CCDS-NEC Response to: An Open Letter To Activists Concerning Racism In The Anti-War Movement  

April 2003

Dear Friends: Steve Bloom, Jean Carey Bond, Humberto Brown, Saulo Colón, Bhairavi Desai, Cherrene Horazuk, Randy Jackson, Hany Khalil, Ray Laforest, Ngô Thanh Nhàn, René Francisco Poitevin, Merle Ratner, Liz Roberts, Juliet Ucelli, Lincoln Van Sluytman.

The National Executive Committee of the Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism (CCDS) met and discussed your "Open Letter to Activists Concerning Racism in the Antiwar Movement." The letter was discussed at length and we agreed to send the following response.

The National Executive Committee of the CCDS agrees that there is much that is valid in your letter: it reflects a critique that many of us have made of the composition and programmatic approach of the major antiwar coalitions. It raises the need for more discussion and debate on rooting out white supremacy in the movement and the country, as well as the role of whites in challenging white supremacy. While these are valid points that require a great deal of attention––points that our leadership prides itself in confronting and dealing with head-on in the mass movement––there are problematic areas of your letter that need to be addressed.

First, there are different interpretations and recollections of events described in your letter. For example, your letter states:

"at least two other promising coordination efforts in this city, since 9/11/2001, also began by involving diverse forces and ended badly. One series of meetings, attended by hundreds, led to the formation of the New York Coalition for Peace and Justice––but only after a disastrous split around the question of calling for the use of "international law" as an alternative to war against Afghanistan. A second series of meetings, held last Spring to plan antiwar commemorations of 9/11, produced Stand Up New York––but that coalition foundered when one group insisted on organizing a vigil "autonomously," without being responsible to the coalition as a whole. In our view, destructive racial dynamics and white supremacy are implicated in the disruption of both of these unity initiatives: Predominantly white forces failed to grasp the importance of self-determination and certain concerns in communities of color."

We differ with your recollection of coalition efforts in New York City after September 11, 2001, and the causes of the divisions within the antiwar movement. Many activists in attendance at the first mass meeting held at Local 1199 felt as we did that the main cause of division in the coalition was based on tactical disagreements, not racism. If you recall, the fallout of the coalition started when most of the African American and Latinos in the room left and never returned due to the sectarianism of the meeting when the "international law" debate took place. For many who left, as well as many who stayed for at least several more meetings, the fact that the coalition never was able to find language critical of terrorism was a major problem. The unity of the newly formed coalition was broken by a few who opposed calling for an International tribunal because they wanted the body to agree that the attack of September 11th was an attack on "US imperialism."

On your criticism that one organization held a demonstration "autonomously"––since when don't organizations have the right to organize their own demonstrations? It is our understanding that several groups worked together on a separate rally, including 9/11 Families for Peaceful Tomorrows. Such a criticism would not look kindly on the Harlem/Washington Heights or any other independently organized protest.

Your letter states that "the problem of racism in anti-war activism is not new…for many years, people of color and their white allies have cited its debilitating effects, to no avail." This assertion is not only false, but it makes a blanket negative assessment of struggles people have waged for multiracial unity, often successfully. We want to be clear. We are not saying racism in the antiwar movement has been eliminated, but rather that there are positive examples of multi-racial work.

Another false and misguided statement in your letter is the following: "white supremacy is a system, historically constructed by white peoples, European nations and the United States, to exploit and oppress nations and peoples of color." Your description of the origins of white supremacy is one that most members of CCDS would not share, as it seems to ignore the material, historical, and economic roots of racism.

On a point of tactics, you write: "even many white liberals cling to the notion that building a mass movement against war necessitates the use of techniques and rhetoric that ‘don't scare away’ middle class whites." The letter places this issue as though people are only concerned about scaring away middle class whites with bad tactics. We disagree. People who understandably express concern about employing tactics that serve to narrow the movement are not only worrying about scaring away white people! They worry about scaring away the multiplicity of forces needed to bring into this and other movements all races and classes, religions, geographic areas, ages, etc.

In regard to the list of points cited under "Examples of White Supremacy & Privilege within the NYC Peace & Justice Movement," though there is validity in the points made, we feel that they serve to divide, rather than bring forces together, at a time when unity is so important. We believe that one of the best ways to counter these forms of racism is for all of us––of all racial backgrounds––to play a pro-active role in confronting racism and working for peace simultaneously.

In closing, we feel that your letter, while making some important points, does not provide a good basis for discussing serious issues, as it brings in many subjective interpretations of events. It is quite possibly inflammatory at a time when we need the utmost unity in the movement. We feel that there are many ways to address white chauvinism––collective setting of certain standards of behavior, organizational principles and styles of work, on the spot criticism of individuals when it is needed, as well as giving leadership by example. Many of us in CCDS have long experience with addressing this problem, and we plan to continue in doing our part to help build the unity of the antiwar movement, and all movements for peace, justice, democracy and equality.

In struggle, CCDS Co-Chairs

James Campbell Leslie Cagan Charlene Mitchell Mark Solomon For the National Executive Committee

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism
545 Eighth Avenue, 14 NE New York, NY 10018
Phone: (212) 868-3733 Email: national@cc-ds.org Web: www.cc-ds.org