Resistance begins
Response in the US to Bush's War
Article taken from Justice, the paper of the US-section of the CWI
The repulsion to the terrorist attacks on 9/11 was universal. Almost every government and political organization in the world, including many who oppose US government policies, condemned the killing of civilians and workers in the US. The response to the massive military attacks to avenge the shaken empire, launched by George W. Bush, did not enjoy such unanimity.
The war against Afghanistan, the announcement that it would be just the first stage in a prolonged war "against terrorism" and the generalized assault on civil liberties now underway "to defend freedom and democracy" created a broad array of responses, almost instantly.
The Bush administration can claim the formation of a "broad alliance" for his declared military-political offensive. Indeed, some governments like Blair's British administration and those of NATO - and of course the Democrats at home - seem to go along uncritically with Bush's push for a violent response to 9/11. Meanwhile the results so far point in the direction of a more dangerous, unstable and unpredictable world.
From mass demonstrations against the war and for peace in Europe to riots, mass protests and armed conflicts in the Middle East and Central Asia; from pockets of resistance against Bush's war at home to the widespread perception in the Muslim countries that the US government is out to wage war against Muslims in general, the world that was horrified by the killings of 9/11 is starting to disagree with Bush's policies.
THE RESPONSE AT HOME
Naturally, US residents were shocked and angry on September 11th. The ruling class seized on this, effectively whipping up a wave of nationalism, racism and war fever. The manipulation of public feelings worked. As of this writing, the war drive still claims the support of three-quarters of US residents even if the war will result in a substantial loss of American lives. However, important pockets of resistance have emerged, particularly among youth and students, the core of the Left and some of the anti-globalization movement, but also in some communities of color and among a few labor activists.
The speed at which these small layers responded to Bush's war drive-considering the widespread confusion and anger that reigned in the country in the weeks following the terrorist attacks - surprised many, including some in the ruling class. They expected total unanimity-as they found it in the ranks of Congress and among the politicians of the Democratic and Republican parties.
September 29: Washington, DC and San Francisco
Building on the previously organized effort to protest the meeting of the IMF/World Bank on September 29-a meeting which was canceled because of the 9/11 events-the International Action Center and a dozen other organizations proposed to go ahead and transform the event into a protest against Bush's military offensive.
While the decision of the AFL-CIO, Friends of the Earth and others not to participate dissuaded the majority of the expected 40-60,000 demonstrators, between 7-10,000 demonstrators showed up anyway. On the same day, 5,000 demonstrated in San Francisco against the war and immigrant scapegoating and in defense of civil liberties. Smaller actions took place in a dozen other cities around the country. The peace and antiwar movement was born once again in the US, this time only 18 days after September 9/11 and less than two weeks into Bush's avenging mission.
Events will build Opposition
A small minority at this stage, the anti-war/peace movement is isolated in small pockets of resistance. Past wars show, however, that while initially governments can have widespread support the mood can change rapidly, especially when the full consequences begin to hit home. If the war develops into a protracted conflict and US ground forces begin to take serious losses, resistance will begin to spread within the US.
Different layers will at different speeds move into opposition around different issues. Opposition to racism, to the attacks on democratic rights and against workers being forced to pay for this war will collide with Bush's war program. Many workers currently support the war, but if they attempt to go on strike to defend their wages and conditions, they will be labeled "unpatriotic" and "un-American" by big business, politicians and the media. Many who currently support the war are revolted by the racist hysteria against Arabs, Muslims and immigrants. Immigrants, who may support the war, will oppose the drive to attack their rights. Others are unwilling to sacrifice their civil liberties. The anti-war movement must be flexible enough to be able to link up with all sectors who move into opposition, no matter how limited and how cautiously they do so. The movement must help all sectors to advance their struggle and in the process explain to them why they should oppose the ruling class war drive.
The development of a mass movement against the war will not be a straight arrow. The present "anthrax scare" or the possibility of new terrorist attacks or the launching of a broad anti-immigrant campaign and the imposition of draconian laws like the "Patriot Act" could all cause setbacks and have a chilling effect on people willing to oppose the ruling class plans. But they could also build up further opposition to Bush and Congress along the road.
Actions around the Country
New York was ground zero of the terrorist attacks on 9/11 and also the center of the propaganda war of the Bush administration. The anger and fear of the population was at its peak here and the manipulation of the media most rampant. This is where the ruling class needed the symbolism of strong support for its war abroad and at home.
In the first week of October, however, led by several Nobel Peace Prize winners, 10,000 people gathered in Manhattan to call for peace carrying hundreds of placards saying "Not in Our Name" in opposition to the calls for vengeance.
This demonstration has opened a space under the difficult circumstances in New York for an antiwar-peace movement to start taking shape.
In San Francisco, the day after the bombing on October 7, a teach-in and rally with almost two thousand participants joined up with other antiwar groups to march for about three hours. By the end of the rally, the demonstration had grown to about five thousand people.
On October 13, a march and rally numbering 800 people, was organized to denounce attacks against immigrants and the scapegoating of Arabs and Muslims, by the Immigrant Rights Movement (MDI) and Socialist Alternative. The march was supported by major labor organizations, among them the national AFL-CIO and the local SF Labor Council, as well as community organizations.
On October 20, 3,000 people marched once again in San Francisco, organized by the SF Town Hall Committee against War and Racism, an umbrella group for dozens of antiwar, peace and left organizations.
Across the Bay, at the UC Berkeley campus, the UC Coalition against War was born in the last weeks of September and led a demonstration of 3,000 at the end of September. The Coalition took a number of other actions and started organizing a California-wide student antiwar coalition.
Demonstrations also took place on about 100 campuses around the country, some with dozens of participants and some with up 1,500 people in attendance.
In Chicago, in the first week of October about 1,000 people marched, merging a scheduled rally with an emergency demonstration in response to the start of the war. The march went through downtown Chicago, gathering support as it went. In Boston, over fifteen hundred people rallied near downtown, listening to rappers and speakers and singers before they mobilized to march to a park in the South End.
In Seattle, crowds between 1,000 and 3,000 people have participated in several demonstrations since the end of September and coalitions, both citywide and at several campuses, are taking shape.
It is obvious that a strong core of opposition has started to develop in the country and that the war propaganda, while effective for the most part at this stage, has not been met with complete unanimity. While the movement is still in a very early stage, with mixed messages and some degree of confusion, (see article: How to Build the Antiwar Movement, page ...) the conditions are there to effectively build a movement.
The Role of Socialist Alternative
Members of Socialist Alternative initiated organizing for demonstrations in Seattle Central Community College, University of Washington and Oberlin College in Ohio, and launched the first rally against Bush's war at the University of Minneapolis. The demonstration in Oberlin, with some 500 participants (in a campus of less than 3,000 students), was highlighted in the Guardian newspaper in Britain.
In San Francisco, Berkeley, Seattle and other places, the role of our organization was to help spark the movement against the war. In SF, Socialist Alternative built and led, with the Immigrant Rights Movement (MDI), the only action on the streets to specifically defend Arabs, Muslims and immigrants being scapegoated and attacked.
Days after the terrorist attacks, the organization published a pamphlet highlighting our opposition to both terrorism and the war drive and under the title of "Stop the Cycle of Terrorism" developed a working class, socialist perspective for the present situation. Thousands of copies of the pamphlet and other materials were sold throughout the country at the antiwar and peace demonstrations.
[ Top ] |