I'm not saying that.
I'm saying that many of the groups that formed then were formed primarily for the purposes of direct action. SNCC, SCLC, etc. made direct action a central core of their programs.
However, the AFL-CIO is not primarily a group organized for and engaged in political action demonstrations and marches. They have a broad labor agenda, and the WTO protest march, big as it was, was just one small aspect of their program. Similarly the Sierra Club and many other mainstream organizations which suported the march. The Direct Action Network supports action in general, but the WTO is only a small part of their program.
I don't "dismiss" the 60s groups at all. I was involved in founding two of them, and they did excellent work. But neither one had a broad agenda, and both had direct action -- sit-ins, teach-ins, marches, etc -- at the core of their activities. If it all had to be done through letter writing, press releases, lobbying, etc, as some have said should have been done with the WTO, these organizations never would have existed.
That is the difference I was trying to point out. |
