From: ".: s0metim3 :." <s0metim3-AT-netlink.com.au>
Subject: AUT: RE: Re: brief Melbourne demo report
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 05:11:15 +1100


Maybe I wasn't very clear.  Sure, there were sections of the
rallies that were against a UN-licenced war and said so.
But I've yet to hear this couched in such a way that touches
on the reasons for why a lot of people (including those at
the rallies) support this position, ie: the specificity of
this position in Australia, the 'we're isolated in a sea of
asians and muslims down under'.  It's this that I don't
reckon is being addressed bc it amounts to saying that a
xenophobic panic is composing a large measure of antiwar
sentiment and thereby abandoning the 'comforts' of a
united/popular front.

But, yes, I agree Anthony that if/when the UN inclines
toward licensing an attack, the coalition will split, or
become smaller, and perhaps more militant (after a fashion).
Which is to say that I reckon the joys over numbers at
rallies has tended to obscure a consideration over the
politics involved, both the form and substance of the event.
In a way, I think what's occured is a forgetting of the
substantial reasons why decentralised, autonomous forms of
action had become a question of necessity and integrity and
directly related form to content of actions, eg: the debates
over the presence of nationalism/sts in the anti-WEF(s11)
protests.  Also, with the Baxter thingy: NOII's refusal to
assert an autonomous, decentralised network (with spokes and
affinity groups) *in their orig callout* is also an example
of pretending that form has no relation to content, that
there is no relationship between the form of representation
implied by united/popular fronts has no relation to the
content of a noborder politics.

Angela
_______________

<end message>




: i agree with angela and reckon it will result in
: a much smaller and
: more *militant* (if i may use that word) anti-war
: movement.
:
: i'm not sure who these "coalition partners who
: don't adhere to a 'not
: without the UN' position are too scared to
: address it" are, except the
: obvious ones: the greens, the labor party. the
: leninoids here in
: canberra seems to be running vocally and clearly
: with an anti-un
: position - particularly as one of the main
: speakers at the saturday
: rally.
:
: anthony
:
:  --- Steve Wright <pmargin-AT-froggy.com.au> wrote:
: > thanks for that,
: Angela - as always, you give me something of a
: > (often
: > necessary) jolt.
: >
: > Any others from down this way (or elsewhere)
: have a view on this?
: >
: >
: > ".: s0metim3 :." wrote:
: >
: > >
: > > I'd like to be wrong, but I think it will disintegrate
: > > if/when the UN sanctions war in some fashion.
: That is: the
: > > united front that underpinned the rally will
: disintegrate,
: > > and in large part bc the coalition partners
: who don't adhere
: > > to a 'not without the UN' position are too
: scared to address
: > > it lest it disrupt that coalition-building
: exercise.  The
: > > only response I've seen is a vague
: pacificism: war is bad.
: >
: > [snip]
: >
: >
: >
: >      --- from list
: aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
:
: ====: ------------------------------------------
: NO WAR! NO BORDERS!
:
: TREASON: http://treason.metadns.cx
:
: RED THREAD: http://redthread.cjb.net
: ------------------------------------------
:
: http://mobile.yahoo.com.au - Yahoo! Mobile
: - Exchange IMs with Messenger friends on your
: Telstra or Vodafone mobile phone.
:
:
:      --- from list
: aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
:



     --- from list aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---