The organizing team for the recent Bush demonstration in Salt Lake City did an amazing job of pulling together, in less than 5 full days, an outstanding event that drew thousands of people – one of largest demonstrations in recent Utah history.
The day after the event the organizing team held a “post mortem” debriefing to celebrate our efforts, successes, and voice concerns about the organizing, the event itself, and discuss improvements for future events, as well as the possibility of keeping the group together for organizing in the future. In go-around fashion, about a dozen people had a chance to say what was on their mind. 11 of those people were organizers, one person came to sit in on the meeting.
Some of the concerns voiced were mostly on logistics and the media spin, although overall we were pleased with the media attention that was garnered. The committee decided to send a letter of “thanks” to George W. Bush (it is being composed as I write this) for visiting SLC,with all of our signatures and organizations on it, along with a fact sheet of our unified position on the war. We plan to also individually write letters to the editor of local papers.
The committee also agreed that the focus of the rally on September 24th needs to focus on **Utah**.
Now for the “fun” part.
The group recognized that the event was a little heavy on speakers from the Democrat party side, but only because the SLC mayor, Rocky Anderson, had really promoted this event and speakers had come forward. The Utah Progressive Democrats were involved in organizing, as was the Green Party of Utah, Student Socialists, and other military-peace and peace organizations. The Prog Dems were formed to pull the Dems to the left and they have been active in the peace and anti-nuclear movements in Utah.
One person, the person who was not involved in organizing the event, chose to voice his concern that political parties should not be involved in the anti-war movement and that the Democrats had essentially taken over the event.
In repsonse to a subsequent email from organizers voicing concerns over this person’s comments, this person wrote that the anti-war movement
has been, will be and is strongest if it is politically independent from any political party.
and
The larger and more powerful the politically independent, grass-roots movement we build the more difficulty we will have fighting off the opportunist politicians of every stripe who are begging to speak.
.
(Please note that the entire email has not been included and excerpts have been extracted for this post.)
Maybe these “opportunist politicians” are “begging to speak” because they have something worthy to say about their stance on war. They should be provided that chance.
Here is my response that I sent via email.
Peace and Justice encompasses ALL people and organizations who embrace the concept of ending war and promoting a more just and peaceful existence on earth, regardless of political pursuasion or affiliation or level of involvement in political organizations.
We see political parties as an active part of the peace movement. We need to target not only citizens, but our representatives in this process. The system is currently set up to have our representatives reflect the will of the people and we know that it doesn’t actually happen this way and that is why we, the people, and our political parties MUST change this!
If we start limiting the type of organizations that can participate in working on rallies, etc. where do we draw the line and stop?
The Green Party is extremely active nationally with its peace action committee (see our website at http://www.gp.org/committees/peace). Greens everywhere are participating in and making a difference in the peace movement. This committee is ciruclutating petitions, generating and publishing press releases, travelling to major events (such as Camp Casey) and pushing for the impeachment of George W. Bush. The Green Party of Utah also has developed a case of war crimes against Mr. Bush. (www.gput.org/warcrimes.shtml).
Our committee did an amazing thing. Despite our egos and differences, politically, idealogically, or otherwise, we came together on common ground and pulled off a major event that gained national and international attention (see links at http://www.livejournal.com/~deesings/). It wasn’t perfect, there were some intense discussions and process issues, and there were some snafus at the event, but overall the process was amazingly smooth.
We need to include ALL organizations – political parties, peace groups, faith-based groups, etc. – who stand together in agreement on certain issues – and address those issues that bring us together. To not recognize this effort to be in unity on those issues is a disservice to the peace movement.
I also feel that the Green Party needs to pursue electing Greens to office who reflect our the values of the peace, environment, and anti-nuclear movements. As one of our organizers pointed out, it’s politics that got us into the war, after all. We **need** to have politicians in office who will be accountable to its citizens….and to the **world**.
One person pointed out the ambiguity of the label “opportunist politicians”:
….why can’t they speak if they are opposed to the war? The more politicians from any party we can get on record as opposed to the war, the sooner we will reach critical mass. Does it really matter if they advance their personal agenda if they also advance our agenda? We need as many politicians at all levels of government from School Boards to the Presidency opposing the war.
In the same response, an organizer from the Prog Dems, was this comment:
We have an opportunity to create working relationships among ourselves in order to further our shared goal. Those relationships can help us further other goals in this Republican dominated political landscape as well. Goals that protect our environment and help build more diverse and humane communities. The UDPC has been a willing participant in this effort and will continue to be provided we are not put down because of our political affiliation. In the grand scheme of things it worked better than we imagined. Let’s run with it.
The committee viewed this event as an opportunity. An opportunity to grow. An opportunity to work on shared visions. An opportunity to set the example that political organizations **can** make a difference with sincere efforts. An opportunity for politicians to make statements without being worried about their image. An opportunity for peace activists to share their efforts with people of diverse backgrounds and phiolosophies. An opportunity to practice consensus building. An opportunity to break the barriers and continue to build the movement towards making our world a more humane and just place to exist.
As quoted above: Let’s run with it!
Deanna Dee-Dee Taylor 