Reply #27: Todd Gitlin on A.N.S.W.E.R. [View All]

[maha]

From a Salon interview Emphasis (in blue) added by me, because I was at the NYC protests and know what he's saying is true.

http://archive.salon.com/opinion/feature/2003/07/19/gitlin/index.html

Gitlin was prominent in the anti-Vietnam war movement. More information about him with the article.

Is there a modern equivalent of Students for a Democratic Society? I'm wondering how you'd compare SDS to ANSWER, MoveOn...

It's apples and prickly pears. I mean, ANSWER is a cult. It's a tightly organized sect that operates in the shadows and tries to bull its way into power. SDS was a much more open and democratic organization -- at least until the bitter end. Couldn't be more different.

Yet ANSWER is the group most strongly associated with the Iraqi antiwar protests...

ANSWER was originally the movement against the war, but I think they were superseded. ANSWER couldn't bring themselves to criticize Saddam Hussein. They seemed to believe that any use of American power, anywhere, under any circumstances, was illegitimate and imperial ... The sort of fanaticism they displayed did allow them to jump forward getting permits for protests and so forth, but it also very quickly limited the support they received, which is why other people started organizing other networks, which then did mobilize the largest demonstrations: for example, the one in New York, which was not done by ANSWER -- though they were standing there with signs trying to look like they had. In reality it was United for Peace and Justice.

There's no question that sectarian groups can accomplish very specific objectives in a big hurry. What they're not good at doing is moving public opinion, or moving the real political forces.

So it sounds like ANSWER would be more comparable to the Weathermen, if anything...

The history is inverted, but yes, the spirit is similar in that they, like the Weathermen, talk a sort of abstract language which doesn't make sense to anyone not standing in their immediate circle. It's a jargon that only sounds plausible if you take it as an emotional rant. They're not only speaking impractically about the world, but they're also impenetrable to people who don't already have the code book.

It's this abstractedness which I think marks them both. They're talking about a world that's unrecognizable to most people.

What about MoveOn?

Also tightly organized, but also hospitable to ideas from its membership. I think MoveOn is an extraordinary achievement, but it's not really a membership organization -- though maybe it's quietly in the process of becoming one. I don't know. If I get an e-mail from MoveOn, am I a member?

SDS was a much more ambitious phenomenon, maybe indecently so, but it had the hope of becoming a sort of "ideological home," as opposed to being simply action oriented. But MoveOn is absolutely brilliant for its setting.