Conference on U.S. Foreign Military Bases [Baltimore, 1-12 to 1-14]

[ckaihatsu]

Time is Running Out — Please Register for Our Conference on U.S. Foreign Military Bases


PLEASE JOIN US

Conference on U.S. Foreign Military Bases

January 12 - 14, 2018, University of Baltimore

Learning Commons Town Hall, Baltimore, Maryland

Organized by: Coalition Against U.S. Foreign Military Bases

Thirteen prominent peace, justice and environmental organizations in the United States are collectively organizing a 3-day national conference on U.S. Foreign Military Bases on January 12-14, 2018, at the University of Baltimore, Maryland: • Alliance for Global Justice • Black Alliance for Peace • CODEPINK • Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space • International Action Center • MLK Justice Coalition • Nuclear Age Peace Foundation • Popular Resistance • United National Antiwar Coalition • U.S. Peace Council • Veterans For Peace • Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom • World Beyond War.



You can join and support this Conference by:

Registering and attending the Conference.

Having your organization endorse the Conference.

Placing an ad or a solidarity message from your group in the Conference Journal.

Click Here for Conference Details, Registration and Endorsement

[ckaihatsu]

Only 10 Days Left — Please Register to Attend


ONLY 10 DAYS LEFT!

PLEASE REGISTER TO ATTEND



Conference on U.S. Foreign Military Bases

January 12 - 14, 2018, University of Baltimore

Learning Commons Town Hall, Baltimore, Maryland

Organized by: Coalition Against U.S. Foreign Military Bases

Fourrteen prominent peace, justice and environmental organizations in the United States are collectively organizing a 3-day national conference on U.S. Foreign Military Bases on January 12-14, 2018, at the University of Baltimore, Maryland.

Conference Endorsers: • Alliance for Democracy • Alliance for Global Justice • Bangladesh Bar Council • Black Alliance for Peace • Canadian Peace Congress • CODEPINK • Environmentalists Against War • Gaza Freedom Flotilla Coalition • Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space • Greater Brunswick PeaceWorks • International Action Center • Labor Fightback Network • Liberty Tree Foundation • MLK Justice Coalition • Nuclear Age Peace Foundation • Pax Christi Baltimore • PCUSA • Popular Resistance • United For Peace and Justice (UFPJ) • United National Antiwar Coalition • Upstate (NY) Drone Action • U.S. Peace Council • Veterans For Peace • War Resisters League • Women's International League for Peace and Freedom—U.S. Section • World Beyond War • World Peace Council



You can join and support this Conference by:

1. Registering and attending the Conference.
2. Having your organization endorse the Conference.
3. Placing an ad or a solidarity message from your group in the Conference Journal.

Click Here for Conference Details, Registration and Endorsement

Copyright © 2017 Hands Off Syria Coalition, All rights reserved.
You are on this list because you signed HOSC's Points of Unity Statement.

[Ele'ill]

Copyright © 2017 Hands Off Syria Coalition



what is the goal of these groups, what is their strategy

[ckaihatsu]

Copyright © 2017 Hands Off Syria Coalition

What's the significance of quoting this part?

what is the goal of these groups, what is their strategy

I won't speak on behalf of the coalition, but it looks like the groups are co-sponsoring the conference to raise awareness of imperialist-type warfare, as through U.S. foreign military installations.

[Child of the Gallery]

What's the significance of quoting this part?

Tankies?

[Ele'ill]

What's the significance of quoting this part?

it appears as if they've copyrighted a movement, a serious movement with serious registration pricing

I won't speak on behalf of the coalition, but it looks like the groups are co-sponsoring the conference to raise awareness of imperialist-type warfare, as through U.S. foreign military installations.

Their goal is to raise awareness with this conference but what is their actual goal? Once all the awarenesses have been raised, what is their strategy?

[Child of the Gallery]

Hands off Syria are also Tankies.

[ckaihatsu]

it appears as if they've copyrighted a movement, a serious movement with serious registration pricing

Okay, noted, and I should've excised that 'footer' part anyway, per my personal policy agreement / understanding with the board.

(And, if I may say, please try to give explanations like this one of yours upfront, for the future, for the sake of good communication.)

Their goal is to raise awareness with this conference but what is their actual goal? Once all the awarenesses have been raised, what is their strategy?

Hands off Syria are also Tankies.

I have no *strategic* differences in the short term with M-Lers, but I certainly disagree with the principle of 'socialism in one country'.

I can't speak to the HOSC organization's trajectory, but I guess we can call it 'single-issue geopolitical progressivism', if nothing else.

[ckaihatsu]

[LFN] Working for United Mass Action Against U.S. Wars


Conference on U.S. Foreign Military Bases:

Working for United Mass Action Against U.S. Wars of the Present and Wars of the Future

A broad coalition is sponsoring a Conference on U.S. Foreign Military Bases, to be held in Baltimore, MD, beginning Friday, January 12, 2018, and ending Sunday, January 14. It will be held at the University of Baltimore’s Learning Commons, 1415 Maryland Avenue. The Labor Fightback Network is proud to endorse this conference and the Unity Statement of the Coalition Against U.S. Foreign Military Bases. This event will be an important step forward for the entire working class and for all who are concerned about the threat of once-unthinkable nuclear war and the continuing war in Afghanistan.

The conference is expected to propose a day of action on January 23 commemorating the 1898 occupation of Guantánamo Bay in Cuba by U.S. forces during the Spanish-American War. That occupation continues today. Guantánamo is the site of a U.S. naval base and of the infamous prison where captives from the Iraq and Afghanistan wars are held without trial or charges. Those prisoners, many of whom are guilty of no more than being in the wrong place at the wrong time, are subject to abuse and torture. We will demand that the prison be closed, that the U.S. naval base also be closed, and that Guantánamo be returned to the Cuban people. As the Resistance to Donald John Trump and his oppressive administration continues in the new year, the demonstrations against the occupation of Guantánamo will send a message to Trump and to everyone that stopping and preventing war is a high priority on the Resistance’s agenda.

The conference will discuss ambitious plans for a national spring mobilization for peace. Those plans are at the very preliminary stage at the present time: a call is being drafted, and a number of dates and locations are being considered. However, there is consensus on the need for united mass action in the streets to show the Trump administration and the entire world that the people of the United States demand peace. We are tired of our sons and daughters being killed and maimed; we are infuriated at the death and destruction being visited upon the populations of Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, and Syria by either U.S. forces themselves or their Middle Eastern proxies, and we are terrified at the prospect that this President may very well unleash nuclear destruction against the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.

At its October 2017 convention in St. Louis, the AFL-CIO adopted a resolution called “War Is Not the Answer.” It states clearly and conclusively that the “AFL-CIO promotes and advocates for a foreign policy based on international solidarity of all workers, mutual respect of all nations and national sovereignty, and calls upon the president and Congress to make war truly the last resort in our country’s foreign relations, and that we seek peace and reconciliation wherever possible…” It adds the voice of the most powerful social force in the population to the demand for peace. A spring mass action for peace has the potential to bring that most powerful social force into the streets, so that the warmakers can consider the possibility that the labor movement could take even more decisive action in the future, action which could directly threaten their profits and their power. It also raises the possibility that the young working people who fill the ranks of the armed forces will come to the realization that the geopolitical machinations of the bankers and businessmen are not worth their lives.

The Labor Fightback Network calls on all its supporters: if you can attend the Conference on U.S. Foreign Military Bases, please do so. The time to register is now—and space is limited. Add your voice to the call for united mass action against current and future wars, to the call to close U.S. foreign military bases, to dismantle the U.S. military arsenal, and to use the money now spent on weapons and war for job creation and human needs. When the power of the organized working class is brought to bear for peace, victory is certain. The time to get started is now.

[Ele'ill]

in the streets demanding peace

[ckaihatsu]

in the streets demanding peace

Your continued habit of blithe dismissiveness overshadows you -- sure, the *solution* isn't in peace marches, but something *should* be going on to remind people that the U.S. is an empire, with material interests in flexing military muscle, as for arms sales, etc.

I prefer to think of these kinds of actions as being 'a first line of defense', and 'consciousness raising' for those who may be new to class struggle.

[Ele'ill]

Your continued habit of blithe dismissiveness overshadows you -- sure, the *solution* isn't in peace marches, but something *should* be going on to remind people that the U.S. is an empire, with material interests in flexing military muscle, as for arms sales, etc.

I prefer to think of these kinds of actions as being 'a first line of defense', and 'consciousness raising' for those who may be new to class struggle.

Has it raised consciousness?


Openly criticizing a specific thing in the post you made isn't "blithe dismissiveness".

[ckaihatsu]

Has it raised consciousness?

I would think so, compared to *not* having a mobilization / protest.

Openly criticizing a specific thing in the post you made isn't "blithe dismissiveness".

I just happen to be generalizing, based on a pattern I see in your overall political attitude.

[Ele'ill]

I would think so, compared to *not* having a mobilization / protest.

I'm not convinced that what you're saying here is correct, how do you know consciousness is going up, how have you measured it, how is it identified as consciousness?

I just happen to be generalizing, based on a pattern I see in your overall political attitude.

But when confronted with someone openly criticizing a specific thing in a post you just made you accuse them of a general blithe dismissiveness. If i didn't have a reason to be dismissive before i certainly do now.

[ckaihatsu]

I'm not convinced that what you're saying here is correct, how do you know consciousness is going up, how have you measured it, how is it identified as consciousness?

I'm not a social scientist researcher of social and political movements -- I don't have the empirical data that you're asking for.

Again, it's better to have a left-wing, anti-imperialist presence than *not* to.

But when confronted with someone openly criticizing a specific thing in a post you just made you accuse them of a general blithe dismissiveness. If i didn't have a reason to be dismissive before i certainly do now.

See -- you *do* tend to be wantonly dismissive, and now you're practically *admitting* it.

[Ele'ill]

I'm not a social scientist researcher of social and political movements -- I don't have the empirical data that you're asking for.

then what are you basing the things you say off of? Where is your position on this coming from?

Again, it's better to have a left-wing, anti-imperialist presence than *not* to.

This isn't true. Sometimes, it doesn't really even matter.

See -- you *do* tend to be wantonly dismissive, and now you're practically *admitting* it.

I'm asking questions to you about the thing you posted. You then accused me of being dismissive for no other reason than because i was asking questions. Your reply to why you felt that this thing you've posted about is worth posting here was basically i'm not a scientist so I don't have any data.

[ckaihatsu]

then what are you basing the things you say off of? Where is your position on this coming from?

I provided a rationale in the subsequent section of my last post.

This isn't true. Sometimes, it doesn't really even matter.

I think having an anti-imperialist / anti-capitalist stance is the *crux* of revolutionary politics, and is worth demonstrating publicly, if at all possible, without being sectarian about it. (You're showing more of your dismissiveness here.)

I'm asking questions to you about the thing you posted. You then accused me of being dismissive for no other reason than because i was asking questions.

No, this isn't correct -- I characterize your politics based on your *pattern* of political reactions over the months and years that we've been interacting. You're *assuming* that it was because you were asking questions, but your dismissiveness is 'a priori' -- it doesn't *require* justification, and I'm taking it at face-value for what it is: over-dismissiveness.

Your reply to why you felt that this thing you've posted about is worth posting here was basically i'm not a scientist so I don't have any data.

Correct. But also see the sections above in this post for more explanatory text.

[BIXX]

I think having an anti-imperialist / anti-capitalist stance is the *crux* of revolutionary politics, and is worth demonstrating publicly, if at all possible, without being sectarian about it. (You're showing more of your dismissiveness here.)

Again, it's better to have a left-wing, anti-imperialist presence than *not* to.

Why is it so consistently in this same liberal format though? Perhaps that is actually making itself null. Why do you consistently promote this liberal format? Why not be sectarian about it?

No, this isn't correct -- I characterize your politics based on your *pattern* of political reactions over the months and years that we've been interacting. You're *assuming* that it was because you were asking questions, but your dismissiveness is 'a priori' -- it doesn't *require* justification, and I'm taking it at face-value for what it is: over-dismissiveness.

lol holy shit ckaihatsu thinks he can read minds

Which kind of salt did you have to eat to read minds?

[Ele'ill]

I provided a rationale in the subsequent section of my last post.

No you didn't, there isn't anything in your posts here that i haven't replied to.

I think having an anti-imperialist / anti-capitalist stance is the *crux* of revolutionary politics, and is worth demonstrating publicly, if at all possible, without being sectarian about it. (You're showing more of your dismissiveness here.)

What i'm saying is that simply because someone or some group says 'anti-imperialist' or 'anti-capitalist' it doesn't mean that said activity is free from criticism and i'm really skeptical that i should have to explain this. Asking questions, identifying flaws, etc.. is not dismissive or sectarian. It's approaching the topic here head-on. Dismissiveness would actually look like avoiding responding to another user's posts by lying, giving answers to questions that weren't asked or addressing things that weren't presented, just flat out not answering questions, not answering questions and then claiming it's because you're not a scientist,

No, this isn't correct -- I characterize your politics based on your *pattern* of political reactions over the months and years that we've been interacting. You're *assuming* that it was because you were asking questions, but your dismissiveness is 'a priori' -- it doesn't *require* justification, and I'm taking it at face-value for what it is: over-dismissiveness.

Oh cool so you just felt like letting me know that generally that's what's up but def. not this conversation where you def. accused me of being dismissive although i've responded to all of your points and you have not answered a single god damned question that i've asked.


Has it raised consciousness?


I'm not convinced that what you're saying here is correct, how do you know consciousness is going up, how have you measured it, how is it identified as consciousness?



(in regards to you not being a scientist) then what are you basing the things you say off of? Where is your position on this coming from?

Correct. But also see the sections above in this post for more explanatory text.

You haven't explained shit and there are no 'sections above'.

[ckaihatsu]

Why is it so consistently in this same liberal format though? Perhaps that is actually making itself null. Why do you consistently promote this liberal format? Why not be sectarian about it?

Principally, I *am* in the revolutionary camp (distinct from the liberal 'reformist' mindset), but if others, like liberals, happen to be addressing timely *issues*, then those are strategically *valid*, issue-by-issue, as far as I'm concerned.


---

No, this isn't correct -- I characterize your politics based on your *pattern* of political reactions over the months and years that we've been interacting. You're *assuming* that it was because you were asking questions, but your dismissiveness is 'a priori' -- it doesn't *require* justification, and I'm taking it at face-value for what it is: over-dismissiveness.

lol holy shit ckaihatsu thinks he can read minds

Which kind of salt did you have to eat to read minds?

Cut the shit -- I'm saying that I used a process of *inductive reasoning* to make a generalization ('over-dismissiveness') about Ele'ill's statements here.

No you didn't, there isn't anything in your posts here that i haven't replied to.

You've been asking for a rationale, and it's this:

Again, it's better to have a left-wing, anti-imperialist presence than *not* to.

---

What i'm saying is that simply because someone or some group says 'anti-imperialist' or 'anti-capitalist' it doesn't mean that said activity is free from criticism and i'm really skeptical that i should have to explain this. Asking questions, identifying flaws, etc.. is not dismissive or sectarian. It's approaching the topic here head-on.

You haven't explicitly raised this point of substance prior to now -- if you're going to harbor some kind of resentment ('I'm really skeptical that I should have to explain this'), then you should *at least* make sure that you've *communicated* this point to those you're being resentful towards instead of thinking that everyone should be able to read your mind.

*Of course* I'm in agreement, and I've got *plenty* of negative things to say about the liberal approach, in general, like the usual orientation to the politics of the nation-state instead of pressing for working class independence.

Dismissiveness would actually look like avoiding responding to another user's posts by lying, giving answers to questions that weren't asked or addressing things that weren't presented,

'Dismissiveness' is larger than just these few denotations, and you definitely *do* it, such as being sectarian when some group is showing a solid anti-imperialist stance -- a *strategic* commonality.

just flat out not answering questions, not answering questions and then claiming it's because you're not a scientist,

I already told you that I don't have the data you're asking for, because I'm not the person *recording* that kind of data.

Oh cool so you just felt like letting me know that generally that's what's up but def. not this conversation where you def. accused me of being dismissive although i've responded to all of your points and you have not answered a single god damned question that i've asked.


Has it raised consciousness?


I'm not convinced that what you're saying here is correct, how do you know consciousness is going up, how have you measured it, how is it identified as consciousness?



(in regards to you not being a scientist) then what are you basing the things you say off of? Where is your position on this coming from?

You're not being cooperative, as usual -- added to the list is your dismissiveness of what other people like myself are *telling* you, like right here:

You haven't explained shit and there are no 'sections above'.