In this great post on the Movement Vision Lab blog, grassroots activist Dan Horowitz Garcia argues that if there is a peace movement (and he doubts it...) it needs to change its tactics.  According to Dan, marches don't end wars --- and never have.

Dan Horowitz Garcia says that history repeats itself, and so do movements.

Contrary to many beliefs, the peace movement didn't end the war in Vietnam. Three things ended the war in Vietnam. They were, in order of importance, the Vietnamese, the tanking economy, and the resistance of U.S. soldiers. If I extended this list by 100 more items, I still wouldn't include marches on the U.S. capitol or attempts to raise the Pentagon. It is beyond doubt that popular resistance in the U.S. had success in restricting the scope of the war, but it didn't end it. If public opinion alone could stop a war, then the Iraq occupation would have ended back in November 2004 when public support dropped under 50%. Majority opinion may hold sway in a democracy, but not in the U.S.

Dan also details how marches against WWII in the United States didn't really stop that war, either.  So what makes us think they'll stop this one?

Instead, Dan says the anti-war movement has to stop being merely anti-war --- and offer a clear alternative instead.  Here, Dan argues for a peace movement that is challenging hegemony and violence much more broadly:

I believe we also have to expand the conversation from Iraq to the so-called war on terror. This is the elites' latest framework for empire, and we have to challenge it. The "peace movement" (it still doesn't feel right to say that) can learn a lot from organizers fighting the criminal justice system. The parallels between the rhetoric justifying the war on terror and the war on crime are plain to see, if you look at them. In the war on crime, bad people are coming into your neighborhood or even your house to do you harm. (These people just happen to have dark skin.) To keep you safe, we need to be tough on these criminals. We need more cops with more equipment (i.e. guns), and we need places where we can put the bad people far away from the good people. In the war on terror, bad people are coming to your country to do you harm. (These people also happen to have dark skin. Coincidence?) To keep you safe, we need to be tough on these terrorists. We need more troops with more equipment (i.e. big guns), and we need to kill the bad people in places far away from the good people.

In a comment on the blog, another community organizer Gabe Gonzalez talks about how his daughter is convinced there are monsters under the bed.  So he has to spend his energy convincing her otherwise.  In other words, even if progressives were to take up the agenda  that the "war on terror" and its ever-present threats are false, why should we have to convince the public?  Shoudn't we be forcing the Right wing hawk fear mongerers to prove their point?  

Otherwise, we're in the position of proving that the invisible threat doesn't exist.  Which is sort of like disproving monsters under the bed.  

We should be fighting the "war on terror" by making THEM defend it!

What do you think?

Sally Kohn is the Director of the Movement Vision Lab.

WASHINGTON, July 5 -- Support among Republicans for President Bush's Iraq policy eroded further on Thursday as another senior lawmaker, Senator Pete V. Domenici of New Mexico, broke with the White House just as Congressional Democrats prepared to renew their challenge to the war.

"We cannot continue asking our troops to sacrifice indefinitely while the Iraqi government is not making measurable progress," said Mr. Domenici, a six-term senator who has been a steadfast supporter of the president.

Thus Mr. Domenici joined a growing number of Republican voices in opposition to the war just as Senate Democratic leaders are readying plans to put the political and policy focus back on Iraq next week. The NY Times

For those of you who don't know, I'm Lowell Feld, former netroots coordinator on the Jim Webb for Senate campaign.  Among other things, I'm now working with "Heading Left", an exciting new project by James Boyce of the Huffington Post, Nate Wilcox of Forward Together, and several others.  My job, which I have (wisely?) chosen to accept, is to help spread the word about both "Heading Left" and also the way-cool "Blog Talk Radio".  Anyway, I just wanted to highlight a great show that aired last night on Blog Talk Radio, "The War To End The War. Hear How Iraq War Vets And The Online Community Are Fighting Together."  

From Dan Conley on Political Insider:

http://politicalinsider.com/2006/12/2007 _prediction.html

Let me be the first Political Insider contributor to offer a prediction for what will be the most important political event of 2007: the return of the Vietnam-era street protest.

Having seen that non-existent public support and a Democratic Party takeover of Congress is not enough to keep President Bush from escalating the Iraq War, war opponents will take to the streets in the largest anti-war protests since the early 70s. By spring, expect a massive, million + participant march in Washington to coincide with the fourth anniversary of "Mission Accomplished." Every Democratic candidate for President ... and at least one Republican ... will speak at the rally.

This Monday, August 21, 2006, moveon.org will be hosting a protest of John Sweeney's (R-NY-20) record on military affairs outside of his upcoming fundraiser with Rudy Giuliani at the home of corporate lobbyists Julie Chlopecki and David Fuscus in Saratoga Springs. (This diary also includes all of Sweeney's major votes against our troops and veterans)

A proud member of the University of Chicago, I plan to attend these protests.  Please join me and others, including the great Slovenian politician and psychoanalytic theorist, Slavoj Zizek, who is one of my personal favorites, at the Reynolds Club at 57th and University Streets.  I wonder if other politicians affiliated with this campus plan on attending.

I post an email I received below.

Many around here have asked, how can I show solidarity with the hundreds of thousands of immigrants that marched across the country over the last few weeks?

Well, here's something you can do without leaving the comfort your home: stand up for the 15 women that were fired for attending the marches.

A manager at a Detroit meatpacking plant said Monday that 15 immigrant women were fired last month after attending a protest for immigrant rights.

[...]

[A]bout 20 union officials went Monday to Wolverine Packing Co. offices on Rivard to inquire about what happened.

[...]

[A]s Wolverine knows, the workers were documented, but an employment agency does the actual hiring. He said the workers had been told, "written and verbally," on the Friday before the protests that their attendance was mandatory on the day of the protest.

They were fired "for standing up for their rights."

The fired workers were natives of Mexico and many had worked at the plant for several years. Most have children and are worried about supporting their families, Herrada said.

At Discourse.net Professor Froomkin reports that 20 students have taken over the Ashe Administration Building at the University of Miami and asks why is Donna Shalala afraid of Father Frank Corbishley?

The SEIU led strikers are demanding better pay, healthcare benefits and union representation.  God knows UM charges enough for tuition.