Now that the war in Iraq is 'finished', are you looking for something new to protest about?

by dathi - Al axia Fri Apr 25, 2003 00:47

eh...who said the war is over?...hasnt even begun.

by Josef Fri Apr 25, 2003 12:24

Are Democrat Party bombs no as lethal as GOP's. There has been little sign of public outrage at the war in the Democratic Republic of Congo - at least 2.5 million people killed so far. Could we infer that black on black killing isn't quite such an outrage?

That's why I could only watch the pictures of 100,000 people on the streets of Dublin with a sneer of derision.

by Anonymous Fri Apr 25, 2003 13:29

Couldn't agree with you more Kevin. Iraq is just one of a countless number of horrific trajedies going on around the world.

The "anti-war" protest, must not only die away, it needs to grow.

Get involved with organisations who are carrying on this fight.

Drop the Debt Coalition of Ireland for example:-

www.debtireland.org
ddc@connect.ie
Tel 01-8571828

Anarchists, Socialist orgainisations, Chomlamh, Gluaiseacht etc. etc.

These groups are working on the world's totally preventable mass scale attocities every day. The world's streets needs to be full of people again -SOON.

Capitlaism, Imperialism, Globalisation, the U.S., the West - MUST be stopped.

(just another related comment I wrote on the "Where is the war on Malaria article" just a few postings up)

Anti-War protestors must also ask themselves this question - "Where is the war on Malaria"
by Anonymous Fri, Apr 25 2003, 12:14pm

Totally agree with author "where is the war on Malaria"? You could ask this about any number of things.

But anti-war protestors I think must ask themselves the same question. There has been massive unprecendented world wide protests on the war on Iraq. The plight of the Iraqi people indeed is as devestating as any that is out there. However, it is only one of many, many tragic situations.

Why does the world not protest to the same extent on all the other tragic world issues? Many, if not most which are preventable, and which are being caused by a large extent by our own western governments, banks and companies - most particularly in the U.S. of course.

Why? Why? Why?

The same worldwide mass disgust and pressure must be shown.

I think the work of anti-war protestors has been unbelieveable. But it must equally be applied to all the other preventable trajedies and deaths in this fucked up world of ours.

by Matthew Fri Apr 25, 2003 13:29

There are many wars going on on the planet right now.

One difference with Iraq was that the war involved the world's richest democracies, who should have known better. You expect expansionist aggression from two-bit African dictatorships, not pluralist Western democracies.

Also the Iraq war is different to other wars (including Kosovo) in that it was launched on the pretext of pre-emption. This new excuse for war sets a dangerous precedent.

The issue of imminent threat is also important. In Iraq the threat to the outside world or the people of Iraq was no greater in March 2003 than any other time in the previous decade. In Kosovo there was a clear threat to the natives of Kosovo, as they were fleeing the country.

Yet enother difference between Iraq and other wars (e.g. Congo) is that of the media. People can only protest about issues they are aware of. Western media gave blanket coverage to the bogey man Saddam and the run-up to the war. On the other hand Congo never gets mentioned.

When you add up all the above issues it's hardly surprising that the Iraq war drew more protestors than any other recent war.

by Chekov Fri Apr 25, 2003 14:09

"You expect expansionist aggression from two-bit African dictatorships, not pluralist Western democracies."

Actually history shows that you expect expansionist wars of aggression from western democracies, way, way more than from two-bit african dictators. At least as long as you don't simply equate expansionism with increasing the area of the country - this has been out of fashion for a long time, even in Africa. Despite the almost random nature of the African map, there have been remarkably few wars that have been primarily expansionist in the last 50 years in Africa. A few border skirmishes here and there, Western Sahara, Ethiopia vs. Somalia and vs. Eritrea are all that spring to mind. Even these expansionist wars had a healthy dose of proxy imperialsim.

Also, while there may be a load of 2-bit dictators scheming in the congo, they very much play second fiddle to the handful of American, Canadian, South African, French and British mining & petroleum corporations that are pulling the strings. The main reason for the lack of protests about this war are down to media coverage, lack of information and the inherent complexity of the situation. Without media attention most people don't know that there is a war in Congo, even if they do, it is almost impossible to find accurate information about what is going on. I tried. I travelled all around the edges of the Congo for a couple of months in 2000. It was impossible to gain more than a vague impression of what was going on. What it was possible to find out is that there are a dozen or so corporations (mostly not very well known, if very large, mineral corps) squabbling for the imense mineral wealth of the Congo. Even if this information was widely known, it would still be difficult to organise coherent protests against the villians. They operate through proxy armies, market forces, often financing different sides at the same time. For a coherent protest movement to arise, we would have to convince a lot of people of a fairly common analysis of imperialism, and its manifestations.

In the current situation, I'd say that any protest movement would take an explicitly imperialist point of view, basically calling on the UN to control the two-bit african dictators with peacekeepers. Whenever most of the corporations felt that they had what they wanted from the conflict, they'd welcome this and use the UN forces to police their ill-gotten wealth. Hardly a worthwhile endeavour.

There is no point in protesting for the sake of maintaining the moral high ground, nor of protesting against 'badness'. The point of protest, at least as I've always understood it, is to attempt to change the world. We have to know how we want to change it and have realistic strategies of where to direct our forces if protest is to be anything more than a narcissistic exercise in appeasement of our consciences.

by IMCer Fri Apr 25, 2003 15:12

why is "indymedia kevin" telling people where to protest? does imc support all these events? how is he allowed sign as imc eire, can the other editors come on and defend this? independent my arse.

by ya whateva Fri Apr 25, 2003 15:29

you should have learned by now not believe everything you read on indymedia and elsewhere in life, no?

this is an open forum and people can generally say and claim to be what ever they want - that's the beauty and the problem of indymedia.

by conor (wsm personal capacity) Fri Apr 25, 2003 15:39

If you really have been bitten by the bug here are some exciting causes recomended by myself

the agrophobics raly is quite good and, unfortunately, reminds me of some of the smaller protests I've been on

http://www.worth1000.com/cache/gallery/contestcache.asp?contest_id=779

by S. Aerobics - Reclaim the Runways Fri Apr 25, 2003 17:39

The fact that Ireland is being used is a big part of Irish anti - war setiments.

The Axis of Onslaught : Washington - Shannon - Babylon.
Direct action highlighted this fact.
More people became conscious, more people began to take reponsibility....

Is there links between Ireland and killing in the Congo or anywhere else ?
Then highlight them to provide a focal point for (ir)responsible action .

by J. Fri Apr 25, 2003 17:41

Is Conor's humour revolutionary -
or is it a threat?
Or is this just an in-joke between those Indymedia people?
And what about the agoraphobics?
Discuss.

by longtime listener Fri Apr 25, 2003 18:09

I agree with chekov on his 'expansionist' clarification, and like him, I believe that protest should always effect Change. However, i believe that most corporate entities [such as those in the exploration business] are far easier exposed/damaged than people believe and should be concentrated on more, particularly the various Irish & UK ones.
Sandline/ExecutiveOutcomes/DeBeers/Kissinger/and many more have been seriously affected by PR assaults by focused, qualified, experienced and often non-politically aligned negative media attention.

This may seem very 'mainstream' but my own opinion of the Irish 'resistance' movement makes me wonder from what quarter would such effective and sustained pressure come from. Usually, on indymedia, I see various blokes abusing other blokes as they compete for the darwinian prize of erradicating other peoples opinion or correcting their syntax or historical accuracy/legitimacy. There seems to be very little cooperation on elevating issues which are important to me beyond the level of the leaflet or IMC posting.

Regarding comments on a mobilisation against aggression and oppression in Africa, I would be shocked if anything was done, in the current political & media climate, for many years to come.

it would be naieve to believe for one moment that anti-Bush style disgust and opposition could be mounted internationally against an equally psychotic character like Joseph Kony of the Ugandan LRA rebel grouping.
Mr Kony, known for his customary hacking off of Ugandan cyclists feet - seriously - [in case they are flying off to the next village to alert the govt.], is no Nkrumah. His 'Lord's Resistance Army' rules, similar to Sharia, & Texan law, by the 10 commandments.

Like Bush, he's easy to hate, to mock, to fear and to oppose - if you're 5000 miles away. But will we see a European movement against Kony? Of course not, he's not relevant - he's anonymous. He's a shabby black man from some village in africa who doesn't speak english and has kept his dealings with his Belgian arms/gem dealers secret. Most crucially, he's never on the telly is he? Whats he look like?

In the Niger delta, Saro Wiwa became an international [i.e. western] martyr due to the fact that A] he was culturally significant and B] he was opposing other culturally significant icons [Shell Oil etc].
In Myanmar a similar story - also East Timor. Mexico/Chiapas had Zapata [very sexy] and the cool Commandante - Botha's apartheid was terribly uncool [but integration was ubercool]. Hitler was hateful, Lenin was intense, and what about Cuba eh?
All the truly inspiring movements have their posters, emails, movies, moods, documentaries, sloganeering, photocopying and celebrity endorsements to keep us cosy as we squat down in the cultural quarter of our chosen cities.

The problem with inexperienced but charismatic marketing movements [such as Rich Boy Barista's SWM], is that they are based on academic preconceptions [i.e. ignorance] of how oppressed societies exist. The SWM/GR movement's experience extends from the colleges to the protests. Their frontline understanding is limited to that most priviledged and safe of positions - the vocalist/arbitratitor/adminstratitor.

It seems vulgar for such a movement to claim to speak for african or other children and adults dying today from problems 95% of these aspiring Dáil-dwellers will never encounter or understand first hand.

How do they plan to Globalise Resistance in a typical african country with 154 language groups, 4 timezones, 7 climate zones, 87% illiteracy, little electricity and and an average wage of $5 a month?

Perhaps there will be a GR cruise chartered to Dakar, Freetown, Adidjan, Cotonou, Douala and Durban distributing multilingual pieces of protest propaganda with links to rte's website for RBB commentary and GR updates?

Then again, I suppose the Global Resistance ship won't start chugging until the IMF decide they're going to have lunch there?

by Anonymous Sat Apr 26, 2003 09:42

Interesting, knowledgeable piece there, "long time listener".

One point I have to comment on though is your thoughts on the competing and uncooperative nature of people who come on this site, i.e.:-

"Usually, on indymedia, I see various blokes abusing other blokes as they compete for the darwinian prize of erradicating other peoples opinion or correcting their syntax or historical accuracy/legitimacy. There seems to be very little cooperation on elevating issues which are important to me beyond the level of the leaflet or IMC posting."

I totally agree with this. I think it is very destructive and self-defeating and seems to be a phenomenon the worldwide left movement suffers from.

However you then go on to heavily critisize organisations like the SWP and ridicule them:-

"The problem with inexperienced but charismatic marketing movements [such as Rich Boy Barista's SWM], is that they are based on academic preconceptions [i.e. ignorance] of how oppressed societies exist. The SWM/GR movement's experience extends from the colleges to the protests. Their frontline understanding is limited to that most priviledged and safe of positions - the vocalist/arbitratitor/adminstratitor.

Perhaps there will be a GR cruise chartered to Dakar, Freetown, Adidjan, Cotonou, Douala and Durban distributing multilingual pieces of protest propaganda with links to rte's website for RBB commentary and GR updates?

Then again, I suppose the Global Resistance ship won't start chugging until the IMF decide they're going to have lunch there?"

Are you not suffering from the same disease that you pointed out that others are suffering from? And falling into the same trap of slandering others who are actually giving up their free time, voluntarily (99% of them), to fight these horrific situations around the world?

My thoughts are with the dying, the dead, the maimed and the berieved people of Africa.

Best regards...

by ipsiphi - angels of apocylapse Wed Apr 21, 2004 16:56

No, nor will it, soldiers of all types are finding their souls, and robots are remembering azimov and going astray, and the internet traffic which slowed last Febraury to faciliate the booting of the warnet is trunding around doing it's thing aint "that so". And "so" means "so" and u mostly don't know what "so" is, and the Saudi are the enemy and the cult of the Bull and their servants who are found in every party, corporation, country, under every flag, and well that means as we said War is all over the planet, and this time it's play for all
and either lose all
or win
our
Sion

Now I'd like to declare a phalanx more of agent smiths, minister Mc Do-well.
that's the thing about me, there's so many of me...