The (Global) Warfare and (Corporate) Welfare State

Yesterday, Stop the ACLU linked to a CS Monitor article on supposed conflicts within the anti-war movement generated by the Obama administration's escalation of the war in Afghanistan and Pakistan, on the one hand, and its planned de-escalation in Iraq on the other. Predictably, Stop the ACLU rhetorically asked whether the movement would have assumed such a 'wait and see' attitude if McCain had been elected over Obama. However, since the CS Monitor for the most part quoted only elected Democrats, and the folks at Stop the ACLU likely do not follow the anti-war movement very closely, all failed to notice that large anti-war rallies were, ironically, taking place across the country while they wondered whether it would maintain its momentum in the upcoming years.

The rallies held yesterday were organized by United for Peace and Justice, the International Action Center and Bail out the People, while International Answer held a large anti-war rally and march on the Pentagon two weeks prior on the sixth anniversary of the start of the Iraq war. From the very beginning, the contemporary anti-war movement was organized by groups independent of the two-party system, many of them actual socialists. Seeking their own advantage, Democrats have parasitically co-opted the message of this movement to consolidate their own power. But as many in the anti-war movement know very well, the duopoly effectively functions as a one-party state, the party of global warfare and corporate welfare.