Maybe,one day...I'd like to see that.
Millions marched for peace this weekend in an outpouring of anger,
frustration, and defiance at the conventional wisdom that war with Iraq is
"inevitable." One million in London; half a million in Berlin; two million
in Rome; 1.3 million in Barcelona; 800,000 in Madrid. In America, easily
over a million demonstrated in 150 cities across the country: 200,000
rallied in Manhattan, crowded into barricaded "pens," and surrounded by a
heavy police presence � including sharpshooters perched atop buildings. How
very New York. 100,000 surged through the streets of Los Angeles, and
250,000 in San Francisco.
But it wasn't just an urban phenomenon: the American heartland also uttered
a heartfelt cry against the rush to war. Much of the geographical center of
the country was in the grip of a major snowstorm over the weekend, but in
spite of this some 2,000 demonstrators marched through downtown Detroit,
where Kris Hamel, of the Michigan Emergency Committee Against the War on
Iraq, succinctly expressed the traditional anti-interventionism of the
American heartland when she told the crowd: "We need to leave Iraq alone."
10,000 said "No!" to the war in Austin, Texas, and a long list of other
unlikely places saw antiwar sentiment take to the streets: in North
Carolina, hundreds gathered in Charlotte's Marshall Park, while 250
gathered at the Columbia, South Carolina Statehouse � and the President's
war plans aren't playing in Peoria, either. In Augusta, Maine, dozens of
protestors lined up on both sides of Memorial Bridge, part of a statewide
campaign dubbed "bridges for peace." In Las Vegas, Nevada, protestors
rallied around the dancing fountains of the Bellagio casino, and marched
through the phantasmagoric streets carrying their anti-war message to the
city's revelers. But it wasn't exactly party-time in Colorado Springs,
where 3,000 turned out � and were shot at with rubber bullets and
tear-gassed. In Athens, Georgia, a demonstration of 500 people was marred
when a counter-protestor hurled a brick that landed amid a contingent of
children. The Athens Daily Banner reports:
"Witnesses said a passenger of a white car threw a piece of cinder block
into the crowd gathered in the median of Broad Street, striking the
10-year-old. The car then looped around the block and another piece of
brick was thrown. That piece struck a protest organizer, but he also wasn't
injured."
American super-patriotism � a religion of peace?
The Banner reports that the demonstrators were harried along the way by "a
handful of people representing the newly-formed Students for War in Iraq"
who "invited marchers to debate about pending military action in the Middle
East, but met with little participation" � except for the protestors'
involuntary interaction with that brick. In Detroit, also, we saw the
emergence of a phenomenon largely overlooked in the media: pro-war
counter-demonstrations. Associated Press reports:
"Another rally, this one in support of Bush and his administration's
policies toward Iraq, also was held Saturday on the Michigan State campus.
Some participants held a counter-demonstration during the anti-war rally at
the Capitol. Jason Miller, president of the MSU College Republicans, said
the group wanted to show there are those 'who do support efforts to disarm
the dictator for the safety of America, the region and the world. We wanted
to send the message that left-wing radicals do not represent the average
American.'"
Coming from one who supports the Jacobin fantasies of radical
neoconservatives in his own party, who dream of "democratizing" the Middle
East at gunpoint, Miller's critique of "radicalism" seems highly selective.
Aside from that, however, one would hardly label such commentators as
Patrick J. Buchanan, Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas), Paul Craig Roberts, and
Arnaud de Borchgrave � all of whom have expressed skepticism or outright
opposition to this war � as "left-wing."
As the tidal wave of antiwar protest rises up to confront the War Party,
one may perhaps forgive the media for overlooking this story but the
pro-war demonstrators are out there, too � and what a pathetic lot they
are! We are told that the majority support this war, and Senator John
McCain has even invoked "the American street" to warn our European allies
that the righteous wrath of this Silent Majority is about to get more vocal
� but the real American street expressed itself this past weekend, and in
overwhelming numbers. The few and scattered pro-war demonstrations, on the
other hand, were most often gathered in numbers of less than three digits.
As the Voice of America reports, amid the 200,000-plus who rallied in New
York City, a grand total of 50 showed up to support the Bushian policy of
"national liberation," chanting "We gave peace a chance, we got 9/11!"
According to Richard Sawicki, a spokesman for the group:
"We have a powder keg in the Middle East that's going to blow up in our
faces if we do not lead the international community in dealing with it. I'm
here to support the President and the administration."
That the Bushies are lighting the fuse with their war mania seems not to
occur to Mr. Sawicki. But an understanding of the subtleties of foreign
policy is hardly a hallmark of his group. The VOA profiles these
foot-soldiers of the War Party:
"Mr. Sawicki was among more than 50 people on hand in support of a war to
remove Saddam Hussein. A common theme that emerged in the group was anger
at the lack of unanimous support for a war within the UN Security Council.
One man held a placard saying, 'France is intellectually ignorant.' Another
member declared the French violently anti-American, and announced she was
boycotting French products."
Them damn Frenchies! How dare they fail to kowtow when we crack the whip!
While Jonah Goldberg and his fellow Francophobes over at National Review
crack jokes about "cheese-eating surrender monkeys," what riles them is
that the French won't surrender to the Americans. As for boycotting French
products: why stop with France? In Europe, in the "pro-American" East as
well as the West, eighty percent plus oppose the war; in the rest of the
world, the numbers are probably higher. If Sawicki and his French-hating
friends dare to be consistent, they are going to wind up boycotting the
rest of the world outside of Israel � and they call us "isolationists"!
Much has been written about the leadership of the antiwar movement, which,
according to its critics, is suffused with Communists and Iraqi agents, but
what about the pro-war movement? As it turns out, they have a few skeletons
in their closet, too, and it isn't pretty, as the Greeley [Colorado]
Tribune reports:
"The now-famous Italian vacation mom who left her children home alone last
week during her continuing vacation helped organize a patriotic rally in
Greeley two days before she left the country. Jennifer Farrell, 33, worked
to set up a 'Show Your Colors' rally with the same boyfriend who went with
her to Italy � retired Greeley school psychologist Hank DePetro. � Both
Farrell and DePetro said they held the rally in early February to show
support for the American troops going to the Middle East. About 30 people
attended the rally Feb. 1, two days before the couple left for vacation."
Farrell left her 14-year-old daughter in charge of five children, ages 12,
11, 10, 8 and 6. She told them she'd be gone "about two weeks," and gave
them a credit card they couldn't use, three loaves of bread, three gallons
of milk, and $7 in cash. The children were taken into custody by the state
authorities after a neighbor called police.
Ms. Farrell's unconscionable behavior is the perfect metaphor for the
misplaced policies and focus of this administration: she is clearly guilty
of dabbling in overseas adventurism, while neglecting important problems on
the home front. While she is liable to face a police inquiry on her return
to American shores, no court in the land can deliver us from President
Bush's custody, and that of a compliant Congress that long ago gave up its
constitutional prerogatives.
Most of these pro-war rallies are minuscule: one of the largest was in
Huntsville, Alabama, where 200 gathered for a "Support Our Troops"
demonstration on one side of the Memorial Parkway. The event was sponsored
by WVNN-AM 770 radio station. Attendance was no doubt upped by the presence
of a large student contingent, as described by the Huntsville Times:
"About 40 students in grades 7-12 from Huntsville Christian Academy
participated in the rally, said school Headmaster Alan Webster. 'It was
strictly volunteer,' he said."
Yeah, right. Go to the rally, kiddies � or you'll burn in Hell.
The opportunistic character of these rallies was hard to miss: most were
held under the general rubric of "Support Our Troops," with the pro-war
message taking a back seat, and usually only implicit. The graphic
distributed by one group, as pictured in this story, is indicative of this
tactic: "If you don't support our country's policy," proclaims one
yard-sign, "please support our troops." As if opponents of this war
required a lecture on that score. In North Carolina, a rally to "support
our troops" was deemed officially agnostic on the war question by the sponsors:
"Michelle Cox and other organizers said the rally would be neither pro- nor
anti-war. 'We're doing everything we can to keep it from becoming a
political event,' she said."
Hundreds gathered at a rally in downtown Bellevue, in Washington state, and
while a few waved "Liberate Iraq" placards, the majority view was reflected
by Carolyn Verone, 56, of Puyallup,
"She said she doesn't believe that all those who are against the war are
against the troops. And she herself expressed some ambivalence about
whether the United States should go to war against Iraq now. But she says
her participation yesterday was 'not for the war and not against the war.
It's to support our troops.'"
If this is the "American street" that Senator McCain is referring to, then
it is hardly militant or even very forthcoming about its pro-war stance.
The reason is fairly simple: contrary to what the push-polls tell us, this
war is immensely unpopular, and even the War Party's most fervent partisans
cannot afford to be too out-front about their politics.
However, the student wing of this tiny-but-vocal movement is far more
in-your-face. Here is Josh Chafetz, a graduate student at Oxford,
announcing the formation of Yale College Students for Democracy, which he
describes as a group "aimed at promoting democracy around the world,
including in the Middle East, and recognizing that democracy can be
promoted by force." A better domain name for "Oxblog," the site on which
this announcement was made, would be Oxymoron. The YCSD manifesto, as
printed in the Yale Daily News, breathlessly proclaims:
"The time has come for the birth of a worldwide student movement devoted
heart and soul to the promotion of democracy in each and every nation where
it does not now exist. In the United States, this student movement must
devote itself to ensuring that our government recognizes that suffering
cannot end and that the war on terror cannot be won until the dictatorships
responsible for that suffering and terrorism are replaced by democratic
governments.
"For those accustomed to thinking of American foreign policy as a cause of
suffering in the developing world, we ask that they contemplate the radical
change that has come to Panama, Bosnia, Kosovo and Afghanistan in the
aftermath of their liberation."
Ah yes, those model democracies sure do show us the benefits of this new
post-Soviet form of international "liberationism," to wit:
Panama � a country that was created by American corporate interests for
their own economic benefit, and ruled by a series of US government-backed
tyrants. The Panamanian government is now trying its best to stay out of
yet another American effort to implant democracy by force: this time in
Colombia, where the "war on drugs" is tearing that nation apart, and
threatening to drag the Panamanians into the same maelstrom.
Bosnia � a collection of ethnic cantons where the "democratic" system
routinely invalidates election results if they displease despotic UN
overlords. As the BBC reported, when Serbian nationalists beat US-financed
"moderates," the American ambassador intervened:
"International forces have the power to ban parties or individuals they
consider to be counter-productive. The US deputy ambassador to the UN,
James Cunningham, said the US favored that course of action. 'We will
continue to urge that obstructionists are kept out of government', he told
the UN."
Isn't "democracy" wonderful?
Kosovo � where the drug lords of the Kosovo "Liberation" Army still rule
over a thug-ocracy and terrorists roam the streets, victimizing the few
Serbs who haven't already fled..
Afghanistan � a boiling cauldron of ethnic clans ruled by fear and
constantly threatening to come apart at the seams despite a heavy Western
troop presence.
None of these examples are very inspiring, but the soaring rhetoric of our
militant young Democratists is enough to sustain them in their faith. When
reality conflicts with their ideology, it is always the latter that wins
out. Like the Soviet apologists of yesteryear, who painted a rosy picture
of the People's Democracies, the neoconservative ideologues who speak of
"liberating" Iraq have revived the old Soviet way of thinking, albeit with
a "pro-American" twist.
"Ideology is political fanaticism," wrote the conservative philosopher
Russell Kirk, "an endeavor to rule the world by rigorous abstract dogmata.
The dogmata of an abstract 'democratic capitalism' may be as mischievous as
the dogmata of Marx." The new mischieviousness is on the march, and the
YCSD, and similar groups here and there, are its perfect expression.
Like the old mischieviousness, this new version is not likely to gain many
adherents in America, but what they lack in numbers the neocons make up for
in terms of influence and dogged determination. As Arnaud de Borchgrave
pointed out in a recent column, they have practically seized control of
U.S. foreign policy: ensconced in the highest reaches of this
administration, they are dragging the rest of us, kicking and screaming,
into a war no one wants.
The pro-war movement is top-heavy with armchair generals, but hasn't got a
lot of foot-soldiers, and no wonder: the idea that the American system can
be imposed by force is not only counterintuitive but profoundly
un-American, alien to our history and inimical to our character as a free
people. So it should come as no surprise that when the War Party took to
the streets, hardly anybody noticed.
� Justin Raimondo
http://www.antiwar.com/justin/j021703.html
