Dave,
Thanks for this useful point- it returns to the recurring question about
how broad a spectrum of alliances we feel we can engage in. I think it is
pretty remarkable that a group of SWP folk and the odd CP member, with
support of people as 'colourful' (to put it politely) as Galloway, and the
alliance with the Muslim Association of Britian (which made many people
uncomfortable), could form the core of a group like the
Stop-The-War-Coalition that was able to mobilise more than a million people
onto the streets. These groups could have tried to make more personal
capital out of it than they did (although here Galloway may indeed be an
exception).
I don't know much about the END; do tell me more, and what lessons you
think can be learnt for the current anti-war movement.
What do list members think about the SWC, participation in it, and its
future role in the broad anti-war / anti-globalization movements?
Nick
>
> i think it was actually damaging to the anti-war movement to have
> someone with his record and style, and with such a compromised
> attitude
> to Hussain taking such a strong leadership role...I think it closed
> down
> the possibilities of developing a more nuanced opposition which was
> against both Hussain and Bush/ Blair- the kind of imaginative
> geography
> of resistance pioneered by groups like the campaign for European
> Nuclear
> Disarmament (END) in the cold war...
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Dave
>
>
> ----------------- reply -------------
>> I believe that independent auditors cleared Galloway of all charges
> in
>> regard to war on want.
>>
>> He met Saddam Hussein twice, the same number of times as Donald
> Rumsfled.
>> The latter met him to sell weapons and back his war on Iran; the
> former to
>> try and mediate the impacts and effects of war.
>>
>> I agree, he is a self-publicist, and his champagne-socialist
> lifestyle does
>> little to endear him to me. Nonetheless, he has been an important
> and
>> persistent voice in the anti-war movement.
>>
>> I guess the hat won't be passed round at the IBG, then :-)
>>
>> Nick
>>
>> --On 26 June 2003 11:32 +0000 Jon Cloke <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
>>
>> > I agree completely; George Galloway's been a relentless
> self-publicist
>> > for a number of years who apparently believes that the more times
> he gets
>> > on TV the better for the Iraqi people, which is a dubious
> proposition
> to
>> > say the least - and his fawning on Saddam Hussein was something
> suitable
>> > only for those with a very strong stomach.
>> >
>> > These allegations were to my mind always going to prove false, as
> the ones
>> > made by the Telegraph will be, but that doesn't alter the fact
> that
>> > Galloway's made a large amount of money over the last few years in
>
> his
>> > role as professional dissident, for very little benefit to the
> people he
>> > claims to represent.
>> >
>> > Let him fund his defence out of his own deep pockets.
>> >
>> >
>> > Jon Cloke
>> >
>> >
> _____________________________________________________________
> ____
>> > Find a cheaper internet access deal - choose one to suit you.
>> > http://www.msn.co.uk/internetaccess
>>
|