Recount: A Magazine of Contemporary Politics

In Post-Election America, Activists "Return" to Iraq

By Erin Obourn | Nov 15, 2004 Print

At 5 p.m. on Tuesday, in the fading afternoon light of an early winter evening, demonstrators began assembling at the south end of Union Square in Manhattan to protest the U.S. attacks in Falluja. There’s nothing new about a protest in Union Square, a concrete mecca for those looking for an open space and an audience to express their views. Yet, rather than the shorts and T-shirts worn during the RNC protests in late August, with temperatures in the 30s on Tuesday, participants needed gloves to keep their hands warm while holding up signs on one of the first bitterly cold winter evenings this season. And instead of the “Stop Bush” signs prevalent over the last eight months of the presidential campaign, protesters on Tuesday held signs reading, “Stop U.S. war crimes in Iraq,” and “Money for Education, Not War.”

The anti-war rally, organized by United for Peace and Justice, was staged to protest this week’s American-led assault on Falluja intended to wrest the Iraqi city from insurgents. As protesters slowly gathered, and organizers warmed up the megaphone, an elderly man fought with the sounds of rush hour traffic, handing out flyers at the entrance to the subway station. “End the war! Bring the troops back alive, not in a box,” he shouted. People mingled quietly as more participants gathered, chatting in small groups as if they were old friends, and perhaps they were—protests against the current U.S. administration are nothing new in New York City. Yet, Tuesday’s rally, a week after President Bush won re-election, was a return to a movement put on the back-burner during the presidential race this year: the anti-war movement.

Sean Petty, 27, was chain smoking and handing out newspapers called “Socialist Worker” at the rally. For Petty, a member of the International Socialist Organization, it’s time for organizations like United for Peace and Justice to regroup, recover from the election results, and get back to the critical issues like the war.

“For the last eight months anti-war groups were silent on the left because they were concentrating on Bush,” Petty said. “We need to recover somewhat from that lull.” And recover they had on Tuesday. There was certainly no lull between the voice of a young woman coming through the megaphone, “U.S. out of the Middle East,” and the crowd’s chanting reply, “No justice, no peace!”

While the rally was described by many as a way to regroup and continue activism despite disappointing election results, most did not think the anti-war movement would be any different had John Kerry won the presidency on Nov. 2. According to those at the rally, the military action in Falluja was planned before the election, and would not have changed much even if Bush had lost.

Carol Holland, a volunteer for the International Action Center, an organization that describes itself as a resistance to U.S. militarism, war, and corporate greed, was nothing more than a tiny face poking out of a giant pink parka as she handed out information about upcoming anti-war and anti-draft conferences. According to Holland, although many protesters had been focused on getting Bush out of office, the anti-war protest probably would have gone on in the same way even if Kerry had prevailed. “We’re regrouping and reassessing what we can do,” she said. “The war stances between the two candidates weren’t that different, and since their stances were so similar, it’s likely nothing would be different tonight had Kerry won.”

For organizations like MoveOn, which has a powerful youth base, the transition out of the election and into anti-war campaigns is a logical next step given the circumstances.

Robert Kuttner, editor of American Prospect, emphasized this while speaking to a group of journalism students at New York University late last month. “For at least 20 years, because electoral politics have been so awful, and because they’re all about money, have turned young people off,” he said. “Whoever gets elected will see an anti-war movement like this country hasn’t seen in years. MoveOn will take about a week to turn from pro-Kerry to anti-war, because we still haven’t heard a plausible exit strategy for Iraq. MoveOn is small ‘d’ democratic. We will see them asking their members what they should do – it’s the people deciding what they want.”

A quick visit to the web site of organizations like MoveOn and United for Peace and Justice shows that that is just what has happened. Top stories on these sites have changed from headlines like, “Vote. Get out the Vote. Protect the Vote,” to “Protest the Attack on Falluja” and “Uncovered: The Whole Truth about the Iraq War” in just a week.

Bill Dobbs, media coordinator for United for Peace and Justice, believes the protests and work surrounding the presidential election were never about who was in office, but about changing policies—and U.S. policy in Iraq was always front and center.
“We’re a coalition of over 800 groups and we’re non-partisan. Our concern was always for the day after the election and keeping a strong anti-war movement,” Dobbs said in a phone interview. “Yes, many people went off to work on the election, and our hope is that they come back now and work on the issues. There’s a need for continued pressure regardless of who’s in office, and that’s what organizing around issues is all about.” For Dobbs, the anti-war voice was never silenced due to the anti-Bush administration campaigns during the election season. “There were loud, clear signals at protests up in Boston at the Democratic convention and at the RNC in New York this summer that the occupation of Iraq needs to end,” he said.

The general ideology of these organizations seems to be that regardless of who is president, and regardless of where the campaigns were focused over the last few months, it’s now time to get back to the heart of their mission—a change in foreign policy and an end to the U.S. occupation of Iraq. 

Back to top