Write us!

November 2004 • Vol 4, No. 10 •

Kerry’s Dead End

By Bonnie Weinstein

On November 3 more than 2000 protestors marched in San Francisco against the war. Virtually every antiwar group in the Bay Area endorsed the demonstration initiated by Not In Our Name. Also, here in San Francisco, voters had the opportunity to register their opposition to the war by voting for Proposition N, which called for the immediate withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq. Prop. N passed with a 64% majority. This victory was celebrated that evening as protestors renewed their resolve to organize and fight against the war.

The last united mass action against the war was on Feb. 15/16, 2003—before the war even began. Before that action each organization was calling their “own thing.” Demonstrations were being called almost weekly and sometimes in conflict with each other. But never again—since Feb. 15/16 has there been a truly unified action and mobilization against the war—here or worldwide—not once since the war began!

This is what is happening again now. Already actions are being called independently of each other. This is the greatest weakness of the antiwar movement. The demonstration in San Francisco on November 3 was a new beginning.

The ruling class is united. Bush and Kerry differed in tactics of how best to take control over Iraq, Afghanistan and the whole Middle East—and to maintain and bolster the life and strength of its strategic ally, Zionist Israel.

Establishing U.S. control over the Middle East is the objective of the U.S. government because it has to be. Both Kerry and Bush represent the desires of American big business to maintain their position on top of the capitalist world financial pyramid. It’s all about the money. And the one that has the most oil will have control over the world’s finances. That is the bipartisan American military goal. And the Democrats and Republicans are united on this. On that, you can bet your life.

The problem with this past election was that there was no choice. No choice that seemed very different than Bush. When the candidates are perceived as almost identical, folks “play it safe” and vote for what they know. And they know Bush.

I wonder what the vote would have been if an antiwar initiative such as San Francisco’s Proposition N had been on the ballot throughout the country? I feel it would have won nation-wide.

Kerry was not a reasonable choice for those opposed to the war. Kerry’s program just wasn’t any different, fundamentally, on many key issues. On one of the only issues he did differ with Bush on, the abortion issue, Kerry stated publicly that although he was “against abortion personally,” he “stood for choice.” He also said that a candidate for Supreme Court Judge did not have to be for upholding Roe v. Wade in order to get his support and approval. As a woman who has had to have an abortion, Kerry’s “pro-choice” but personally “moral anti-abortion” position was not a very promising commitment to Roe v. Wade, to say the least.

Kerry didn’t stand for any clear position on anything. He was too busy out-Bushing Bush and turning his so-called anti-Vietnam War position into a patriotic, flag-waving, pro-military stance. That’s why he didn’t throw away all of his medals during the War in Vietnam in the first place. He knew they would come in handy later on in his life. How hypocritical is that?

His position on stem cell research was the only fundamental difference he had with Bush. And this research did not need the approval of the President anyway.

We can’t depend on either of the two major war parties to bring peace to the world. Their only goal is to turn the entire world into an armed camp under their super-military control and to crush any attempt to bring freedom, or democracy anywhere.

They are not about to share the spoils of war. They only need us to keep paying their war tab; that’s why Kerry had no intention of pulling out of the Middle East without a clear military victory for the U.S. The Kerry choice was not a lesser evil because American big business won either way.

The worlds only hope for peace depends on organizing a massive, peaceful, independent antiwar movement based on equality and solidarity with demands such as “U.S. Out of the Middle East Now! Money for Human Needs not War!”

It must also be a profoundly democratic movement with non-wavering solidarity in defense of one another, in unity of action and on commitment to the freedom and equality of all.

It’s the only kind of movement that can garner the support and involvement of the masses of the world—the only competing power to the wealthy elite with the strength needed to disarm these billionaire warlords once and for all time. Our strength is in our numbers. To their billions of dollars we must answer with billions of working people united against war and injustice.

It’s our only chance to win a world of peace, freedom, democracy and equality for all.





Write us