How was C.A.N. born and how long has it been a part of the UIUC ca
mpus?
The question of “when” CAN was born is sort of multifaceted. It is both a national organization and a local one, and while I have been around since the formation of the local chapter, my knowledge of the birth of the national organization, in February 2003 before the war began, is not as solid, so I’ll stick to the story of the local CAN chapter.
CAN started here at U of I in the winter of 2006-2007, when a few members of the International Socialis
t Organization who had heard of and worked with CAN at other campuses (Marty Smith, a member of the ISO and also Iraq Veterans Against the War, foremost among them) put out a call for the formation of a chapter here, with the short term goal of getting people out to the January 27, 2007 march on Washington DC. We were able to organize a car and van convoy of about 20, 25 people, and marched with the 250,000 estimated people (numbers range from 100,000 to half a million) on the Mall and Congress that Saturday.
From there, our numbers were slightly in flux for the semester, although we had a core of 4 people who met in the second floor of the Undergrad Library. We were an official group, but we didn’t know the importance of many of the resources available to RSOs – such as reserving rooms! We had a slow time building knowledge about us, since we missed the all important Quad Day, and we were getting started in the middle of winter. But that spring, we were able to organize and fill a 50 person bus out to the anniversary protest in DC, which was remarkable considering there were 4 of us (and help from our allies, especially the ISO and the Campus Greens, both of whom we still have good relationships with).
As a side note, nationally CAN had a bit of a rebirth in October 2007. Not to get too bogged down in internal politics, CAN has a national coordinating committee which is intended to oversee the national workings of the group – organizing days of action, putting out press releases, and keeping the chapters in some sort of contact with each other. We’re not a very top down organization, but we do have some infrastructure at the national level. However, in 2006-2007, many of the members of the national coordinating committee graduated or dropped out, and CAN as a national body sort of limped along. Then in October 2007, we had our first National Conference in two years, held in Madison, where we not only elected a new coordinating committee, but also developed a new set of points of unity and generally revitalized the movement in a huge way.
2.) What are the main goals of C.A.N.? Do they change?
CAN has a national points of unity, which are thus:
“The Campus Antiwar Network stands for the immediate withdrawal of all occupation troops and private contractors from both Iraq and Afghanistan.
We demand that the United States government provide economic reparations to the people of Iraq and Afghanistan.
We also demand full physical and mental health benefits and educational funds for all military personnel regardless of discharge status.
CAN is committed to building a movement based on grassroots, democratic, and independent organizing that actively opposes all forms of racism, Islamophobia, sexism and homophobia.”
Locally, we are also committed to helping the people of Palestine, although there is dissent even in our chapter about the best solution 
that that particular hotbed of violence – the classic debate over a one-state or two-state solution.
The inclusion of Afghanistan in our points of unity came about this past October (2008) at our National Conference in Chicago, and the Palestine issue was formally adopted by our chapter this past January, although we had long been operating with it as an implied principal.
3.) What was C.A.N.'s greatest accomplishment of 2008 and what do you look forward to this semester?
Well, kicking the CIA off our campus was a big plus. They came to recruit people, and due to the media we were able to bring out – the DI, and maybe a member of the IMC – they canceled their session (due to CIA policy about not holding such a session when there is media around). We’ve picketed CIA events in the past, but this was the first time we were able to get them to leave before they were able to recruit people. It was a contentious victory – I think I was an editorial in the DI over a week after it happened condemning our action – but we stand by our decision to demonstrate outside both CIA and military recruitment efforts, and pass out information that they would probably like to bury under the rug.
For the upcoming semester, I’m not really sure what we have in mind. I know there have been talk of a divestment from Israel campaign in conjunction with Students for Justice in Palestine, but I don’t really know how much work has been done on that. Since we are a very grassroots organization, one thing we like to do is find out from new members at the start of the year what kinds of things they might be interested in working on, and what they think of when it comes to antiwar activism – or activism in general.
4.) What organizations share the C.A.N. mission and what organizations have you subsequently collaborated with in the past on various projects/events?
Locally, we have a ton of amazing ally organization. Members of the International Socialist Organization were the catalyst to founding the local chapter here, and we have a number of members of the ISO also playing roles in CAN – although I should note that we are in no way a socialist organization. The Campus Greens have also been our long-time ally here, and we have a sort of tradition of organizing a protest around the anniversary of the invasion of Iraq in March with the Greens. We’ve also worked well with the Graduate Employee’s Organization, and they’ve helped us out in return. More recently, we have established good relationships with Amnesty International, Four Walls and a Roof. We also have a long-running tradition of working closely with Students for Justice in Palestine, and the Muslim Student and Arab Student Association, although recently we’ve lost some of our key contacts in the latter two organizations due to graduation. We hope in the future to outreach to the various LGBT and Latino groups on campus, and we’ve had some success with the latter in the last few months on campus.
There IS, contrary to what many students might think, a vibrant activist community on campus. The impor
tant thing is really to make the kind of personal contacts and relationships it takes to bridge the gap, and get the entire progressive community out to an event. When a coalition of groups this past April held a demonstration in favor of the Employee Free Choice Act and a Vendor Code of Conduct here at U of I, almost the entire core of CAN was at the rally, even though the event was not specifically “antiwar”. We recognize that a united progressive front is necessary, and while we may focus on our own issues, it’s important to help our allies with theirs. That’s why we’ve tried as much as possible to outreach to other groups, get involved with their projects, and get then involved with ours.
5.) Some of us know C.A.N. as the organization that doesn't believe in centralized power? Why is that and what does C.A.N. do to structure itself in place of individual "leadership" positions?
The issue of centralized power and leadership is actually a question that CAN has been juggling for the past year or so. Due to our small size at the start, we never really felt the need for any sort of real, official leadership; we were tight-knit, and able to keep each other responsible. We had the two positions required by the RSO office – President and Treasurer – but the role of “President” was just on paper.
During our second year, we played around with the idea of a steering committee – a few people who would make sure things got done, and while it worked well for some time, eventually it kind of fell apart. However, it wasn’t a hug eblow to the organization from a logistical standpoint. We’ve had some floundering, trying out different techniques, and this winter I think we found a good balance between “leadership” and accountability. We elected people to head up certain areas – such as media or email and web – so there is accountability and so that people can make sure things get done, but without any sort of hierarchical structure; everyone is equal in CAN.
There have been problems with the way CAN has been organized, of course, especially during the semester when we were sorting out different ways to organize ourselves. A few dominant people – myself included – tended to dominate both discussions and also the logistical ends of organizing, which led to a bit of a power consolidation, which we’re working to break away from, by getting people to step up and take on more responsibility, but with the help of those who were doing it before. For example, I used to be the person who sent out emails and reserved rooms, not because I had been elected to that position but because I just did. We changed that, elected someone to do it, and hopefully we’ll continue the trend of teaching newer people the things that older activists take for granted – how to reserve space, how to write a press release, things like that. The important thing it to ensure that the organization can survive the graduation of older members, and continue to thrive.
6.) What campus-specific issues are taken on by C.A.N. in addition to larger anti-war endeavors?
Unfortunately, we haven’t worked incredibly closely with some of the more immediate issues that confront us as students. We’ve helped out the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) and Vender Code of Conduct (VCC) people by showing up at their rallies, and we’re often found at other events – especially GEO events. Hopefully, we’ll be able to change that this upcoming semester.
We do take pride in being in close contact with the community group Anti War Anti Racism Effort (AWARE) which meets on Sundays at the IMC, and many of our members have contacts at the IMC, or even volunteer there.
7.) Has any C.A.N. member been arrested in the past? What precautions does C.A.N. take to protect it's members during collective activism or anti-war protests?
From our chapter, no one has been arrested. At the Republican National Convention last September, three members of CAN (two from the east coast and one from Ohio) were arrested, and a number of members, both from our chapter and nationally, engaged in the direct action street protests which the mainstream media described as senseless vandalism and “violent”. Not only were acts of vandalism incredibly rare at RNC, but the only violence was from the police against the peaceful protesters. There more people getting beat or tear gassed by cops there just for taking to the streets outside the officially sanctioned area than we’ve seen in America since the equally brutal RNC protest in New York City in 2004, where people broke free from the “freedom cages” to express their discontent.
A few members have also been arrested in New York for school occupations or lock downs in solidarity with Palestine, although they were working with other groups at the time. However, CAN supported all the actions our members have taken apart in thus far, especially when it comes to taking back our schools through occupations.
Nationally, the issue of tactics at protests is a tricky one. Some people are opposed to “direct action” tactics – that is, anything other than permitted protests. Others in the organization are in favor of a diversity of tactics – the acceptance of both permitted marches and asymmetrical forms of protest, whether it be a banner drop (which we did on May Day here two years ago), an unpermitted march, or a lockdown outside an important location. Our opinion is that our members should do what they feel comfortable doing. At the RNC in September, some of our chapter’s members marched with the CAN contingent in the permitted march, and others risked arrest by engaging in the direct action street protests, but neither begrudged the other group, and both represented CAN exceptionally well – I was, and am, incredibly proud of CAN’s showing at the RNC. Those who do engage in direct actions due tend to try to keep their activities separated from those who don’t feel comfortable with such actions through either a separation of space or of time, in order to make sure everyone feel completely comfortable demonstrating their discontent in their own way. And while it is not required, all of our members practice non-violent forms of protest no matter what they are doing.
8.) When C.A.N. members spend time together outside of meetings, what do you all do together?
What do all college students do? Well, we actually break the mold a little by having ba
nner making get-togethers, and very often politics is the dominant topic, but we party with the best of them when we decide to. We have some people who are very active socially as well as politically, and some people who are there mostly for the politics, and whom we see rarely outside meetings, tabling the Quad, or protests. However, we all get along with each other very well, political differences aside (we pride ourselves of having a pretty broad spectrum of political views, from liberals to lefties, socialists to anti-authoritarians).
9.) You, Pete, are a familiar face at campus protests and anti-war rallies--what keeps you going?
Good question. I really have no idea. There are times when I can get dissuaded and feel kind of burned out – which is an all-too common affliction for many activists – but then we have a really great meeting, or an invigorating protest, and I’m back.
Cory Doctorow wrote, “I think to be an activist, you have to be an optimist and a pessimist. You have to be an optimist in that there are things that you can win and if you do, you’ll get somewhere wonderful -- and a pessimist in that you have to think it’s not a foregone conclusion and you have to fight for it,” and I think that sums up my opinion on the matter pretty well. You can’t let things get you down, and you have to channel the negative energy, all the anger at the current state of the world, into something constructive and positive. Otherwise, there’s just apathy, or worse, a jaded quality that defines many of the Gen Xers who came before us.
Also, I tend to get really stoked by protests, demonstrations, and actions. It focuses my energy and drive, and being in a mass of people, taking to the streets and showing our discontent at the shape of the world, our determination even in the face of repression, and defiance of the status quo, it really gives me energy and drive. I may be physically exhausted after marching for hours, but I am completely rejuvenated mentally, spiritually.
10.) Some say traditional modes of protest no longer resonate with America (since some consider the protests of the 60s and 70s to have failed). Do you agree? Where do you see the future of anti-war activism?
In a sense, those people are right – we’re never going to have the same numbers we had then, but it’s not because people don’t care. There are many more outlets people have now, many more chances to be activists – online petitions are now a dime a dozen, and they allow people to let their voices be heard while also not being too involved. It remains to be seen just how effective such petitions are, but I do think that they are an important new part to the landscape of activism.
As for critics who claims that the protests in the 60s and 70s failed, I would have them revisit history. We pulled out of Vietnam due in large part to the massive protests, the total abandonment of the war by a large and important part of the citizenry – those who were being enlisted or drafted to fight it.
But protest in and of itself cannot make change. It takes a multifront effort, both in the streets and in the halls of Washington, and using all the nonviolent tactics we have at our disposal, in order to enact change. Politicians are not deaf to their constituency, but they are also not blind to the money of the lobbyists. We need to make sure that our collective voice is louder than the money of the vested interests. Protests are a vital way to do that, but they should not be the only way to do it.
I think that President Obama did a fantastic job of energizing and empowering the people who support him, but his supporters cannot allow him to rest on his laurels. We must constantly push Obama – provide the constructive criticism he needs to be able to say that he has a mandate from the people to end the wars, provide single payer healthcare, stand up for workers rights, the rights of women, of the LGBT community, and of undocumented immigrants. THAT is why protest will continue to matter in the 21st century.
Any final thoughts?
Well, people might get discouraged that we are NOT in the environment of the 1960s, and they might think that they cannot change the world. I think that with the world in the shape that it’s in – especially regarding the environment – that the sort of individualistic apathy of the 1980s and 1990s – the Gen X mentality – is increasingly anachronistic. We are going to have to start thinking beyond ourselves, whether it be by creating strong community based efforts or large national or international movements dedicated to fighting for people’s rights, health, safety, and prosperity. We will be struggling against both those who cleave to a short-sighted view of the world – the get rich quick mentality which arguably caused a large part of the current economic crisis – and against the apathy or objectivist mindsets of many people who ask either “What’s in it for me?” or “Why does it even matter?” We need to help people achieve a sense of empowerment, and an altruistic mindset allowing them to look beyond their own small world and tackle, as individuals, collectives, or organization, the problems in the world.
majority heterosexual environment. Whether you’re out to everyone or just to yourself, this group is a safe space to find support and learn more about yourself.
IMC Super Summer Saturday Skillshares
Posts
