Challenges for the Peace Movement Following the 2004 Presidential Election

(This is a note I wrote for discussion on our local peace list serv in the Capital District, NY.)

The peace community not only lost the 2004 Presidential election, it largely supported a candidate and party that argued they could do a better job in finishing up the invasion of Iraq and creating the global American corporate empire.

Never again can the peace movement be so marginalized, while largely actively supporting policies that it opposes.

A short agenda for the peace movement to commit itself to.

One. Vote Only for Peace.

The peace community must work locally, regionally and nationally to pledge never again to support a pro-war candidate, particularly in time of war.

This will be difficult apparently for the peace community to come to grips with because of the undemocratic nature of our political system, but we will never find peace until the peace community is willing to insist upon it.

Two. Organize for Democracy and Electoral Reform

The peace community - and progressives in general - must commit to building democracy in this country. Every vote must be counted. We need at least preferential voting to avoid the lesser of two evils strategy that gripped much of the peace community this time. We need proportional representation. We need verifiable voting. Public campaign financing would also be helpful, but less important I believe - and less winnable near term - than the other two.

Getting rid of the electoral college would also be helpful. The electoral college was expressly designed to increase the power of the slaveholders in the early days of the republic - it unfortunately is still doing its job very well (remember that the Electoral College is a combination of the Senate plus House).

You will see the Greens continue to demand for voting reforms and for a real count of the 2004 vote. I doubt the Democrats will join because they don't want democracy. Progressive democrats need to figure out an agenda of how to push this through the democratic party at the local level. Start calling ward meetings of the democrats and pass resolutions; pass city council resolutions. Don't give up. The Democratic Party is as much a part of the problem as the Republican Party; progressives have to start treating it as such, with much more hard hitting actions at the community level targeting the Democrats.

Taking community control of the media would be also be helpful. I just don't know how realistically one challenges Fox News and the networks.

The great loss for democracy in this country was the tolerance if not promotion by far too many progressives of the electoral challenges to Ralph Nader's candidacy. Inexcusable. It was politically acceptable in progressive circles to support curtailing the right of the main peace candidate to be on the ballot to offer voters an alternative to the war policies of the two corporate parties. The success of the Democrats' efforts to curtail Nader's right to run, including the use of dirty tricks, is a long-term blow to democracy in this country. We must pledge to fight to allow all people who promote an agenda of peace to be able to compete. (One positive note is that Nader's aggressive litigation did win some important legal principles in some states. But many bad precedents were also established.)

Three. The peace community must become more tactical in our actions. The Dems and Reps are not being moved by our rallies and vigils. We must figure out how to reach those who don't yet agree with us, rather than just rallying the choir. We must remember Alinsky's thesis: those who wish to be the most radical must themselves appear to be the most reasonable. While there is merit to the chant, this is what democracy looks like, in most cases it does not.

The peace community must become more involved in the struggles for economic justice. While this receives great rhetorical support from the peace community, too often the peace groups are missing from the critical local organizing.