Report from USC
The protest at USC versus Ann Coulter and David Horowitz's Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week (IFAW) came together and was quite significant, in a number of ways.
According to the LA Times, there were 150 people at the protest where Coulter spoke. Student organizations included USC Anti War Coalition, Students for Justice in Palestine, SCALE - Student Coalition Against Labor Exploitation, Free Culture, Muslim Student Union, and Women's Student Assembly.
USC students lent a fresh and militant flavor to the protest, exposing Coulter and confronting Coulter's support base, and IFAW as a whole, as an effort to legitimize the US War on Iraq and preparations for war on Iran. Religious organizations from on and off campus worked together and carried out a silent vigil to protest Coulter and IFAW's promotion of Christian Fundamentalism (including Coulter's fundamentalist threats to 'perfect' Jews and Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week's direct attack on Islam). On campus, throughout the lead-up to IFAW and at the protest itself, there was serious discussion and debate on the danger Horowitz represents - especially his efforts to purge 'the tenured left' in academia - a reactionary offensive which is, in fact, gaining momentum.
For Coulter's IFAW appearance, USC students led a general protest at the site of Coulter's talk, a speak-out, and then confronted Coulter's social base with anti-war and anti-racist and anti-fascist slogans. Panel discussions featuring USC academicians followed these events. There was a genuine 'flowering' of forms of protest and participation.
At the protest were USC professors from Theatre Studies, Anthropology, Spanish, Cinema, and Gender Studies departments. The Interfaith Communities United for Justice and Peace (ICUJP), a Los Angeles based coalition of progressive religious leaders and lay people, got involved and made efforts to impact the media through advisories leading into the protest. Especially Rev. Louis Chase, pastor at Hamilton UMC in South Central LA, Hussam Ayloush, Executive Director of LA Area CAIR (Council on American Islamic Relation), Steve Puzarne - a Pacific Palisades Jewish Cantor, and the organizations Jews on First and the Jewish Alliance of California.
Carol Downer, founding member of Feminist Women's Health Centers, was at the protest and speak-out. Ms. Downer presented an important, and in real ways, a position that was in contrast to some who said they would not 'stoop to the level' of Coulter by participating in the protest. Downer exposed the essential nature of IFAW's anti-women program, called attention to the sophistication of their hypocrisy and demagoguery, specifically showing how Coulter and Horowitz and IFAW cloak their actual fascist program for women (and society as a whole) with so-called pro-women anti-Islamic rhetoric.
Other organizations sent contingents, including ISO and ANSWER. The Revolutionary Communist Party (RCP) was there with Revolution newspaper and books and tapes featuring Bob Avakian speaking on critical thinking, dissent and the search for the truth. RCP spokesperson Clyde Young examined, in an emotional and polemical speech, the rise of a dangerous fascist movement in the US, and spoke of how IFAW is a part of this. He connected the dots on the relationship between IFAW and U.S. government backing of racist nooses hanging from trees in the South, and government backing of prosecutors in the Jena 6 case in Louisiana . Young spoke to the importance of, and the connection between, massive popular resistance on these political fronts and said a revolution in the U.S. is needed and possible. World Can't Wait members dressed in orange prison dress like the prisoners wear in Guantanamo - their guerrilla style protest was photographed and published by the LA Times and Daily Trojan. Reggie Dylan represented for the National Project to Defend Critical Thinking and Dissent in Academia. His comments included a round-up of national resistance to IFAW and exposure of how David Horowitz, far from being a marginalized lunatic, is actually very well connected to powerful ruling class politicians... and the significant danger he and the forces he is allied with represent to critical thinking and dissent in academia.
Another part of the 'flowering of resistance' included written materials with various perspectives all over USC and at the protest itself, taking up the issues related to so-called 'Islamo-Fascism' and the actual danger of U.S. fascism. These included a fake program for the IFAW Ann Coulter event -- which detailed her racist, chauvinistic, and Christian Fundamentalist thoughts - which was developed by students. There were materials that explained, from a Muslim perspective, the concept of justice in Islam and theoretical articles by Islamic journals on what is, and is not, fascism. During the week the TroHo, an alternative newspaper at USC, featured several articles on IFAW, including pieces exposing Coulter and IFAW's efforts pressuring Women's Studies programs. The newspaper called on students 'to not just sit back and ignore' it. This paper got out all over campus.
IFAW, Coulter's appearance at USC, and organizing efforts to confront and counter this with facts and the truth, was very controversial on campus. Debate on whether Coulter should just be ignored, or not, raged pretty intensely among faculty and students.
Revolution newspaper had an article discussing why 'You Can't Defeat Fascism by Ignoring It' which was timely and we took it up and shared it with many people. As the day approached for Coulter's visit, the big question of Coulter's and IFAW's political agenda became much more widely posed and talked about, creating conditions for the organized presence at the protest and speak out. Professors from History, Social Work, Political Science, for example, led discussions in classrooms on the importance of defending critical thinking and dissent in academia. Some of us spoke in classrooms, and this was really great, as many of the crucial issues were posed by students in these classes, and we talked about them. Off these discussions, some students took big bundles of the National Project's 'Expose and Defeat This Reactionary Offensive' poster to get out in their classrooms and to post up all over campus, while other students said they were unconvinced and had a hard time understanding how exposing and protesting Coulter, with facts and the truth, would in fact be a defense of and a service to critical thinking, dissent and the search for the truth in academia (and society), not an attack on Coulter's 'free speech.'
One thing we did in these classrooms was get into the specifics of the Newly Minted Feminists piece that was on the National Project's website and at recom.us. These discussions gave the students a deeper appreciation of the hypocrisy and how deceptive these fascistic forces are, what their actual program is on campus and also in society.
A complicated and challenging issue arose in connection with mass sentiment opposing the way Iranian President Ahmadinejad was treated at Columbia a couple of weeks ago. Numerous students and professors have the opinion he should have been given the opportunity to speak, and then he should have been challenged if people disagree, rather than what happened (where the President of Columbia University attacked Ahmadinejad as part, objectively, of a wildly chauvinistic and jingoist battle cry to attack Iran). Now, the logic went, shouldn't that mean that Coulter be given a 'free speech' platform at USC. This problem is worth wrestling with, especially because it acted as an objective obstacle to vigorously protesting IFAW and Coulter's agenda for numerous people. In my opinion this underscores why efforts at 'balance' cannot be method through which the either the truth or humanity's emancipation can be achieved. In this specific situation we showed how efforts (by the U.S. authorities, U.S. media, and reactionary organizations etc.) to whip up a social base for war in Iran -- in connection with Ahmadinejad's US and UN visit -- was intimately tied up with IFAW's efforts, including Coulter's speech, to do exactly the same thing. We also asked the students and faculty to consider what message is being sent to the larger community beyond the walls of the university, if Coulter's comments, and practical program, is not exposed and opposed.
This remains controversial. There were numerous professors who did important things in relation to IFAW at USC. However, the principal reason The LA Times, for example, does not mention how IFAW is geared to banishing 'the tenured left' and what Horowitz is doing is an attack on critical thinking and dissent in academia'¦ the reason it was not mentioned in the article'¦ was the relative lack of participation of the professors at the protest and speak-out, at least in any organized way, where opposition to this attack on dissent and critical thinking in academia would be unmistakable.
It is hard for some to confront that Coulter and Horowitz, who have a definite practical program and are backed by powerful and well-financed capitalists who are themselves fascist, have a certain initiative and are part of a dynamic taking things to extremes in U.S. society'¦ and there is a need to confront this and defeat it. When it comes to actual moves to attack Iran, there is also disbelief, and paralysis. Some said: 'Coulter can't be debated'¦ "we shouldn't give her attention'¦ "I refuse to give her or this event the honor of my attendance, even in protest'¦'
Well, when this came up there was discussion over what Coulter represents - the actual practical fascist program (hers is not just a set of ideas)'¦ discussion over why she specifically targets the Liberals and what that has to do with ushering in their fascist program'¦. discussion over the progress Horowitz has already made in their attacks on progressive professors and critical thinking and dissent, and the need for massive resistance to it. 'I won't stoop to her level' doesn't challenge this fascism. The 'relativism' that can be found among some academics (expressed in the above arguments) objectively allows these fascistic politics to set the terms and become part of the acceptable language, discourse, and terms of discussion.
There was a panel discussion the next evening after Coulter's visit featuring USC based academics focusing on Women, Religion, and Imperialism. One professor discussed the crimes of the United States in the Philippines, and the use of the bible to oppress women. Another professor had important insights on the 'complexity' of the political situation in the world and in this country and she criticized an academic environment where openly contesting and disagreeing with colleagues was not allowed, or is looked down upon, sort of describing an unprincipled peace that obtains versus vigorous discussion, debate and contestation of ideas, and the search for what is true. Academics who'd gone to and listened to the Coulter speech the night before described Coulter herself, many of those who attended, and the atmosphere in the auditorium as 'chilling'¦ and sobering'. Also, at this panel discussion, one student spoke up and said Coulter wasn't challenged inside the auditorium and said that was disturbing.
Among the students, professors and everyone there needs to be much more ferment on these questions.