Cooperation between diverse antiwar groups helped the Democratic Party in the 2006 congressional elections, but the split caused by some of these activists who feel betrayed could hurt the Democrats at the upcoming 2008 presidential election, according to research published in the journal American Politics Research.
"Sorry, but the Dems simply cannot do the job—not because they are cowardly, but because they are bought and paid for by those who favor empire, most notably AIPAC, the arms industry, and the other merchants and schemers of empire," activist J. V. Walsh said in the listserv of United for Peace and Justice (UFPJ, 2005-2006). "It is not that they are afraid to oppose the war. They favor the war."
"We believe that most of Pelosi’s constituents perceive her as antiwar because they know only of her initial vote and her later public statements," another UFP activist Ross Boylan said in the same forum. "We believe that we can pressure her by exposing the gap between her rhetoric and her votes and other leadership actions and inactions."
The authors, Michael T. Heaney of University of Florida and Fabio Rojas of Indiana University, gave the two quotations as an example of how the antiwar movement is divided in its support for the Democratic Party.
Roughly 40% of grassroots antiwar activists support the Democrats, 20% support a third party (such as the Green Party), 39% are independents and 2% support the Republicans, the researchers found.
The study revealed that the Democrats in the movement are more likely to work with organizations like MoveOn.org, the Progressive Democrats of America, and Code Pink: Women for Peace, while non-Democratic activists are more likely to work with organizations like UFPJ and International ANSWER (Act now to Stop War and End Racism).
The authors found that when antiwar activists work closely with the Democratic Party, an informal political network of activists and organizations is created and those activists are more likely to engage in political activities that help the Democrats.
The elected officials respond by helping sympathetic activists in the antiwar movement, however, that balance is unstable and could hurt the Democrats as much or more than it helps them, especially since the activists are increasingly concerned by continued Democratic support of war funding.
“Leading antiwar groups are planning to hold large protests at the 2008 Democratic National Convention in Denver, much like they did at the 2004 Republican National Convention in New York,” Heaney reports. “The Democrats could find their party divided in 2008 much as it was in 1968, with many of its natural supporters camped outside the convention hall, definitely complicating the Democrats’ electoral prospects.”
Post new comment