The
Exit of Cindy Sheehan
By Ron Jacobs
30 May, 2007
Countercurrents.org
I
have to admit that I was quite surprised when I read that Cindy Sheehan
is leaving the peace movement. After reading her explanation for the
move, I was less surprised, but still a bit disappointed. After reading
the piece, it is clear that Sheehan has discovered that politics can
be an ugly affair. When one is the focus of a political movement like
Ms. Sheehan became, they become even uglier. Her departure will leave
a hole, but it should not leave a vacuum. After all, there are thousands
of US residents that have been hurt by the loss of a loved one in Iraq
or Afghanistan, unfortunately. In addition, there are millions around
the world that are just plain fed up and pissed off about these wars
and the death and destruction they are causing.
Ms. Sheehan is planning to
go home and raise her remaining children. That's a good thing. Her screed
makes it clear that she is burned out from her past two years of antiwar
activism and doing something real like caring for children will surely
put her back in touch with the better side of humanity. This move is
similar to the retreat from politics and the streets that much of an
entire generation underwent in the years following the government murders
at Kent State and Jackson State in 1970 during antiwar protests. Another
side of this retreat was the turn away from politics and towards cultural
and religion. Unlike caring for one's children, the latter two were
mere escapism and somewhat solipsistic. One could argue that these phenomenon
destroyed the potential for radical change in the United States, but
a more appropriate analysis would merely claim that here in the US we
had (and have) the luxury to stop fighting against the war because we
do not live where the bombs are exploding and the assault weapons firing.
Ms. Sheehan makes it clear
that she still opposes these wars and the power mongers who insist on
continuing it. Indeed, she saves her harshest words of her farewell
message for these men and women who "move them (US soldiers) around
like pawns on a chessboard of destruction" and are " worried
more about elections than people." Naturally, this includes the
Democrats as well as the Republicans. And that, is the crux of Sheehan's
despair. She honestly thought that the Democrats were different. Now
that they have proved they are not, she is ready to give it all up and,
by doing so, hand the forces of war and reaction a victory that they
will surely relish. Yeh, there will probably be some tentative cries
from various Democrats telling Cindy that their party is not a war party
and that she needs to hang in there. Those cries will most likely come
from party rank and file, not its leaders or elected types, since the
latter are much more concerned with the 2008 elections, as Sheehan clearly
points out. Meanwhile, one can almost imagine the nasty jokes and high-fives
going around George Bush's breakfast table. They finally got rid of
that pesky Mom whose son they killed. Maybe now they can get on with
the war, especially since the Democrats caved like a cardboard box in
a hurricane.
In another section of her
letter, Sheehan directs her anger and frustration at the so-called leadership
of the antiwar movement. Pointing a well-deserved finger at the movement
and its divisions, she writes: " I have also tried to work within
a peace movement that often puts personal egos above peace and human
life. This group won't work with that group; he won't attend an event
if she is going to be there.... It is hard to work for peace when the
very movement that is named after it has so many divisions." What
else can one say except, once again Ms. Sheehan has drawn an incorrect
conclusion. As many others have written when addressing this issue,
who cares about the pettiness of egos and power players in the movement?
If one opposes the war, one gets in the streets and opposes it. Screw
the fools jockeying for a future or a media spot. The war will be ended
by the mass protest of the people who oppose it, not by getting a director's
job with MoveOn, UFPJ, or some other antiwar organization.
The most poignant paragraph
in Sheehan's statement begins with her sad acknowledgment that her son
died for absolutely nothing. One can only imagine the emotions that
come from this realization. Like many of her fellow citizens, Sheehan
wants to believe that the United States is a good place and that the
people who live there do believe in the principles espoused in its documents
and by its greatest leaders. Her discovery that "(her son) Casey
died for a country which cares more about who will be the next American
Idol than how many people will be killed in the next few months"
is a difficult thing to take. Yet, this is not a reason to quit. It
is, instead, a motivation to change things at an even more fundamental
level. One may not like being called a radical because they oppose the
wars Washington has dragged us into, but one must also become aware
that only radical analysis and action undertaken by millions will change
a system that requires those wars to survive.
I recall a discussion I had
with a friend during the buildup to the first Gulf War. We were talking
about activist burnout and egotistical activists as we watched the antiwar
movement in Olympia, WA. grow by leaps and bounds while it struggled
with internal conflicts that were primarily ego-driven. I said to my
friend that whenever I felt an organization couldn't live without me,
then it was time for me to step back from whatever high-profile position
I happened to be in and go back to the grunt work of passing out leaflets
and setting up stages. After all, it wasn't me that mattered, but the
movement.
I wish Cindy Sheehan a peaceful
and restorative time away from the frontlines of the antiwar movement.
Her presence, commitment and personality have made a good deal of difference
in the growth of the movement against Washington's wars. Indeed, it
can be reasonably argued that it was Cindy Sheehan that made it okay
for Middle America to protest, and for that she must be thanked. Now
that she is taking a breather from the madness it is up to us to continue
expanding those protests. It is certainly not time to give up.
Ron Jacobs
is author of The Way the Wind Blew: a history of the Weather Underground,
which is just republished by Verso. His first novel, Short Order Frame
Up, is forthcoming from Mainstay Press. He can be reached at: [email protected]
Leave
A Comment
&
Share Your Insights
Comment
Policy
Digg
it! And spread the word!
Here is a unique chance to help this article to be read by thousands
of people more. You just Digg it, and it will appear in the home page
of Digg.com and thousands more will read it. Digg is nothing but an
vote, the article with most votes will go to the top of the page. So,
as you read just give a digg and help thousands more to read this article.