. That is the road of Lenin. There is no other road to\r\npeace.” <\/p>\r\n --James P. Cannon, The Road to Peace<\/i> (1951)<\/p>\r\n\r\n Break with the bourgeoisie! Build a revolutionary workers\r\nparty!<\/b><\/i> <\/p>\r\n“None of the Above”\r\n Various amendments have been offered to the Assembly’s Action\r\nProposal\r\nand various opportunist leftist groups will be present. Here is a brief\r\nrundown on some of them.<\/i><\/p> The League for the Revolutionary Party, a centrist group whose\r\norigins\r\ngo back to the current of “State Department socialists” of the\r\nanti-Trotskyist renegade Max Shachtman, is embarrassed by the dove on\r\nthe logo for the National Assembly and wants it removed. They also want\r\nthe assembled Democrats and their friends to oppose the war in\r\nAfghanistan. About 30 years too late! In the 1980-89 Afghanistan war,\r\nthe neo-Shachtmanite LRP denounced Soviet intervention while\r\nTrotskyists hailed the Red Army and called for extension of the gains\r\nof the October Revolution to the Afghan peoples. But the LRP does not\r\ncall for a break with the Democrats, or anything even approximating a\r\nLeninist program against the imperialist war.<\/i><\/p> Not surprising, since the LRP’s supreme ambition is to be the\r\n“left\r\npole” of a class-collaborationist peace movement. The LRP’s signal\r\npledge of loyalty to the bourgeois order is its elaborate justification\r\nof its “preference” for a draft – just as the U.S. military is\r\nstruggling to fill its boots and body-bags. Why? The imperialists “must\r\nhave an army,” so these phony “revolutionaries” “prefer” a draft. So do\r\nCharles Rangel and a number of other bourgeois politicians. The\r\nInternationalist Group stands on the tradition of Lenin, Liebknecht and\r\nLuxemburg: Not a man or woman, not a penny for imperialist war!<\/i><\/p> Then we have the Northeast Federation of Anarcho-Communists\r\n(NEFAC), a\r\nclot of anti-Soviet “communists” who cheered on the counterrevolution\r\nin the Soviet Union and the deformed workers states of Eastern Europe.\r\nThese gentlemen anarchists sniff that the Iraq invasion “violated all\r\nstandards of truth, morality and international law and justice.”\r\nImagine that, anarchists for international law! So NEFAC proposes that\r\nthe Assembly “calls on the national AFL-CIO and Change to Win\r\nfederations to follow the powerful example of the ILWU and organize a\r\ncoordinated one-hour stoppage of all work on Election Day, 4 November\r\n2008, to demand the immediate withdrawal of all U.S. troops from Iraq\r\nand Afghanistan.”<\/p> In other words, the mid-level union bureaucrats and bourgeois\r\npoliticians who populate this Assembly should ask the pro-imperialist\r\nbureaucrats at the head of the labor unions to organize a token\r\ndemonstration on election day. If you weren’t born yesterday you know\r\nwhat that would look like, on the off-chance that it comes to fruition\r\nat all: NEFAC is calling for a get out the vote effort<\/i> for the\r\nDemocratic war party, dressed up in laborite “anti-war” language. The\r\nhistoric May Day ILWU strike against the war, which the IG fought for\r\nwhile NEFAC was looking for a way to wedge itself comfortably into the\r\nbourgeois peace movement, came from elected union delegates over\r\nresistance from the pro-capitalist union bureaucracy.<\/i><\/p> There is also a proposal from the AL (Animal Liberation)\r\ncollective for\r\n“education,” which calls on the constituents of this Assembly to\r\neducate the masses about basic Marxist concepts of class relations in\r\ncapitalist society and the nature of capitalist war. They might as well\r\nask crocodiles to become vegans. The whole raison d’être of the phony\r\nsocialists is to mislead the workers.<\/p> Finally, the ex-Trotskyist Spartacist League (SL) will be in\r\nevidence.\r\nThe SL may make some correct criticisms of the various antiwar\r\ncoalitions, yet it has abandoned the Leninist program for the defeat<\/i> of\r\nthe U.S. imperialists, instead substituting the “Out Now” slogan that\r\nis indistinguishable from SA and the rest of the opportunist left. The\r\nSL calls vaguely for “class struggle at home.” But there is one thing\r\nthat “class struggle at home” doesn’t<\/i> mean for the now-centrist SL: the\r\nstruggle for workers strikes against the war. The SL used to champion\r\nthis call before the counterrevolution in the Soviet Union led to a\r\nregression in the consciousness of its leadership, which now blames the\r\nworking class for its own capitulations.\r\n<\/p>\n","contact":"internationalistgroup@msn.com","link":"http:\/\/www.internationalist.org\/","address":"Box 3321, Church Street Station, New York, NY 10008","phone":"212-460-0983","parent_id":0,"mime_type":"text\/html","summary":"On June 28-29, an \u201cOpen National Antiwar Conference\u201d was held in Cleveland, called by a newly minted National Assembly to End the Iraq War and Occupation. Over objections from the conference organizers, centrally Socialist Action, the assembly voted to change the name to include reference to the war on Afghanistan, and to emphasize the connection with U.S. backing for the Zionist occupation of Palestine. (The sponsors of the confab were so right-wing that they feared losing \u201cunity\u201d with Democratic Party supporters of Israel and the Afghanistan war!) What did not change at all was the popular-front character of the new outfit, tying it to the bourgeois parties despite the fig leaf of electoral \u201cindependence.\u201d Making this utterly clear, it was decided not to call a national antiwar mobilization prior to the November elections explicitly in order to court those forces who wish to aid the Democrats (and therefore want to avoid making problems for the presumptive Democratic nominee, Barack Obama). Here is the leaflet issued by the Internationalist Group at the conference.","numcomment":0,"fileurl":"\/uploads\/","filesize":null,"article_url":"\/news\/2008\/07\/218978.php"},"attachments":[],"comments":[]}