Small 'stop the assault on Falluja' demo at US Embassy

by Me Mon Nov 15, 2004 17:32

"Apart from a dozen or so Italians almost everyone there was a member of one of the political parties involved in the IAWM."

There are only two parties involved in the IAWM.
The SP and the SWP.

by Joe Mon Nov 15, 2004 17:40

I thought the Greens were involved as well?

by Me Mon Nov 15, 2004 17:50

The Greens only involvement was one of their members (Crumlin candidate) being on the steering committee in a personal capacity. They are not affiliated.

by Tim Mon Nov 15, 2004 18:03

even if ya don't like the SWP.

Fairview held a small vigil a few days earlier, the IAWM did one on Friday, and if there are regular vigils (not necessarily large) then it will be a good thing, especially as Ballsbridge is a residential area and very accessible by bus and DART (Lansdowne road is ver close)

if 70 people wanted to do a vigil and broke it up into 10 people on a different night of the week it would give soem much needed continuity.

by Grapevine Mon Nov 15, 2004 18:41

Heard through the grapevine that even the one Green on the IAWM steering committee, the one Green whom they pointed at to attempt to show their diversity and tolerance, has now joined the SWP...I think that's what happens to people on the IAWM SC. They either resign in despair at the unrepresentative nature of it, or their throw their hands up and say 'If you can't beat 'em, join 'em.' The green woman has done the latter.

Problem is that the alternative to the IAWM isn't very attractive either in my experience. Not much out there in the way of intelligence and gravitas in the anti-war movement as a whole, outside the IAWM. It's either Walter Mitty types who think they're way more important and able than they actually are (very apparent down in Ennis recently) or small groups may be sane but don't have resources, or have off-putting (to many) aspects such as a religious element.

by Tim - small sane low resource group Tue Nov 16, 2004 15:06

As a member of a small, sane, and under-resourced group (according to the categories above) I'd like to say that even small groups can be effective, so rather than whinge about not having a monolithic, sophisticated and genuine movement, do what you can with what you have.

There's enough small groups in Dublin to do regular small vigils, or do a bit of anti-war subvertising to snap some of the people out of the media delusion about the war, and the free-fire zone situation in Iraq.

We can all critique the movement which is fine, but too many people do nothing else besides criticism.

by Joe Tue Nov 16, 2004 15:17

I wasn't knocking it Tim I bothered to go along and report on it because I reckoned an almost meaningless gesture was better than nothing. But I do think there is a need for some honest evaluation of where the anti-war movement is at (close to nowhere), why it has got there and what if anything can be done about it.

As I say in the Shannon thread numbers are slightly up on the Afghan war period but way, way, way, way down from F15 2003.

by The Devil and George Warmonger Bush - The Black House Bullies Wed Nov 17, 2004 12:52 666 Tenth Level of Hell Suite 666 666-666-Hell Ext. 666

His Unholiness George Warmonger Bush to the World: "Sorry to Oil the War Crimes and the Mass Graves but Oil comes first."

by Reality Check Wed Nov 17, 2004 13:40

I passed by and there probably wasn't even fifty people there.

by Joe Wed Nov 17, 2004 13:53

I actually counted everyone around 18.40 and got to 88. As a couple of people may have left early or been behind a tree I reckon 90 is accurate. But if you passed by at 18.20 you'd have got around 50.

BTW I'm a hardline sceptic myself when it comes to numbers reported at demos which is why I often count them myself.