Two weeks ago I was offended by David Corn's ridicule of the impeachment movement:
"...impeachment is a dream; it is so far-fetched a prospect that it raises questions about the sensibility and political judgment of anyone who suggests it be adopted as a real-life goal. A debating point, perhaps—but not an operating premise."
http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2006/03/15/impeachable_strategy.phpI let it go because Corn generally has a lot of good to say and makes some sound points even in this essay, although I consider it fundamentally flawed and its publication ill-advised. Subsequently, in another piece, Corn attacked Woodward's narration of w's rush to war, and Woodward (who deserved a smack) replied with some very sound arguments rebuking Corn, to which Corn (who also deserved a smack) has replied, and hopefully both men have arrived at a better appreciation of their limitations.
http://www.thenation.com/blogs/capitalgames?bid=3&pid=73408This past week Scott Ritter posted on the Alternet blog a (in my opinion, profoundly flawed) essay pronouncing the collapse of the anti-war movement:
"In short, the anti-war movement has come face to face with the reality that in the ongoing war of ideologies that is being waged in America today, their cause is not just losing, but is in fact on the verge of complete collapse. Many in the anti-war movement would take exception to such a characterization of the situation, given the fact that there seems to be a growing change in the mood among Americans against the ongoing war in Iraq. But one only has to scratch at the surface of this public discontent to realize how shallow and superficial it is. Americans aren't against the war in Iraq because it is wrong; they are against it because we are losing."
He concluded in a fantasy of bellicose narcissism:
"I have indicated my willingness to apply my training and experience as a warrior in a manner which helps teach the principles of the art of war to those who call themselves part of the anti-war movement... I for one am ready to assist. However, in writing this essay, I am constantly reminded of the old saying, 'You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink.' One can only hope that the anti-war movement is thirsty."
http://www.alternet.org/blogs/themix/34332/Given the apparent frustration behind his hyperboles, I let that piece go too, consigning it to the bin of "posts better regarded as therapeutic exercises and better left unpublished." I did notice that a number of the posts to the blog started calling him on some of his points. Now, however, Cindy Sheehan has replied to it, and in doing so, again reminded us of how sound her insights generally are, and of how authentic her voice is:
"The anti-war movement is not on the 'verge of collapse' because we are not organized, or because we don't take a 'warrior's' view of attacking the neo-cons and the war machine using the tactics of Napoleon, or Sun Tzu - but because the two-thirds of Americans who philosophically agree that the war is wrong, BushCo lied, and the troops should come home will not get off of their collective, complacent, and comfortable behinds to demonstrate their dissent with our government."
"There are several opportunities for us to band together and show the illegitimate leaders of our country that we mean business.
"This April 12th to the 16th, even though George and family won't be coming to Crawford to celebrate Easter for the first time in years, we will be. We will be gathering at Camp Casey in support of our troops by calling for them to be withdrawn and brought back to their families as healthy and wholly as possible. As usual, everyone is invited down to Camp Casey and can get more information at
www.GSFP.org"Also, on April 29th, UFPJ is calling for a massive gathering in NYC to protest the war. I am issuing an invitation to everyone who is personally affected by this war, which is every last person in this country, to come out and visibly show this administration that you don't want to be abused by them anymore.
"Yes, Scott, the anti-war movement is collapsing into a Peace movement. We won't use the tactics of Napoleon, or your hero, Sun Tzu, we will use the tactics of our heroes: Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr.
"Nothing is gained by war, warlike tactics, or warriors, but destruction.
"Nothing is gained by doing nothing, either. Do something."
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/040606S.shtmlSo there it is. And it really is that simple. Those of us who lived through the 60's should remember that almost all the social causes of the era received government redress only after massive demonstrations. It happened in the streets. After and before all the essays and postings, all the exhaustive dialoging about tactics, strategies, and issues, their relationships and hierachies, on thousands of blogs and listserves---as necessary as these are---Corn, Ritter, and we need to keep mindful that narrow, forceful focus is what we seek to achieve, in order to direct specific mobilization. It is beyond me, how, for example, we could turn out a massive protest communicating the subtleties of the global hegemony of American currency, but I have no problem advocating demonstrations against the very war that functions, among other things, to underpin that hegemony.
A million bodies massed on the mall get attention. As I have said before, 5 million would demand it. Immediately. There is no more effective way to remind the politicians in Washington of the source---and limits---of the representational power they wield. We grant it, and it is our job to control it. Hopefully, I'll see you in the big apple on the 29th.