Unfortunately, that's the role that Gitlin has elected to play and
that's why he was and will continue to be interviewed by the mainstream
media and why he should be considered a Trojan Horse in our ranks.
Jeff Blankfort
Marty Jezer wrote:
> As we come closer to war, it's seems silly to argue about past
> wars.....but Re: Gitlin. I heard him on Terri Gross this week
> criticizing the anti-war movement for aligning itself or following
> A.N.S.W.E.R. His critique of A.N.S.W.E.R. was correct, I thought, but
> it was a discussion for the NATION or some other lefty journal; in as
> much as the mainstream media has not raised the issue of A.N.S.W.E.R's
> awful politics, Gitlin, to my mind, should not have made his critique
> on public radio. The best response to A.N.W.E.R. (as I have been
> writing in my weekly newspaper column since October) is to create a
> movement that more accurately reflects the politics of the
> participants. This is happening with United for Peace. As for the
> Humphrey business. The anti-war movement didn't have to endorse
> Humphrey or rejoin the Democratic Party; all we had to do was cut him
> a little slack the last weeks of the campaign and then him. Instead,
> we promoted the idea that a victory for Nixon would create a
> revolutionary situation that would benefit us. We were wrong in terms
> of the analysis that went into that position and in what ultimately
> happened. Sometimes it's better to vote for the lesser of two evils
> when the other guy represents true, rather than rhetorical,
> evil. Whatever the differences that Jeff, I and others share, we are,
> I believe, in solidarity in opposing the Bush Administration and the
> coming war. Marty JezerAuthor:Stuttering: A Life Bound Up in
> WordsAbbie Hoffman: American RebelThe Dark Ages: Life in the US
> 1945-1960Rachel Carson (Women of Achievement Series) Subscribe to my
> Friday commentary (by reply e-mail). It's free.Visit my home page:
> www.sover.net/~mjez ---- Original Message -----
>
> From:
> To: sixties-l@lists.village.virginia.edu
> Sent: Friday, January 10, 2003 12:59 AM
> Subject: Re: [sixties-l] response to Cox and Blankfort
> > Despite our different interpretations of what was wrong
> and right about the anti-war movement, I do not put Marty
> Jezer in the same category as I do Tod Gitlin who seems to
> be edging his way into the current anti-war movement, if for
> nothing else than to get more material for another book, to
> become an expert on the current movement, and to smear
> anyone who suggests this war might also be "for Israel" as
> an antisemite or a self-hating
> > Jew. Probably, all three.
>
> Regarding the position vis a vis Humphrey and the movement,
> Marty did not deal with the apparent truth of what I had
> said, i.e., that, if the movement, which had broken away
> totally from the Democrats, had demonstrated anything close
> to a mindset that would have had it, or a major segment of
> it, endorsing Humphrey, that mindset would have been
> recognized by the Democrats and LBJ would not have dropped
> out of the race. That's the point
> that has been ignored.
>
> Jeff Blankfort
>
> > Marty Jezer wrote:
>
> > I don't know where Carroll Cox is coming from but he
> certainly turned =
> > what I wrote -- and what I consistently write and say --
> totally around. =
> >
> > I've always stood for an inclusive movement -
> > Trotskyists, pacifists, Democrats, socialists, anarchists,
> even =
> > Republicans, as long as they are willing to accept the
> agreed upon =
> > discipline of any demonstration. (I do agree with Jeff
> Blankfort however =
> > that the sectarians in A.N.S.W.E.R. -- who deserve our
> thanks for =
> > organizing the first of the anti-Iraqi War demonstrations
> should not be =
> > allowed to control the planning of future
> demonstrations.)What's needed =
> > is a broader coalition that reflects the diverse politics
> of all the =
> > participants -- and that welcomes Jeff, Gitlin, and me.
> >
> > In the controversy that Cox is writing about, I was
> initially responding =
> > to Blankfort's sentiment of excluding Gitlin from the
> movement for his =
> > "incorrect" politics. In that vein Blankfort wrote:
> >
> > "I'm not surprised that Marty Jezer decides that the
> involvement of =
> > Gitlin or anyone else in the anti-war movement is not to
> be questioned. =
> > A couple of years back he joined Gitlin in criticizing the
> 60s anti-war =
> > movement for not having had the sense to endorse Humphrey
> for president =
> > in 1968, not being able to understand, apparently, that
> had the =
> > movement's consciousness been at that low level, Johnson
> would not have =
> > withdrawn his candidacy in the first place...."
> >
> > I would thus like to (sarcastically) apologize to
> Blankfort riding an =
> > all-night bus from Vermont to Washington,D.C. to protest
> the war. =
> > Obviously, because I hold positions that aren't those of
> Blankfort's, I =
> > have no right to be in his anti-war movement.=
> >
> > More to the point, Blankfort misrepresents my position on
> the 1968 =
> > election that I wrote in 1992, independent of Gitlin's
> position, in =
> > Abbie Hoffman: American Rebel, pp. 128,174-176.
> >
> > By the summer of 68, I wrote, the anti-war movement had
> "won the battle =
> > within the Democratic Party." I then go on to describe how
> we (I was one =
> > of those who was in the streets of Chicago and who opposed
> Humphrey's =
> > candidacy) were so infatuated with our own revolutionary
> image that we =
> > got the political analysis of 1968 all wrong. We believed
> a Nixon =
> > victory would, as the cliche goes, "heighten the
> contradictions." In =
> > repressing the movement he would revolutionize the
> country. At the time =
> > it looked like that was possible, but in retrospect it
> wasn't even =
> > close. Nixon took power, escalated the war, and we were
> helpless to stop =
> > him. I continue: Humphrey as President would have had to
> end the war =
> > (whether he wanted to or not) because to continue the war
> would have =
> > totally destroyed the Democratic Party (and his chance
> for re-election. =
> > The equation, which we didn't fully understand) was that
> Nixon, to =
> > appeal to his base, had to move right, which he did. HHH,
> to secure his =
> > base, i.e., to survive as President, would have had to
> move left; the =
> > political reality of the time was that he had no choice.
> Further more, =
> > the cultural aspects of the movement, feminism, gay lib,
> and many other =
> > parts of it would have prospered under the greater
> tolerance of a =
> > Humphrey presidency. In opposition to Jeff's critique, my
> analysis was =
> > based on the strength of the movement, not its weaknesses.
> We =
> > misunderstood our strength. We had rallied the country
> against the war =
> > and not towards our agenda of cultural and political
> revolution. At a =
> > time when we were strongest, we upped the ante and our
> demands. Instead =
> > of settling for reforms that would have ended the war, we
> decided to go =
> > for revolution, which was a fantasy based on, among other
> things, taking =
> > too much LSD and/or reading too much Mao and Fanon.
> >
> > Agree with that analysis or not, it's an attempt to think
> critically =
> > about that time. My take is that we blew it. That doesn't
> mean I'm =
> > trashing what I was part of. I just don't want to repeat
> those mistakes =
> > again.
> >
> > In the current situation, there is widespread opposition
> towards going =
> > to war in Iraq from the right as well as the left. We need
> to guard =
> > against the revolutionary illusions and exclusionary
> politics that, in =
> > the past, did us in.
> >
> > Abbie Hoffman: American Rebel -- which Martin Duberman
> called "by far =
> > the best account we have of Abbie Hoffman's remarkable
> life...deeply =
> > sympathetic and scrupulously detached -- a triumph of
> judicious =
> > empathy," and of which Anita Hoffman wrote "Here's the
> Abbie I knew and =
> > loved!" -- can be ordered from books stores or ordered
> direct from me =
> > mjez@sover.net for $15 postpaid.=20
> >
> > Marty Jezer
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Feb 18 2003 - 17:04:51 EST