A.N.S.W.E.R.
ANALYSIS OF ELECTIONS & ACTION PLAN
Mon Nov 8, 2004 02:00
64.140.159.57

A.N.S.W.E.R. ANALYSIS OF ELECTIONS & ACTION PLAN
Important E-mail - Please Read

ALL OUT FOR . . .
* DECEMBER 18 Protest Vigil in LA;
* JANUARY 20 Counter-Inaugural in LA; and
* MARCH 19 Global Day of Protest
on 2nd Anniversary of the war in LA

It is time to take a close look at what actually
happened with the election of Bush and the defeat
of Kerry. We should cut through the myths, clichés
and banalities that are pumped out by the politicians
and TV punditry - the establishment propaganda machine
- and then too frequently echoed even by progressive
people. It is also an important moment to make another
commitment to organize and mobilize for the December 18
protest vigil in Los Angeles and the January 20 and
March 19 mass actions against the criminal war being
waged in Iraq. That war is about to escalate sharply as
the Pentagon prepares a murderous reign of terror against
the people of Fallujah and other Iraqi cities, and all
people of conscience must take action.

It is more than ironic that Bush can openly prepare
to make the streets and alleyways of Fallujah run red
with blood so Iraq can have "democratic elections" in
January.

More than 100,000 Iraqis have died since March 20, 2003,
as a consequence of the U.S. invasion and occupation of
their country. At least 10,000 U.S. soldiers have been
killed or wounded according to the official figures.
The death toll will grow higher on both sides as the
nationalist insurgency of the Iraqi people deepens.

A SHARED VISION FOR WAR AND CONQUEST - WHY THE TRUTH
WAS NEVER SPOKEN

This is not just Bush's war. The Democrats, including
Kerry, complain only that the criminal war has been
badly managed. Kerry’s program was to bring in other
imperialist countries, give them a share of the contracts
(also known as the loot) and share the burden of aggression
and occupation with others. There are millions of people
including many "conservative" working people in swing
states who are either opposed to, or apprehensive about,
the war. Just as in the Vietnam War, millions of people
can turn actively against the war - and can even become
its most militant opponents - once they come to understand
that they have been lied to by the government. Their
children and spouses and neighbors are being sent to
kill and be killed.

For people to learn the truth and accept the fact that
the government that they pledged allegiance to is really
a bunch of lying criminals takes a process. It requires
people who know the truth to tell it and to speak plainly
so that there is no misunderstanding. Kerry has always
known that Iraq was not a "grave and imminent threat"
to the people of the United States. He also knows that
the war was a brazen act of lawless aggression and that
every life lost in Iraq constitutes an act of homicide
by the officials who planned and ordered the war, who
should all be tried for war crimes.

Instead of stating clearly that Bush was lying, instead
of telling the people that this was a war of aggression
for the power and enrichment of Corporate America, Kerry
voted for the war, agreed that he would do it all over
again, and then asked people to vote for him because he
had a "better plan" to win the war.

How could anyone think that such a confused and
disingenuous position could appeal to traditionally
Republican voters who are, in fact, deeply worried about
the escalating war in Iraq? Kerry decided instead to
wrap himself in the flag, tout his war record in Vietnam,
dress up in fatigues and go duck hunting for a day. Only
a rich liberal aristocrat and his Democratic Party
operatives could believe that working people are going
to find this convincing.

THE REAL DIVIDE

Millions of hard-working people did everything they
could to help Kerry get elected and to fight against
racist disenfranchisement. They registered new voters,
passed out literature, went door-to-door, acted as
election monitors. Many were labor activists, others
were from the antiwar movement, for many it was their
first political experience.

Now, that Kerry has been defeated by the concerted
effort of the right wing political machine, many in
the Democratic Party leadership are promoting an absolutely
false reason for his defeat. They are blaming gay marriage,
and the so-called liberalism of the Party on "social and
cultural issues." The Democratic Party leadership has,
in fact, proven itself incapable of defeating the right
-wing once again.

At the same time, the pundits are announcing a "divided
America," arguing that the people of the U.S. are split
into two sectors - the progressive, open-minded, peace-
loving people, and the hateful, ignorant, warmongering
bigots. But the post-electoral pundits' certification
of this national divide misses the real divide, in the
same way that the Democratic Party and many progressive
organizations ignored the real divide in the United States
during the electoral fight.

The vast majority of people in the United States, who
voted either for Kerry or Bush, are working people,
far from rich. This is the unexposed divide. But this
divide did not determine the election because it could
not, as neither candidate represented the interests of
this majority. The Bush campaign fostered a divide of
fear and bigotry. The only way to overcome this strategy
would have been to openly counter it, to tell the truth
about what the real divide-and-conquer program was, to
openly support progressive issues and undemonize the
demonized by raising the curtain on the real workings
and intentions of the political and corporate establishment.
This could not happen. Kerry, and many of the progressive
organizations that supported him, accepted the belief
that Kerry had to "speak to the right" on social issues
and pander to this falsely created "moral" divide, with
the quiet assurance that he would not be as regressive
on social issues as Bush is sure to be. But once one
accepts and panders to the Bush program and its fostered
social divide, how can anyone be educated or be won from it?

THE UNSPOKEN UNITY

Inside of the political and economic establishment, the
ones who financed Bush's and Kerry's campaigns are not
"sharply divided," rather they are united. Both candidates
and both parties are advocates of "winning" in Iraq,
unconditional support for Israel's war against the Palestinians,
the ouster of Aristide in Haiti, the maintenance of a half-
trillion dollar annual military budget, implementation of
so-called free trade agreements and the outsourcing of jobs
that are destroying the lives of working people everywhere,
opposition to equal marriage rights. Kerry said repeatedly
that he would simply manage Bush's program better. Both are
almost identical in class representation. Not only did all
four candidates for president and vice president possess
vast personal wealth, but both candidacies were funded by
the largest big banks and financial corporations, and
Bush and Kerry shared four of the same ten largest donors.
The Big Business imprint on the election was total and
complete. Think about that unity. This is the unity of both
Bush and Kerry and both of their parties, and the unity
of all the corporations and banks and media corporations,
including the newspapers, as well as the entire Military-
Industrial Complex.

If they weren't completely beholden to the same big
business interests as the Republicans, Kerry could have
easily captured a section of the Republican working class
base that voted against their own interests.

Many of those who voted for Bush were opposed to the
Iraq war or had serious misgivings, and are also facing
a concerted drive by Corporate America to slash health
care benefits, pensions, cut wages and attack unions.
Kerry could not make a strong, convincing appeal to these
voters because both the Democrats and Republicans are
imperialist parties and, as such, are united in wanting
to conquer Iraq and are united in their view that
working people in the U.S. should give back their hard
won economic gains. Why would a voter leaning toward
Bush on some other issue break away and vote for Kerry
because of Iraq, when Kerry announced over and over
again, "we are not talking about leaving [Iraq] we are
talking about winning." Today Bush is set to unleash
new attacks in Fallujah and other cities throughout
Iraq that will kill thousands, mainly civilians. Kerry
will support this offensive even though many more will
die. Young soldiers are going to be used as faceless
cogs in a racist war. The corporate powers and the
politicians don’t care what happens to the Iraqi people
or to the soldiers. Nor do they wish to see a united
base of working people in the U.S. who join together
for their real shared interests.

WHY THE ELECTION SHOWS THE STRENGTH OF OPPOSITION TO
THE WAR

Given their united political position on Iraq and
the political, economic and media power that they
wield it is a testament to the strength of the antiwar
mood in the country that nearly half the population
has broken from that position. Of the 54 million people
who voted against Bush, opposition to the Iraq war was
a central issue even though by voting for Kerry they
were supporting a candidate who embraces the U.S.
occupation and vows to "win not leave" Iraq.

The electoral outpouring against Bush does not indicate
a continuing trend toward the political right. The
opposite is true. One need only think back to the
political climate on September 12, 2001, or even just
eighteen months ago when Bush was sporting an approval
rating of over 70% when he landed on the USS Abraham
Lincoln Aircraft carrier dressed up as a soldier and
proudly standing under the banner "Mission Accomplished."
If the 2004 election had taken place 18 months ago, Bush
would have won the largest landslide ever. With each
passing day the war in Iraq becomes more inflamed, more
violent and huge parts of the country are under the
control of the Iraqi resistance. The Bush plan for
Iraq and the Middle East is politically premised on
imperial arrogance and driven by the desire for Empire.
The growing hatred of the occupation force inside of
Iraq will only increase and every day more people in
this country, including many in uniform and their
families, will join the ranks of the antiwar movement.

Voting for Kerry, for most progressive people, was a
way of showing repudiation of the Bush administration
and its warmongering, anti-people program, and that
was an important message to send. But Kerry offers no
hope for progressive change and his defeat does not
mean that the true progressive movement in the United
States is weak. It means simply that Kerry was not,
and could never have been, its standard bearer nor
able to win people to a movement for true historic
social change he was not part of.

THE NEXT STEPS FOR PEOPLE OF CONSCIENCE

What is the perspective of the antiwar movement in
the face of the growing escalation of war in Iraq
and repression at home? Are we supposed to now just
hang our heads, lament the victory of the right,
wallow in despair, and proclaim "we are too weak,"
in the face of the triumph of Bush?

We do not have the luxury of taking a break for
despondency and despair. The antiwar movement must
merge the struggle for peace with a militant fightback
movement at home to defend women's rights that are on
the chopping block as Bush and company try to reverse
Roe v. Wade. The antiwar movement must be part and
parcel of the workers' movement to defend our unions
and to launch a broader struggle against the merciless
attacks on health care benefits and pensions. The
antiwar movement must unite with the anti-racist
movement in defense of affirmative action and civil
rights and liberties. We know full well what the Bush
administration has in mind regarding civil rights.
The threatening opening salvo by the government’s IRS
against the NAACP for the crime of criticizing Bush
should be understood as a harbinger.

The unrelenting assault on the Muslim and Arab American
community doesn't give that community the luxury to
take a break from the struggle for justice. The rights
of the entire elderly working class in the United States
are also in the cross-hairs of Bush's Wall Street gunslingers.
They want their hands on that social security money for
the investment portfolio of the banks and corporations.
The antiwar movement must speak plainly: instead of
spending $270 million a day to make Iraq safe for Halliburton
and Citibank, those tax dollars should be used to protect
social security and to build schools and provide health
care. We can bet that the Democrats will head for the
hills on equal marriage rights as Bush and the ultra-right
unleash a wave of bigotry. The antiwar movement must stand
openly against all divide-and-conquer bigotry.

The past three years have been an awakening for many people
in the United States, a realization of the role and aggression
of the U.S. in world affairs and also a realization that
people of the United States have the right and obligation
to fight to change the direction of the country towards
justice, equality, and in support of self-determination
for others. Many people participated in mass action, for
the first time in their lives taking to the streets,
organizing educational events and petition drives, and
doing outreach in their communities to their neighbors and
co-workers. During this period of great drive and excitement,
there was a growing hope that the global antiwar movement
could bring about monumental change, and a growing political
consciousness. This hope is real, and remains.

This global movement is strengthened not by looking up to
the corporations that fund the two primary U.S. parties to
raise up a leader to offer mild reforms, but from people
standing side by side and engaging in collective action
around positions of principle. This is the true democracy,
and the only source for hope for our collective future.

The A.N.S.W.E.R. coalition calls on all people who believe
in justice to double our commitment to building the struggle
against war and empire abroad, and for justice at home.

DECEMBER 18, 2004 - 7 PM
Protest Vigil in Los Angeles (Hollywood & Highland)
Bring the Troops Home in Time for the Holidays!
Initiated by the A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition

January 20, 2005 - 6 PM
Counter-Inaugural Demonstration in Los Angeles
Westwood Federal Building (Wilshire & Veteran)
Initiated by the A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition

We urge you sponsor, support and organize for January 20.

Pledge now to support the January 20 demonstration against
the war. Click here to endorse and say Bring the Troops Home
Now! http://www.pephost.org/InaugurationProtest

MARCH 19, 2005 - MARCH AND RALLY at 12 NOON
Global Day of Coordinated Actions on the 2nd Anniversary
of the "Shock and Awe" Invasion of Iraq
Location TBA
Initiated by antiwar organizations worldwide
including the A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition in the United States

On March 19 there will be mass demonstrations in
Washington DC, San Francisco, Los Angeles and in other
cities. This is the second anniversary of the opening of
the criminal aggression against Iraq. The whole world will
be marking this day with mass actions. We urge you to
sponsor, support and organize for the March 19 protests.
More information about the March 19 demonstrations in
Washington DC, San Francisco, Los Angeles and elsewhere
will be available soon.

WE WILL DEMAND:
1) US Out of Iraq Now, End the Occupation - Bring the
Troops Home Now!
2) End Colonial Domination from Palestine to Haiti,
and Everywhere!
3) Health Care, Education, Housing, and a Job at a
Living Wage Must be a Right!

Please make a commitment today to fight for change.
The anti-war and social justice movemen

Who is counting your vote? — Barbara Jean Hope, Mon Nov 8 02:38