Western Massachusetts

Call for academics to support anti-imperialist Iraq work

Dr. X,

I work with the Revolutionary Anti-Imperialist League (RAIL) and we have been organizing teach-ins and discussions on Iraq at Umass, Smith, Mt. Holyoke and now Amherst College. A number of AFSC members and Dr. Y have suggested that we contact you not only because of your unique experience but because they have said that you wanted to be more involved in Iraq events.

Currently on the agenda is a teach in at Amherst College being set up by a Muslim student there for April 20. Speaking will be Dr. Z an activist and Holyoke Community College Professor, and Easthampton activist W, and myself. Z speaks on the no-fly zones, W talks about how the UNSCOM inspections were designed to fail, thereby justifying more sanctions and bombs, and I usually speak on who really uses chem-bio-nuclear weapons & the effects of D.U.

Our events that RAIL are involved in have a different focus on than most other events on the same topic.

1. An anti-imperialist focus. We try and get people to confront the actions of their imperialist government instead of mobilizing them for another variety of action against the Third World. The constant demonization of Saddam Hussein that is present at so many anti-sanctions events serves only to tell the audience what they want to hear: that "something" must be done about an evil leader. The comparison of Saddam Hussein to other Third World leaders or Bill Clinton is something that people must--but don't want to--confront. We have an open letter on this topic on our web site: http://www.prisoncensorship.info/archive/etext/ma/pacifist_demonization.html

2. No expert worship. Having big name folks or billing yourself as an expert can get people in the door. But it also turns off their brains, making them less critical. In the 6 times we've done a teach in the last 15 months, we've had area students and activists do research and make presentations. We think that this sets a good example that anyone can go out, become educated, and then teach and mobilize others. This also encourages good debate as the audience has little inhibitions against criticizing student speakers. When non-activist professors speak, it discourages critical thinking and activism although attendance is much higher. Each time our event gets more effective, but each time the audience is smaller than at events were only professors speak. So we'd trying to combine first hand expereince, PhDs, analysis and most importantly, real deep & honest discussion. Without discussion people don't change their minds or advance their politics significantly.

3. No angling for State Department jobs. Some of what goes on at other events is explicit and some is just bad responses to bad questions. It shouldn't be our job to give advice to the government on how to be a better oppressor. Rather, we should educate and organize people to think "outside the Amerika-as-global- policeman box" presented to us by this system. When we get pro-system questions, we need to explain that that is a bad question not pander to it. "So if the no-fly zones don't work, how can the U.$. help the Kurds?" (Answer: stop arming Turkey.)

Is this the kind of event and perspective that you would like to be included in? I'm not asking you to agree with it all as a condition to speak, but is it a general perspective you can feel comfortable being a part of at an event? I can meet you at Umass to discuss this if you would like or am available by email. Are you interested in speaking at Amherst College on Tuesday April 20 or at some other time and location?

A few words on format:

We've done this event enough times to know that being formal doesnŐt work. Amherst College student events are always weird, so we've come up with a new idea with three parts:

1. Before event we break down all the various parts to be sure we know who will cover what material.

2. At the event we ask "Why is the U.$. at war with Iraq?" and "What else do you need to know about Iraq" We make a list of what issues come up, and we give presentations on those aspects only. The effects of sanctions will surely be one question. This then allows us to give more focused info than just to go thru what if we used all the parts we've written over the last year, would take 3 hrs. When that's done. Ask the audience: Does the U.$. has the moral authority to take action against Iraq over the issues of WMD, the Kurds, the Shiites, it's neighbors, etc.? If most of the audience says no, we can move on. Otherwise, we need to go back and explicitly go over the material with a focus on whether the U.$. means justify their alleged ends. This of course will require explaining how the U.$.'s stated goals are not the same as its true goals.

We have not yet tried structuring a teach in exactly like this yet, but it seems like a much better idea than the formality that has sometimes stifled debate and discussion in the past.

I hope to hear from you soon.

Wmass RAIL

Return to WMass RAIL page