November 20, 2003 – This afternoon I attended the demonstration coordinated by the Stop the War Coalition. Since there are serious flaws in many of the strategies pursued by the Bush administration (and unfortunately Mr. Blair’s government as well), I feel it necessary to try something to explore alternatives to this caliber of demonstration. More explicitly, I mean that I am disappointed with what I experienced today. There are important issues at stake and I’d like to see more effective action. I have briefly outlined my opinion below. If you have something to add, please contact me.
Strategies for mobilizing effective action.
- Form a coherent policy alternative:
- Decide what policies are being targeted for protest, and present not only a critique of that policy but a viable alternative.
- Articulation of policy alternatives should avoid personal attacks on proponents of targeted policies.
Hyperthyroidism levitra no prescription and hypothyroidism are two common types of ailments that take millions of people into their grips every year. ED is not a kind of maladies, but this is not the end for a person who has a permanent cure to the issue as there is actually no permanent cure. cialis on line Many generic viagra from india a times there are certain medicines which a person can never forget. find out content levitra on line A man might play a spectator role, where he steps outside of himself for viewing how he has performed.
- In general, avoid personal attacks. They distract attention from policy problems, which are what really need to be addressed.
- No chanting vulgar slogans.
- No drugs.
Case in point: a critique of Stop the War rally on Thursday, November 20, 2003 in London.
Positives
- Mass mobilization – upwards of 100,000 demonstrators.
- Peaceful nature of demonstration.
- Profession of a message of inclusion.
- Speakers clearly stated focus of protest was specifically on the leadership, not the citizenry, of the United States and Britain.
Negatives
- No coherent policy/strategy as alternative to continued presence in Iraq. Simply “bringing the soldiers home! Now!” is not a viable policy alternative to the occupation of Iraq.
- No coherent focus for the rally – a variety of opposition movements are rolled into the coalition. But while they present themselves as a coalition, their individual issues remain distinct. Opposition to military action in Iraq, military action in Afghanistan, and opposition to the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza strip all protested. There were probably a few save the whales and baby seals activists in the mix as well.
- Focal point of opposition was the demonization of George Bush and Tony Blair, rather than a policy and its proposed alternative. Personal character attacks are useless, except for blowing off steam, and divert attention from the important issues.
- Open drinking and drug use detracted from potential for presenting serious face of opposition. Leaves demonstrators open to easy characterization as “hippies” or “students partying” and thus to being discredited by those in power as unserious and more interested in making noise than making a difference.
Since I suppose I should practice what I preach, here are the foundations of an alternative to Stop the War Coalition’s approach:
- Find a way to put pressure on the U.S. government so that it accepts the need for a UN-led peacekeeping mission for the transition in Iraq. I have heard about plans by some British MPs to target exports that are vital to the economies of key swing vote states for boycotts. By tying this action explicitly to U.S. policy on Iraq, pre-election pressure can be put on the Bush administration to change its course. This sounds like a start.
- Start legal action to force the Bush and Blair administrations to explain the clear gap between the evidence used to justify the invasion and the justifications used now that military action has been taken. For me, and I suspect many others, the worst part of this was being lied to about the threat. We didn’t believe it at the time, and it rankles further that the Bush and Blair administrations don’t seem to be sticking to thier original reasons. Now the focus is mostly on how much better off the Iraqi people are without living in fear of Saddam Hussein. Fair enough, but that is not what we were told we were going to war over. Where are the weapons of mass destruction? Furthermore, by this justification, we should be invading several other countries. Leaders must experience consequences for lying to their populations.
- If the Coalition’s claims of 400,000 demonstrators were accurate, this sounds like an excellent base from which to organize a political action committee (PAC). Such a PAC could be used to lobby the government, and contribute to the campaigns of politicians. Laws are not written in Trafalgar Square, after all. If 400,000 people could all come up with £10, that would be a serious enough sum to start working. Something along the lines of MoveOn.org.
All this is just off the top of my head, written in the few hours since I returned from the demonstration. I certainly welcome other opinions.