As for the Socialist Worker article, I've written them, and we'll see if they print my note.
Essentially, I said the politics of the day were firmly 'Out Now' and the linking demands on our materials--all have been informed of this, it's in all our materials and will be the banner under which everyone speaks. We're not budging from it. If anyone has a different position, they'll have to adapt to us, not us to them.
And the ISO timeline is wrong on the inner life of the coalition. The ground floor decision to build this as a coalition of all forces against the war, left and center, including elected officials, of any party, was the one made the first day. The decisions to invite certain political figures was made further done the pike.
As for the confirmed speakers list, it's a work in progress.
But the only confirmed elected officials are Joe Moore and Rick Munoz.
Imam Malik Mujahid, head of three mosques and chairman of the Council of Islamic Organizations of Greater Chicago, will speak.
Raed Jarrar, an Iraqi-Palestinian journalist, will speak.
Stacey Haley, one of the military families national leaders, will speak.
Jan Schakowsky, Kathy Kelly and Jess Jackson were asked, but they are speaking in other cities that day.
A number of other union leaders, community leaders, church leaders, immigrant rights leaders, women's leaders and student leaders have been approached, but not confirmed.
It will be a fine program that serves the antiwar cause well.
Rather than get tangled in a mess of 'what ifs?', it might be better to get engaged, help make decisions, big and small, and build a powerful event, working both with folks you agree with and those you don't agree with, to end this horrible war.
I mean, I agree with, or at least sympathize, with the various specific incarnations of the general anti-imperialist approach, but they do diffuse the basic message, and confuse, or alienate, a lot of potential supporters. I suspect that's behind the decrease in turnout over the years.
This war is bad enough that "Out Now" is the right message for this demonstration.
If Daley, Durbin or Obama addresses the crowd at an "Out Now" demonstration, that's great. But I suspect they'll decline for exactly that reason. Daley has the least to lose politically but, on the other hand, he's the most cautious of the three. Durbin's the only one who's taken any chances so far, and he still hasn't taken enough chances.
Carl, how can anyone "get engaged" and "help make decisions, big and small" with this particular event when you have stated over and over that those that disagree with your method of organizing ARE NOT WELCOME to even voice their disagreements? Your position the entire time has been to tell people who disagree with the strategy, tactics and focus of this protest to either shut up or go home. It's pathetic.
I've repeated, time and again, that we are building a left-center coalition around 'out now' and related slogans, and if you are in agreement with that basic orientation, welcome aboard. And there are plenty of decisions, discussions and debates over how to improve things, or do things in various ways, within the framework.
But if you want to change the whole framework, and go back to the anti-imperialist bloc aiming its main blow at all politicians generally, especially antiwar Democrats, you won't find much interest.
Otherwise, the door is open and we need all the help and participation we can get.
"a left-center coalition around 'out now' and related slogans, and if you are in agreement with that basic orientation"
What about those that are in agreement with that "basic orientation" but who happen to think that INVITING PRO-WAR POLITICIANS is COMPLETELY ANTITHETICAL TO THAT??? Those are the people you've basically told to take a shut up, no debate, no discussion. Period.
Don't pretend otherwise Carl. Lying doesn't work well for you.
Re: Chicago ISO Statement on the October 27th Demonstration
10 Oct 2007
Date Edited: 10 Oct 2007 02:22:42 PM
Essentially, I said the politics of the day were firmly 'Out Now' and the linking demands on our materials--all have been informed of this, it's in all our materials and will be the banner under which everyone speaks. We're not budging from it. If anyone has a different position, they'll have to adapt to us, not us to them.
And the ISO timeline is wrong on the inner life of the coalition. The ground floor decision to build this as a coalition of all forces against the war, left and center, including elected officials, of any party, was the one made the first day. The decisions to invite certain political figures was made further done the pike.
As for the confirmed speakers list, it's a work in progress.
But the only confirmed elected officials are Joe Moore and Rick Munoz.
Imam Malik Mujahid, head of three mosques and chairman of the Council of Islamic Organizations of Greater Chicago, will speak.
Raed Jarrar, an Iraqi-Palestinian journalist, will speak.
Stacey Haley, one of the military families national leaders, will speak.
Jan Schakowsky, Kathy Kelly and Jess Jackson were asked, but they are speaking in other cities that day.
A number of other union leaders, community leaders, church leaders, immigrant rights leaders, women's leaders and student leaders have been approached, but not confirmed.
It will be a fine program that serves the antiwar cause well.
Rather than get tangled in a mess of 'what ifs?', it might be better to get engaged, help make decisions, big and small, and build a powerful event, working both with folks you agree with and those you don't agree with, to end this horrible war.
Comments
Re: Re: Chicago ISO Statement on the October 27th Demonstration
10 Oct 2007
I mean, I agree with, or at least sympathize, with the various specific incarnations of the general anti-imperialist approach, but they do diffuse the basic message, and confuse, or alienate, a lot of potential supporters. I suspect that's behind the decrease in turnout over the years.
This war is bad enough that "Out Now" is the right message for this demonstration.
If Daley, Durbin or Obama addresses the crowd at an "Out Now" demonstration, that's great. But I suspect they'll decline for exactly that reason. Daley has the least to lose politically but, on the other hand, he's the most cautious of the three. Durbin's the only one who's taken any chances so far, and he still hasn't taken enough chances.
Re: Re: Chicago ISO Statement on the October 27th Demonstration
10 Oct 2007
Re: Re: Chicago ISO Statement on the October 27th Demonstration
10 Oct 2007
I've repeated, time and again, that we are building a left-center coalition around 'out now' and related slogans, and if you are in agreement with that basic orientation, welcome aboard. And there are plenty of decisions, discussions and debates over how to improve things, or do things in various ways, within the framework.
But if you want to change the whole framework, and go back to the anti-imperialist bloc aiming its main blow at all politicians generally, especially antiwar Democrats, you won't find much interest.
Otherwise, the door is open and we need all the help and participation we can get.
Re: Re: Re: Chicago ISO Statement on the October 27th Demonstration
10 Oct 2007
What about those that are in agreement with that "basic orientation" but who happen to think that INVITING PRO-WAR POLITICIANS is COMPLETELY ANTITHETICAL TO THAT??? Those are the people you've basically told to take a shut up, no debate, no discussion. Period.
Don't pretend otherwise Carl. Lying doesn't work well for you.