Would You Have Refused To Participate In An Event Organized By Yippies?

[DistressedAmerican]

Abby Hoffman?

How about the black panthers?

Would all you who are spouting off about ANSWER and Cindy have refused to participate in an event they hosted? After all lots of people said the same shit about their views and their style making us look bad.

Personally, I think these anti-Cindy and Anti-ANSWER posts are at best a bullshit excuse for not taking action yourself.

If you had a problem with ANSWER, did you organize yourself something local so that you could still express your opposition to the war? Or did you just sit down and start ripping on those that have accomplished something?

Once you have become an organizer, I will listen to the bitching about other active organizations. If it is just armchair bullshit with no back-up and no effort shown by you, stop wasting my freaking time!

This whole thing reeks of freeper if you ask me.

You do not have to agree with every position taken by a person or organization in order to work together to achieve common goals.

The war is a hell of a lot more important that your egos (or your lame ass excuses for not participating)!

[vi5]

1. You're right about people organizing themselves.....

...but if an anti-war protest could have been perhaps twice the size if it was focused on just being an anti-war protest rather than an excuse for every single lefty cause being aired, isn't that rather large missed opportunity?

I'm not even really taking sides, and no I have no proof that it would have been double the size. I give ANSWER credit for their organization and efforts and don't begrudge them the right to let whoever speak.. But I also don't begrudge anyone who would participate in a straight forward anti-war march but not one that veers off and lets anyone speak on whatever issue they want even if it's not related to the topic at hand. Especially if it's topics that they feel very strongly against.

I don't understand why it's so hard to just get an anti-war march together that doesn't involve people talking about Mumia, or the death penalty or the environment or anarchy or whatever else. Those are all things that are o.k. to fight for, but then you are keeping out a lot of people who might otherwise join in this one cause.

[DistressedAmerican]

7. Inclusion Of Diverse groups Grows A Crowd Not Shrinks It!

Your logic is way off base. Few people blew this off because they objected to who would be there in advance. Who the hell knew in advance who exactly would be there? I sure as hell didn't.

Yet, you believe that there were many who somehow knew the "people talking about Mumia, or the death penalty or the environment or anarchy or whatever else" would be there in advance and therefore chose not to attend. I think not.

No one knew exactly who would be there. I didn't even know what DUers would be there more or less every organization that chose to show their opposition to the war.

I guess by that logic no one should have gone to Crawford because the socialist workers party was there?

Here's what I think happened, people did not go and have looked at who was there and are now (after the fact) acting like the crowd composition was their deciding factor.

I do not buy it. Not at all...

[vi5]

22. Have you not been at or seen the previous ANSWER protests?

This same thing has been happening at every sing ANSWER protest since before the Iraq war started and this same discussion was had on this board after every single one of them. Every "anti-war" protest since 2003 has included a hodgepodge of assorted other issues and topics unrelated to the war. It was and is very possible to know who will be speaking about what or protesting what other issues because this same subject has been ongoing since the start of the war and in many people's mind's it's a key issue as to why despite the unpopularity of this war, why there is still a relative difficulty level in getting organization on some of this stuff. You disagree and that is fine but you can't honestly say that this issue is new and took anyone by surprise because it didn't.

Like I said, it's their prerogative to have anyone they want speak. But when people complain that they don't want to take part in say a Pro-Palestinian rally or an anti-Death Penalty rally or any of that other stuff and get yelled at or criticized for not wanting to participate in that stuff, I don't think it's really fair. And it dillutes the message. The fact is I personally am on the same side of probably almost every issue that ANSWER is for and those speakers. But we have to decide what is more important. Sending as clear and as large a signal as possible on the issue of the war, or just having as many different, tangentially unrelated causes represented at the march. To my mind if you are against the war, whatever your stripes on other issues, then come join in the protest. But I know plenty of people who are but who have either been at previous ANSWER run protests or seen clips of them and who don't want to be at a rally that is going to allow speakers to talk about completely unrelated subjects.

[DistressedAmerican]

24. Yes I Have. Several Times.

The Vast majority are there for the same cause, Anti Iraq War. A small number have their own agenda. That will happen. Show up for what you are there for. Carry anti-war signs, etc. Why is it such a problem that others have a different agenda? Show up and support YOUR cause. Why is that not good enough? Afraid to be photographed in the same city as the rest of the crowd? I just do not get it.

This argument that you should not participate and share your message just because there are folks there you disagree with is counter productive.

If you are worried about the other groups taking over, show up and stay on message! The more that show up and do that, the less you should have to worry that the group will be percieved in this or that negative/off topic way.

[Warren Stupidity]

27. no best we all stay home complain. nt.

[vi5]

35. Look, I'm playing devil's advocate here....

I've got no issues with it personally. I personally think that it's selfish to take advantage of an audience to lecture them on a completely different subject than what they are there for but personally it's not my march so I don't have a say.

I'm just trying to point out that by doing this it can and does alienates a lot of potential allies. You can think their reasoning is silly if you want. But all I know is that if I went to a rally for gay marriage rights and someone got up on stage and started lecturing me on the horrors of abortion, as a pro-choice person I'd be pissed off and wouldn't go to a march hosted by that group again, no matter how noble the cause. So I can see where people are coming from on this.

If your attitude is that if someone is uncomfortable supporting the actions of a group that they disagree with on a host of other issues is simply screw them, let them organize their own rally then clearly we are coming from 2 different places so we'll just have to agree to disagree.

[DistressedAmerican]

37. I Think The Degree To Which The Message Was Pulled Away From The War

at this event is way overblown.

First you have thrown out a bunch of folks that were not there at all as sources of this distraction. For example, there was not a big environmental lobby there. Nor were there pro-choice, gay rights groups, etc.

Others, you greatly exaggerate their impact. The Free Mumia folks were a small contingent, etc. The vast majority of speeches at the rally were right on topic. I think folks have overblown the degree to which the different messages impact the overall anti-war message.

All I heard the press report on was a large gathering of anti-war protesters.

I think people have exaggerated the effect significantly and the types of posts I was referring to in the OP actually do far more to deflect the message than the groups that people are talking about.

I really do not know where your last paragraph is coming from. I made it clear that people should come out and make their voice heard on the war of they are worried that these other groups will somehow swamp the anti-war message.

[vi5]

38. Perhaps it is overblown......

...I was at some of the earlier marches and I can say it was not overblown and that I had the same impression, although it didn't bother me as much as it seemed to other people. I wasn't at this one so perhaps my impression comes from misguided sources, although people being concerned about it based off of previous marches does strike me as valid.

And my last paragraph was more directed at your original post which had a very dismissive attitude towards people who may have legitimate concerns with going to a rally or march sponsored by and run by a group who they could very well have legitimate ideological differences with that would make them uncomfortable being there.

If the last response you made to me had been your original post that would have been a more apt statement to make. You made your case clearly and didn't dismiss or condescend to anyone like I felt you did in your original post. You had a good point to make but it just seemed like you were taking a "with us or against us" approach in the original post. My apologies if that was not the case.

[ET Awful]

2. Anyone knowledgeable of the history of mass movements will know

that there are ALWAYS diverse ideas and goals. Look at any Vietnam era protest and you will see discussions by groups ranging from NOW to AIM to the Black Panthers to the Students for a Democratic Society.

In fact, the SDS organized a great number of the anti-war protests of the Vietnam era and was attacked in much the same way.

[goodhue]

3. great post

I agree wholeheartedly

[Warren Stupidity]

4. Good point.

And dammit I miss Abbie.

So about the 'bad protestor' meme: so far it appears to be a call for inaction, an argument for anti-momentum, a criticism without a remedy.

The vast majority of bad protestor posts appear to be basing their 'evidence' of answer-disaster based on their observance of the event via the fixed camera positions 0f CSPAN. So basically all 12 people watching CSPAN got a distorted view of the event. Oh my god! All is lost!

Is answer wrong headed and obnoxious: I am willing to accept that thesis without argument. So now I ask 'what should we do about it'?

Their proposed remedy appears to be 'everybody stay home and do nothing'. Hmmmm... gee, I don't know, that doesn't sound like it is going to be particularly effective.

What are the other solutions? Lets see, perhaps some other less ideologically driven coalition could help sponsor and organize demonstrations? Oh, wait, they did. United for Peace and Justice organized the BIG half of the event, ANSWER oganized the little half. So it seems that UFPJ was not good enough for our Bad Protestor Parade Rainers. The fact that ANSWER was a tiny faction in a huge crowd of everyday Americans makes no difference to them, we must stay away from any event that ANSWER shows up at, less we be tainted.

Hey I know! Perhaps the Parade Rainers can organize the next Big Event and they can establish a Committee to Regulate Approved Protests and CRAP can prohibit all Bad Protestors and then everything will be bliss.

I miss Abbie.

[Blue_In_AK]

44. I miss Abbie, too. n/t

[LiberalEsto]

5. I WAS a Yippie, thank you

and I participated in many Yippie events during the Vietnam era. I consider Yippie as the grandparent of Billionaires for Bush. Yippie was about street theater, about making savage fun of Nixon and his war machine. It was about exposing the scary monsters of the government and turning them into laughingstocks.

There were many groups opposing the Vietnam War, and most of them played their own special roles in mobilizing popular opinion against it. (Some groups, however, were destructive elements whose tactics turned people off, as they were intended to do.)

Yippie may have participated in the organizing of mass demonstrations, but it did not try to run them. Most of the big marches were organized by umbrella groups like the Mobilization to End the War.

In my opinion, ANSWER is in some ways counterproductive for the anti-war movement with their insistence on bringing in a laundry list of causes that turn many people off. I, for one, don't care for their stridency and many of their causes. In my opinion we need a new anti-war umbrella group for mass mobilizations. ANSWER can certainly be part of such a group, but it shouldn't try to hijack the entire agenda.

[crispini]

16. The voice of experience.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

28. Thank you, and having gone to one of the Yippie meetings that was

held in NYC planning Chicago and also living what is history today. You are 100% right.

As to ANSWER. I think they are agent provocateurs.

[LiberalEsto]

30. provocateurs - that's the word I was looking for

Many people in ANSWER may be genuinely passionate about their special causes. But I'll eat my Impeach Nixon button if there aren't a number of CIA types among them trying to instigate stuff to make the entire anti-war movement look bad.

There were provocateurs in SDS and many other groups opposing the Vietnam war. It stands to reason, with another paranoid warmongering administration, that there are people like that around today, doing the same old thing.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

36. Here is an excellent post by Minstrel Boy. It is quite eye opening.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4878874

Also, suspiciously to me at least, ANSWER was formed on 9/14/2001

http://answer.pephost.org/site/PageServer?pagename=ANS_about_us

[fishnfla]

33. Bring back the Yippies!!!

They knew how to get it done! Jerry Rubin blowing bubbles at HUAC hearings....those were the days. To answer the OP: if they were running the show, of course I'd be there. It'd be more fun than a bunchy screechy speakers and vapid slogans about Mumia, thats for sure

Rubin: "The real drug was Walter Cronkite...the more visual and surreal the stunts we could cook up, the easier it was to get on the news..."

I agree with this poster: a group thats in charge of the anti-war movement and not a laundry list of distractions, thats what is needed.

[ima_sinnic]

6. yes, thanks for saying it AGAIN. looks like we have either a lot of

"amateur" protestors, who think the rally is going to be the neat tidy way they pictured it and that everyone will dress and act in conformity with some "image" and focus on one "message" that they approve -- or we have some infiltrators/operatives who have an agenda that is promoted by sowing dissent and fractionation among progressives/lefties/anti-Bushistas.

either way, block your ears to the divisive ones and carry on with resistance--that is the issue here, we are ALL UNITED IN OPPOSITION TO BUSHCO.

[Walt Starr]

8. I'd attend an event sponsored by Hoffman

but I would nto attend an event sponsored by the Black Panthers.

[LiberalEsto]

31. Not even their breakfast programs for kids? n/t

[TallahasseeGrannie]

9. I don't expect to agree

with every plank of every progressive platform, but there are basics upon which we agree.

I have not researched ANSWER enough to have decided if there are any red flags for me there, "red flags" being an issue they espouse that I just morally can't get behind.

[ret5hd]

10. Those bitching have no idea how hard it is to organize a rally, etc...

how hard it is to organize even a LOCAL rally.
i do.

you spend weeks on the phone, contacting every union local and any associated labor groups, every student group, every politician, etc.

you spend hours and hours designing flyers and info sheets, just to have to re-do them when locations/itineraries change. when everything is finally ready for print, you spend time and money and time and money and time and money at the printers.

you fax/email/snail-mail said flyers/info sheets to all of those union locals, labor groups, student groups, politicians, etc that you have contacted by phone earlier.

you constantly answer the phone from those same people, answering questions they have about the "Agenda", quelling suspicions, soothing tempers, etc. You go to each of their membership meetings, usually a couple of hours apiece, to answer their members questions and to raise awareness. you leave stacks of the flyers/info sheets which may or may not be placed in areas readily seen by their members.

you drive for hours every weekend placing flyers/info sheets at every coffee house, student union room, streetpost, etc.

you pay for and design a dedicated website for the event.

you go to organizational meetings for the event. After all, you can't do it all yourself. You have rounded up a dozen or so like-minded individuals with the time AND energy to do all this stuff.

you apply for permits and insurance and arrange port-a-potties and food vendors and t-shirt vendors and ...

hell, i can't even begin to say how much work it all is. and after it's all come together and only 400 or so people show up and two of the politicos you advertised as speaking don't show and musicians union threatens a boycott because you forgot to contact ASCAP to play recorded music but you get that all straightened out...

but then you look back after it's all done and you say "yeah, it was worth it." But you think twice before volunteering again.

[LoZoccolo]

11. Must you constantly and flagrantly use manipulative tactics...

...to try to intimidate people with paranoia to try to make a point?

This whole thing reeks of freeper if you ask me.

That's what I'm speaking of.

[Warren Stupidity]

12. I give up ...

how would you explain the motivation of the parade rainers?

[LoZoccolo]

14. I don't think I have to, right?

It should not be the automatic response of anyone to accuse someone of being a troll when they lay out an argument. I know of one person who you (not me) would call a "parade rainer". I haven't met him in person, but I've met people who have who I do trust. He's not a FReeper. He is, however, a person who consistently examines political strategy and how it works out. I take his position at face value as he posted it here.

I don't like ANSWER either, and you might think I'm a troll, but if you're wrong, well, I'm the first to know you're wrong.

[Warren Stupidity]

26. You don't have to be a freeper or a troll to be catapulting

the freeper propaganda. Excuse us if we get back from a huge and wonderful antiwar protest to find DU cluttered with endless 'bad protestor' posts all dissing the demo because answer was there, and we start to wonder what the motivation for all this negativity is. There sure as heck isn't anything constructive about it.

Like the 'bad looter' meme from new orleans, lots of people with good intentions end up playing right into the propaganda. Too bad. Time and again.

[LoZoccolo]

43. True, I don't check every single statement...

...to make sure that it couldn't be wrested from my total argument and used as a piece of a right-wing one. I pretty much care if something's true or not true, not whether or not it's useful to me or whoever with a larger agenda, possibly out of context. I just don't think that's that important on a Democratic message board amongst other Democrats; I'm not worried about it.

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[LoZoccolo]

15. Because it's disruptive conduct...

...whether or not you're a sincere member.

[DistressedAmerican]

17. Far From As Disruptive As Your Endless Hostile And Sarcastic Posts.

I accused no one of being a freep. You seen a bit defensive. Here that accusation frequently?

However, the tactic is typical of how they operate. They come here and sew discord. This is just the type of thing that freeps do post.

[LoZoccolo]

18. Yeah you did make that accusation.

And I do hear that accusation myself. Not frequently, but occasionally. It almost never comes from someone who's opinion I respect, though. Sometimes the accusation doesn't even make any sense, such as the time I got accused of it for defending Clinton's actions in raising relief money for Katrina victims - why would a FReeper want to keep the Democrats unified against silly accusations? Why would a FReeper be against third parties? Why would a FReeper be against letting Republicans win against DLC candidates? It's a knee-jerk accusation at best, an manipulative intimidation tactic at worst.

I'm not in here sowing discord, saying that people have a right to have real objections to ANSWER and that they should be able to express them without being accused of being a troll. Getting people paranoid of certain opinions which can legitimately be explained as not having a right-wing slant, or trying to supress them through intimidation, is more of my idea of discord, even if it does not come from a troll.

[crispini]

19. LoZo, you are indeed a fighter.

No matter what we are discussing, there is always a position that's "safe to take" on DU. And you are quite often found on the other side of that position. Good for you. In the interests of discourse and dialog, it's good to have people who are willing to stand up for the unpopular position.

[LoZoccolo]

21. Thank you very much for these kind words.

They are encouraging.

[tx_dem41]

23. Count me as someone that appreciates your contributions too, LoZo.

Not sure if that helps your cause though. :)

[LoZoccolo]

39. No it doesn't GO AWAY GO AWAY!

:D

[tx_dem41]

47. Awwwww...

:cry:

lol...j/k... :)

[DemocratSinceBirth]

48. You Are So Fucking Right

Anybody with an IQ north of room temperature knows the politically correct position on every issue at DU and if 1,000 posters are writing the same thing 999 of them are not necessary...


I know I'm a Democrat....

I know I'm nominally pro-choice, pro safety net, pro gay rightsm and pro affirmative action...

I know Bush*'s policicies are disatrous for this country...


After that my opinions on many DU topics are my own and at times are diametrically opposed to many popular positions at DU...

My little declaration of independence...

Or as my hero John Stuart Mill says


"If all mankind minus one were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind."

[Generic Other]

20. I vote for milktoast Democrats all the time

And they disappoint me all the time.

If I applied the standards to them that some at DU are applying to Cindy, I'd stay home on election day.

I too am sick of the "lame ass" excuses and bellyaching.

[obreaslan]

25. Finally a voice of reason.

After Saturday, i came here and started reading all of the negative posts and was thinking WTF? Aren't we all on the same side? This is exactly what the other side hopes for and loves to see. THere's a reason that the phrase "United we stand, divided we fall" is so common, it's true.

Great post. :applause:

[mattclearing]

29. Agreed. I don't like ANSWER, but they are the only game in town.

I always show up to their big rallies in DC.

When Move On or the Democratic Party organizes a rally as big as ANSWER's, then maybe I'll consider knocking them.

As long as there's no alternative, bitching about ANSWER is defeatist and stupid.

[LiberalEsto]

32. What about United for Peace & Justice?

I'd call them the real anti-war mobilizers.

[GalleryGod]

34. I did. I did. So both are moot questions for me.

Thanks for askin',though :hippie:

[bemildred]

40. 500K strong demos are not "organized", they happen, and people help. nt

[Blue_In_AK]

41. I just got back late last night...

There were NEGATIVE posts???!!! Jeezus H. Christ ... this was a wonderful protest and I say the more groups involved the better. I walked all up and down the march, hanging with different groups at different places and they all had incredible (although different) energies. I loved it. This IS what democracy looks like.

ed. And I would have gotten arrested myself if I hadn't had to go catch a plane. I had to leave right when the paddy wagons showed up. Damn. It was cool being surrounded by the crime scene tape.

[skooooo]

42. Check this out

I would have loved them.

http://sunsite.berkeley.edu/videodir/pacificaviet/yippie.ram

[DistressedAmerican]

46. At The Free Store You Could Even Get Alice!

I would have competed in the yippie olympics! Wonder what the events were.

I loved that vid. Thanks for posting!

[txaslftist]

45. Absolutely. I can't stand small dogs.