Comments on: No War: The movement that has dissolved itself http://polizeros.com/2008/03/31/no-war-the-movement-that-has-dissolved-itself/ Musings on politics: anti-war, global warming, peak oil and otherwise Wed, 15 Oct 2008 20:40:27 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=abc By: jack r http://polizeros.com/2008/03/31/no-war-the-movement-that-has-dissolved-itself/#comment-150329 jack r Mon, 31 Mar 2008 17:59:10 +0000 http://polizeros.com/2008/03/31/no-war-the-movement-that-has-dissolved-itself/#comment-150329 It's easy to overestimate the impact of the Vietnam War protests - some of the worst atrocities of that conflict were toward the end of the war, so it obviously wasn't that great a hindrance to the Hawks. In the end the conclusion of the war came down to the Vietnamese people's determination to keep fighting and the massive deterioration in US troop morale (certainly something that the protests back home contributed to). In terms of direct pressure on politicians I don't think it had that great an impact. The movement against the war in Iraq (what movement?) has the reverse political momentum to that of the Vietnam protests. Which is perhaps why it seems less formidable. In late 60s, early 70s America you have a society clearly in a state of constant conflict, over subversive youth cultures, civil rights, workers' rights, welfare rights. In that case you have a civil society that mobilises all sorts of people for diverse aims, most often defending their self-interest. In that context, the developing politicisation that went on over Vietnam was far more threatening. The campaign against the war in Iraq started with widespread, active opposition and diminished. It is not a process of politicising angry people, but of diverse groups having already expressed their grievances now leaving the field. It’s easy to overestimate the impact of the Vietnam War protests - some of the worst atrocities of that conflict were toward the end of the war, so it obviously wasn’t that great a hindrance to the Hawks.

In the end the conclusion of the war came down to the Vietnamese people’s determination to keep fighting and the massive deterioration in US troop morale (certainly something that the protests back home contributed to).

In terms of direct pressure on politicians I don’t think it had that great an impact.

The movement against the war in Iraq (what movement?) has the reverse political momentum to that of the Vietnam protests. Which is perhaps why it seems less formidable. In late 60s, early 70s America you have a society clearly in a state of constant conflict, over subversive youth cultures, civil rights, workers’ rights, welfare rights. In that case you have a civil society that mobilises all sorts of people for diverse aims, most often defending their self-interest. In that context, the developing politicisation that went on over Vietnam was far more threatening. The campaign against the war in Iraq started with widespread, active opposition and diminished. It is not a process of politicising angry people, but of diverse groups having already expressed their grievances now leaving the field.

]]> By: DJ http://polizeros.com/2008/03/31/no-war-the-movement-that-has-dissolved-itself/#comment-150328 DJ Mon, 31 Mar 2008 15:57:37 +0000 http://polizeros.com/2008/03/31/no-war-the-movement-that-has-dissolved-itself/#comment-150328 The latest Smithsonian Magazine has an article on LBJ that points out an interesting divergence between the Vietnem-era protests and those of today: In the 1960s, the issues of war and civil rights were in many ways tied together, giving the protests more immediate relevance. The war, really, was not in Vietnam: it was here at home, and "we" won. Today, with the vast majority of Americans living comfortable lives (and with the Vietnam-era counter-culture matured and firmly in control of government), there's much less personal immediacy to the issue. Discrimination, though not entirely eliminated, is at least prohibited by law. Plus the number of American casualties in Iraq, though criminal, is not really on a war footing. Consider: since 9-11, about 3,100 people have been murdered on the streets of Los Angeles. The casualties in Iraq just aren't above our level of tolerance. American casualties in Iraq pale in comparison with casualties from major mobilizations of the past: 116,000 in WWI, 407,000 in WWII, and 970,000 in the Civil War. From the Iraq perspective, the numbers look a bit different-- but it's hard to get comfortable Americans out in the street over the deaths of people they don't know. The latest Smithsonian Magazine has an article on LBJ that points out an interesting divergence between the Vietnem-era protests and those of today: In the 1960s, the issues of war and civil rights were in many ways tied together, giving the protests more immediate relevance. The war, really, was not in Vietnam: it was here at home, and “we” won.

Today, with the vast majority of Americans living comfortable lives (and with the Vietnam-era counter-culture matured and firmly in control of government), there’s much less personal immediacy to the issue. Discrimination, though not entirely eliminated, is at least prohibited by law. Plus the number of American casualties in Iraq, though criminal, is not really on a war footing. Consider: since 9-11, about 3,100 people have been murdered on the streets of Los Angeles. The casualties in Iraq just aren’t above our level of tolerance.

American casualties in Iraq pale in comparison with casualties from major mobilizations of the past: 116,000 in WWI, 407,000 in WWII, and 970,000 in the Civil War. From the Iraq perspective, the numbers look a bit different– but it’s hard to get comfortable Americans out in the street over the deaths of people they don’t know.

]]>