FactsOfIsrael.com News, Comments and Links

<- Back to Main page

January 26, 2003
 Send to Printer    Link to this page
Communist party financed pro-Iraqi march in San Francisco

The Jerusalem Post (www.jpost.com) has a good analysis of the American extreme left:

Last weekend, the Left held large antiwar marches in Washington, San Francisco and elsewhere. Major media coverage of these marches was highly respectful. This was "A Stirring in the Nation," in the words of an approving New York Times editorial, "impressive for the obvious mainstream roots of the marchers."

There is, increasingly, much that happens in the world that the Times feels its readers should be sheltered from knowing. The marches in Washington and San Francisco were chiefly sponsored, as was last October's antiwar march in Washington, by a group the Times chose to call in its only passing reference "the activist group International Answer."

International A.N.S.W.E.R. (Act Now to Stop War and End Racism) is a front group for the communist Workers World Party. The Workers World Party is, literally, a Stalinist organization. It rose out of a split within the old Socialist Workers Party over the Soviet Union's 1956 invasion of Hungary - the breakaway Workers World Party was all for the invasion.

A.N.S.W.E.R. today unquestioningly supports any despotic regime that lays any claim to socialism, or simply to anti-Americanism. It supported the butchers of Beijing after the slaughter of Tiananmen Square. It supports Saddam and his Baathist torture-state. It supports the last official Stalinist state, North Korea, in the mass starvation of its citizens. It supported Slobodan Milosevic after the massacre at Srebrenica. It supports the mullahs of Iran, and the narco-gangsters of Colombia and the bus-bombers of Hamas.

Although I hold in many ways liberal values (e.g. I am pro-choice, I am against the death penalty, etc...), the issues of national security override today all other considerations. The Democratic party will not get my vote and NPR will never again get my money.

I copy the full article below.

Marching with the Stalinists, By MICHAEL KELLY
The Jerusalem Post, Jan. 25, 2003
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?
pagename=JPost/A/JPArticle/
ShowFull&cid=1043468131725

The Left in America has for a long time now resembled not so much a political movement as a contest to see how many schismatics could dance on the head of a pin, a conversation that has gone from being national to factional to simply eccentric. At some point, progressive politics reached a state where freeing Mumia (freemumia.org) was considered critical and electing a Democratic president was considered optional.

Then came September 11, and the Left found itself plunged into a fundamental debate on a subject of fundamental importance. And this was a debate in which to be of the Left was to be, by definition, involved: In al-Qaida and in the Taliban and in Saddam's Iraq, liberal civilization faced an enemy that represented nearly every evil that liberalism has ever stood against.

What was the Left going to do? A pretty straightforward call, you might say. America has its flaws. But war involves choosing sides, and the American side - which was, after all, the side of liberalism, of progressivism, of democracy, of freedom, of not chucking gays off rooftops and not stoning adulterers and not whipping women in the town square, and not gassing minority populations and not torturing advocates of free speech - was surely preferable to the side of the "Islamofascists," to borrow a word from the essayist and former man of the Left, Christopher Hitchens.

Which is the point: Hitchens is a former man of the Left. In the Left's debate, Hitchens insisted that progressives must not in their disdain for America allow themselves to effectively support the perpetuation of despotism, must not betray the Left's own values.

Others - notably the political philosopher Michael Walzer, the independent essayist Andrew Sullivan, New Republic writer Jonathan Chait and New York Observer columnist Ron Rosenbaum - also made this argument with great force and clarity.

THE DEBATE is over. The Left has hardened itself around the core value of a furious, permanent, reactionary opposition to the devil-state America, which stands as the paramount evil of the world and the paramount threat to the world, and whose aims must be thwarted even at the cost of supporting fascists and tyrants. Those who could not stomach this have left the Left - a few publicly, as did Hitchens and Rosenbaum, and many more, I am sure, in the privacy of their consciences.

Last weekend, the Left held large antiwar marches in Washington, San Francisco and elsewhere. Major media coverage of these marches was highly respectful. This was "A Stirring in the Nation," in the words of an approving New York Times editorial, "impressive for the obvious mainstream roots of the marchers."

There is, increasingly, much that happens in the world that the Times feels its readers should be sheltered from knowing. The marches in Washington and San Francisco were chiefly sponsored, as was last October's antiwar march in Washington, by a group the Times chose to call in its only passing reference "the activist group International Answer."

International A.N.S.W.E.R. (Act Now to Stop War and End Racism) is a front group for the communist Workers World Party. The Workers World Party is, literally, a Stalinist organization. It rose out of a split within the old Socialist Workers Party over the Soviet Union's 1956 invasion of Hungary - the breakaway Workers World Party was all for the invasion.

A.N.S.W.E.R. today unquestioningly supports any despotic regime that lays any claim to socialism, or simply to anti-Americanism. It supported the butchers of Beijing after the slaughter of Tiananmen Square. It supports Saddam and his Baathist torture-state. It supports the last official Stalinist state, North Korea, in the mass starvation of its citizens. It supported Slobodan Milosevic after the massacre at Srebrenica. It supports the mullahs of Iran, and the narco-gangsters of Colombia and the bus-bombers of Hamas.

This is whom the Left now marches with. The Left marches with the Stalinists. The Left marches with those who would maintain in power the leading oppressors of humanity in the world. It marches with, and stands with, and cheers on, people like the speaker at the Washington rally, Imam Musa of the mosque Masjid al-Islam, who declared "the real terrorists have always been the United Snakes of America," and then led the crowd in the Islamic bombers' chant "Allahu Akbar!"

It marches with people like the former Black Panther Charles Baron, who said in Washington, "if you're looking for the axis of evil, look inside the belly of this beast."

The Times's "mainstream" Americans marched last weekend with people who held signs comparing the president and vice president of their country to Hitler, and declaring "The difference between Bush and Saddam is that Saddam was elected," and this one: "I want you to die for Israel. Israel sings Onward Christian Soldiers." March on.

Washington Post Writers' Group

Posted by David Melle at January 26, 2003 12:01 AM
Comments

The WW was actually a Trotskyist organization splitting from the CPUSA, but has since changed more towards Stalinism while still acknowledging Stalin's excesses and crimes.

They don't believe Milosevic was responsible for genocide; they don't support genocide. They don't support Saddam Hussein, but do acknowledge that there were many benefits Iraqis recieved that, due to U.S. invasion, they may never recieve again. I don't know so much about their stance on Tienneman, but I would doubt somewhat that they were supportive. And lastly, North Korea: You know less about it than you think you do. Considering the lack of objective information about North Korea, anyone making judgements about conditions there are premature. I can almost garuntee you a lot of what you hear is incorrect, but I don't doubt there are some major problems there that no one, especially not a Communist, should support. Thw WW mostly supports North Korean sovereignty against a U.S. invasion, which I agree with. Imperialism has even less a right to impose their beliefs than Kim Jong Il on the North Korean peoples.

Sorry, but I felt there needed to be some clarification. The WW isn't that bad, but they just take some extreme positions on certain things that are indeed questionable although often understandable. I'm more of a CPUSA man, myself.

Posted by: Comrade Martin on April 7, 2006 03:50 PM
Post a comment 
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?



Email this entry
Email this entry to (please enter email address):


Your email address:


Message (optional):


Referrers to this Page

FAIR USE NOTICE

This site contains some copyrighted materials the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.




(According to digits.com)