Report on Stop the War Coalition steering committee
peacenik | 28.01.2003 20:01
This was posted to the direct action against war yahoo group, the march on 15th February looks big!!!
I thought people might be interested in a report on the Stop the War Coalition's steering committee which met on 27th January, the day after the 1,000+ demo at Fairford. I'm a delegate from Sussex Action for Peace.
The meeting lasted nearly two hours and mainly discussed the march on 15th February. This is going to be very big, with two starting points, the Embankment and Gower Street near Euston station, to accommodate everyone. The marches will merge in Piccadilly on the way to Hyde Park.
Hyde Park police have refused permission for a rally but that is being challenged. With potential speakers like Nelson Mandela and the Archbishop of Canterbury and up to a million people expected you're in quite a strong
position. The Hyde park police refused a rally to a rather famous demonstration in 1990 against the poll tax and it had to meet in Trafalgar Square instead. Scotland Yard aren't very keen on repeating that.
The rally is expected to last from 2 to 5, dusk being at 5.15. There may be two stages. The Daily Mirror is supporting the march, possibly with a front page countdown for two weeks beforehand.
I asked for Fairford to be discussed as it was urgent, important and the coalition never try to build for it. The chair told me he would "see if there's time at the end or discuss it at the next meeting". There was no time and it was not discussed. The phrase direct action was not used once during the meeting.
I think the coalition are doing a great job organising what will be the biggest march in this country for years. On the other hand, they have no idea about direct action. Socialist Worker, whose members lead the coalition, has been talking about mass direct action after 15th February but are doing no planning. In fact the convenor of the coalition has described NVDA training as 'elitist'. Although called a coalition it is not exactly inclusive of the thousands of people who want to take direct action against the war and I think we just note that and carry on, challenging them if they actively try to stop stuff happening.
I hope that was useful.
Colin
The meeting lasted nearly two hours and mainly discussed the march on 15th February. This is going to be very big, with two starting points, the Embankment and Gower Street near Euston station, to accommodate everyone. The marches will merge in Piccadilly on the way to Hyde Park.
Hyde Park police have refused permission for a rally but that is being challenged. With potential speakers like Nelson Mandela and the Archbishop of Canterbury and up to a million people expected you're in quite a strong
position. The Hyde park police refused a rally to a rather famous demonstration in 1990 against the poll tax and it had to meet in Trafalgar Square instead. Scotland Yard aren't very keen on repeating that.
The rally is expected to last from 2 to 5, dusk being at 5.15. There may be two stages. The Daily Mirror is supporting the march, possibly with a front page countdown for two weeks beforehand.
I asked for Fairford to be discussed as it was urgent, important and the coalition never try to build for it. The chair told me he would "see if there's time at the end or discuss it at the next meeting". There was no time and it was not discussed. The phrase direct action was not used once during the meeting.
I think the coalition are doing a great job organising what will be the biggest march in this country for years. On the other hand, they have no idea about direct action. Socialist Worker, whose members lead the coalition, has been talking about mass direct action after 15th February but are doing no planning. In fact the convenor of the coalition has described NVDA training as 'elitist'. Although called a coalition it is not exactly inclusive of the thousands of people who want to take direct action against the war and I think we just note that and carry on, challenging them if they actively try to stop stuff happening.
I hope that was useful.
Colin
peacenik
Comments
Hide the following 10 comments
angry
28.01.2003 21:07
angry man
Stop it
28.01.2003 22:45
And don't judge all Stop the War groups by what happens in one place. In Manchester, Fairford and direct action is on the agenda. If you don't like what goes on in your area, meetings, demos, whatever, find others and change it. There ain't no Stop the War Coalition police out to get you.
heather
Yep, what she said.
29.01.2003 12:07
So what if the SWP are involved. So what if some people with funny ideas about Supreme Beings are involved? If you want less "SWP domination" then you're going to have to get ORGANISED the way (no sorry, but its true) the way our Trotty chums can.
And as for the idea that the STWC is some kind of SWP front - for everyone's information the chairman of the coalition (note the word) is one Andrew Murray, who is a longtime member of the CP, for chrissakes, and therefore no particular boyfriend of the red-fisted ones.
Not to mention CND, Green types, Labour MPs, trade unions and others.
Right. That's that. Now lets get on with stopping this war, which is going to KILL lots of people.
Mad Monk
On second thoughts..
29.01.2003 15:04
heather
'Coaliton'
29.01.2003 15:11
Maybe you SWP supporters want to know why Mike Marquesse left the Coalition? Because his partner, Liz Davies, was chucked out of the Socialist Alliance for whistle blowing on fraud...but not before SWP thugs tried to physically intimidate her..
Sue
Time enough for debate.
29.01.2003 16:18
Like Heather I agree that this is possible. Most SWP activists are sincere campaigners who work within the framework of their Party because they see it as the best vehicle for social change. The Party structure tends towards intolerance for different movements unless they are seen as easily manipluated (e.g. Green Party, MAB). However, when push comes to shove there are very few SWP members who will argue against direct action in principle.
We simply have to make sure that direct action is on the agenda and cannot be ignored!
Ned Ludd
MISSING. THE. SODDING. POINT.
29.01.2003 16:24
Yes, yes, yes. We know that Muslim fundamentalists are Bad. We know that their attitude to women and gays is Really Bad. We also know that SWP members can be Really Annoying, although not as many live in country mansions as you appear to think.
The thing is that we are a PEACE MOVEMENT. This includes everyone who is AGAINST THE WAR (ie PEACE), such as Muslims, Lib-Dems, Blur, Harold Pinter, Jews, Christians, socialists, anarchists, greens, communists and every variant thereof.
It doesn't exist to raise questions of sexual politics, political economy or even political politics, except obliquely by raising consciousness (if we're lucky). It's a PEACE MOVEMENT. OK?
For Fluke's sake, Heather, if you are going to cherry-pick all the political standpoints of groups/individuals we don't like then you will end up in a peace movement of One. Just like all those Trot splinter groups.
If you want to use the PEACE MOVEMENT to argue the toss about religious oppression (against people who, lets face it, don't care what we atheists think) while THE WAR (remember that?) looms overhead, then we will get nowhere.
But we might end up with a split movement, just like we did the last million times because some people want to have ALL THE ARGUMENTS AT ONCE. You can't. People are not generally that conscious yet. But people generally dislike the thought of killing 500,000 Iraqi civilians - a horrible prospect which we have the power to avert.
Lets Stop the War and be rude to the MAB later. Do you really think that they will pick up many recruits from the STWC? Not given the demographics I saw at the last demo.
Mad Monk
tell me lies about Muslims
29.01.2003 17:20
..except just this bit:
'We know that Muslim fundamentalists are Bad. We know that their attitude to women and gays is Really Bad.'
Do we really KNOW that? Or is there a danger we believe it because we read it in the Guardian? I'm not Muslim myself but I grew up and went to school with Muslim kids, many of whom would define themselves as fundamentalists, and they were no more sexist or homophobic than my white/Christian mates. Which is not to say not at all, but no more so.
(here's hoping I haven't just provoked a flurry of anti-Islam posts that'll kill the thread!)
kurious oranj
Grauniad? What Grauniad?
29.01.2003 18:05
Just thought I'd better clarify a couple of points.
i) The Muslim stuff was, of necessity, a generalisation. I know that irony doesn't really come over on email, but I still try. Yep, plenty Mussies are nice people; shouldn't demonise the many for the sins of the few etc etc.
ii) Why this assumption that all lefties read the bastard Guardian? Steve Bell is about the only decent thing about the Blairite Liberal rag, which doesnae even have the decency to come off the fence over the war.
There are more left papers in Britain than the Grauniad, such as the daily Morning Star and, yes, even Socialist Worker.
Another world (and media) is possible. But we already know that, or we wouldn't be on this website, obv.
Right, I'm off to oppress somebody (JOKE, dammit),
Love and non-sectarian peace to you all,
MM
Mad Monk
love-in
30.01.2003 10:51
kurious oranj