I'm Afraid He's Right - Todd Gitlin on Antiwar America

[Paranoid Pessimist]

http://www.tompaine.com/articles/20050830/antiwar_america.php

Here’s the rub about 1969: As the war became less popular, so did the anti-war movement. It was hated, in fact—by the end of the decade, the most hated entity in America. In the 1969 Gallup poll I just cited, as Harold Meyerson reminded his Washington Post readers in June, “77 percent disapproved of the antiwar demonstrations, which were then at their height.”

Perhaps mindful of this inauspicious history, one unnamed correspondent during a recent Washington Post chat wrote the following:

"The anti-war movement really has to learn about behavior. The candlelight vigil thing was great. That's the sort of action that makes sense, actually makes for good PR, and draws in the mainstream….But sadly, too much of this has been run by the ‘Giant Puppet,’ ‘Bongo circles for peace,’ and ‘Street Theatre’ crowd. For example, the upcoming ‘United for Peace and Justice’ rally is going to protest the war, the World Bank, Israel, and demand unilateral Nuclear Disarmament. All accompanied by Trustafarians with bongos and Giant Puppets.

"When the mainstream sees that idiocy, they start considering that the pro-war side may have a point. I opposed this joke in Iraq from day one, and I find these folks silly and counterproductive. The anti-war movement needs more adults in charge, not folks trying to pretend it’s 1968 all over again, without all the drugs.

[Tace]

1. Many Folks May Think Bongos For Peace Is Stupid...

But, surveys find that a clear majority of this country is against the Iraq war. There is not majority support for this war.

[Dhalgren]

3. Right! And how many people are going to say, "Oh man, I was

against the war and all it's senseless slaughter of innocent civilians, women, and children; the maimed and dead GIs; and the destruction of our way of life - but then I saw some guys playing bongos and some giant puppets, so now I'm all for the war! Total bullshit...

[patdem]

7. Honey, if I'd have known bongos were going to be part of the anti-war

movement I would have voted for bush** twice..damn! Not to mention puppets..puppets..I would have voted for a puppet had I known puppets were anti-war....oh, wait! :crazy:

[Redneck Socialist]

9. LOL! That's exactly what I was thinking

You saved me the trouble of posting it. Damn those bongos, now I'm gonna have to go enlist. :eyes:

[hatrack]

24. This antiwar protest needs more . ..

COWBELL!!

[ret5hd]

2. Did you know that there were...

more people on the street protesting the START of Oil War II than there were during the HEIGHT of the viet nam war?

[formerrepuke]

4. I heartily agree.. I recall video on C-Span in the wee hours of one

one early morning in 2003: It was an "anti-war protest" that included lengthy speeches about and on behalf of Mumia Abu-Jamal.. which has nothing to do with BushWarII. His supporters, and those of other groups may have points to make, but their particular protests should not be spliced in with the larger one that a majority of Amercans can agree on.

[burythehatchet]

5. Maybe if a f**king lame ass democrat said something

then Bongos for peace may not be at the front of the parade.

[yurbud]

27. thank you--its pretty bad when mimes are braver than senators

[Smarmie Doofus]

6. I agree with Gitlin. The march in September is not a good idea.

One definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again no matter how many times it fails to work.

Street demos weren't effective then and they are not effective now. 10 million world wide demonstrated against the war in the leadup to Iraq. The war copnspirators could not have cared less.

More traction could be had by channeling some of that energy into lobbying of elected reps. and boycotting products of companies that aid and abet the war effort.

[ret5hd]

11. Thank god i waited for your input...

before i made my reservations.

[leveymg]

12. I was at the ProChoice march in DC in 2004. A million Americans,

most of us nice, normal, middle class folks with baby strollers and water bottles. Quite a sight.

It does help to remind the bastards every now and then what the people really think. Also helps to motivate the participants to carry out other political activities.

[bananas]

17. Your rights: use them or lose them!

The protest marches do a lot more than you seem to be aware.
I remember the protests before the war started:
After watching all the pro-war BS on tv and radio,
I thought there would be about ten people at the anti-war protest.
Instead there were thousands.
I remember a few times I didn't "watch what you say" in a public place, you could cut the tension with a knife. The size of the protests made it socially acceptable to criticize bush in public.
They aren't just to change policy of the administration,
it's to show local government that they can take a stand against the patriot act, to show joe average that he can criticize the government without fear of repercussions.

Do you remember these stories?
- people arrested for wearing anti-war t-shirts at a mall
- Bill Maher cancelled for saying the terrorists weren't cowards
- Ari Fleischer saying Americans have to be watch what they say
- Dixie Chicks being banned from country music radio stations
- pro-war people a vandalizing Linda Rondstadt concert

Do you remember the pro-war protests?
"In the latest sign of a growing intolerance to dissent against the war, imagined or real, protesters in Louisiana used a tractor to crush compact discs and other items from the band as the boycott on the airwaves intensified."
"In recent weeks a man has been arrested for wearing an anti-war T-shirt in a shopping mall in Albany, New York; a county councillor who passed an anti-war resolution was encouraged to leave town in Pennsylvania; and one of President Bush's senior advisers branded a journalist who wrote a critical article about him as "the closest thing journalism has to a terrorist".
http://www.guardian.co.uk/arts/war/story/0,12958,918518,00.html

Read that whole article - brings back some wonderful memories.


http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/09/20010926-5.html

Q As Commander-In-Chief, what was the President's reaction to television's Bill Maher, in his announcement that members of our Armed Forces who deal with missiles are cowards, while the armed terrorists who killed 6,000 unarmed are not cowards, for which Maher was briefly moved off a Washington television station?

MR. FLEISCHER: I have not discussed it with the President, one. I have --

Q Surely, as a --

MR. FLEISCHER: I'm getting there.

Q Surely as Commander, he was enraged at that, wasn't he?

MR. FLEISCHER: I'm getting there, Les.

Q Okay.

MR. FLEISCHER: I'm aware of the press reports about what he said. I have not seen the actual transcript of the show itself. But assuming the press reports are right, it's a terrible thing to say, and it unfortunate. And that's why -- there was an earlier question about has the President said anything to people in his own party -- they're reminders to all Americans that they need to watch what they say, watch what they do. This is not a time for remarks like that; there never is.

[NoAmericanTaliban]

20. I Agree w/ bananas

the protesters did have an impact. The guy at the NY mall had a customized t-shirt made at the mall that said 'Give Peace a Chance' - more of a pro-peace than anti-war. The problem is that they picked on the wrong guy - he was a lawyer. He appeared on the Spin factor and O'Reilly agreed that he should not have been arrested. The charges were later dropped, but it raised a lot of eyebrows & had people buzzing.

[geckosfeet]

26. BS. Grassroots works. n/t

[rbjensen]

8. Okay, so does this mean we can't..

inflate our scrotums and stuff?

[morgan2]

10. while it does make sense to seperate issues

and have protests only against the Iraq war, it is ludacris to think you can seperate the Iraq War from the Imperial organizations that facilitate and promote it.

[stopbush]

13. Revisionist history: the 60s peace movment was infiltrated by gov

operatives who were responsible for inciting many of the riots, etc., in an effort to tar the peace movement.

BTW - when does the media ever "see the idiocy" of the RW wacko movements? When does that ever lead them to "considering that the anti-war side may have a point?"

I hate this kind of fact-free BS.

[K-W]

14. So its just a coincidence that the right started thier modern propaganda

machine to counter the forces of populism including the anti-war movement? Surely peoples resistance to anti-war protestors is a reflection of peoples natural distaste for puppets and not a product of maniplation!

But I guess its easier to just eat our own than to confront the fact that changing the way things works means changing peoples minds, and that means confronting thier biases and indoctrination, not indulging them. As long as people believe rediculous things about the left, they will believe rediculous things about Bush, war, the environment and anything else.

The fact of the matter is that the people with the puppets are not idiots and pretending they are isnt going to enlighten America one damn bit.

[RaulGroom]

15. To the intellectual class,

The only objective that can possibly be important is aiming to be popular with the intellectual class. Eric Alterman, Todd Gitlin, David Corn, etc. are good writers, but they are blind to the merits of mass action because to them, the only thing that's important is what magazine writers think.

Not much to be done about that, or as my favorite football team's coach recently put it, "ain't nothin' to it but to do it."

Protest is an act, not an appeal to some enlightened society of leftist brahmins.

[EC]

16. Here's the real rub

His arguement is BOGUS:

"Here’s the rub about 1969: As the war became less popular, so did the anti-war movement. It was hated, in fact—by the end of the decade, the most hated entity in America. In the 1969 Gallup poll I just cited, as Harold Meyerson reminded his Washington Post readers in June, “77 percent disapproved of the antiwar demonstrations, which were then at their height.”


The anti-war movement back then WAS the majority, that is why it worked...the disapproval was only of the violent methods, such as blowing up libraries. I don't know where he got these figures, but they are wrong. And of course his figures are from 1969,(on edit: of course he uses the wrong decade to compare, the anti-war movement started in 1968, so yeah, he is right about that decade) when there was a lot of violence, by the 70's the majority were demonstrating.

Also, a demonstration isn't a demonstration unless there is some theater to it, otherwise it just becomes a march (which is military like, so I guess it makes sense that someone that is right leaning would appreciate that more than creativeness). Don't listen to FOOLS SUCH AS THIS....

[Smarmie Doofus]

19. How do you account for Nixon's 61% in 1972....

... against the antiwar George Mc Govern?

[bananas]

21. In 1972 Nixon was anti-war too

he had a "secret plan" to end the war.

[Smarmie Doofus]

22. Actually, the "secret plan" was in 1968.

And well... every one said they were against "war" by '72, Nixon was most emphatically NOT in favor of unilateral pull-out as was McGovern and the antiwar left.

This was VERY clear to the electorate; there was no confusion about the implications of Nixon's victory over McGovern. Nixon et al ridiculed McG for favoring "surrender" and being willing to "beg for peace".

I favor trying to appreciate the reality of situations like this, even when uncomfortable, and the antiwar movement in the 70's never was the majority sentiment in the country, though it represented a substantial segment of the population , esp. in what are now the blue states.

[bananas]

23. that's right - 68 was "secret plan", 72 was "peace with honor"

a year later it was "cut and run".

[yurbud]

28. blowing up libraries? Sound like Cointelpro

[NoAmericanTaliban]

18. Now more mothers & Iraq vets will march

The peace-movement in the 60's & 70's may not have been popular according to the polls, but they did contribute to the US getting out of Vietnam. What Todd leaves out is that one major reason they were not doing good in the polls is because of all the police riots. Just think of the 1968 Democratic convention. Even thought the violence was initiated by the police the peackniks were blamed. Also Nixon & his cronies were labeling the demonstrators as commies, un-american, un-patriotic, ...sound familiar. If vets & mothers march in September the impact can be big. Can you imagine seeing injured vets participating. There will not be one big thing to change the course of the Iraq war, but a number of small steps. This is just one of them. There will be folks there with other agendas & they may become a distraction, but being silent will get you nothing. At least this will counter the Chicken Hawk march on Sept. 11th.

[roseBudd]

25. Fortunately we've all seen Apocalypse Now, Full Metal Jacket, Platoon..

Casualties of War.

Americans aren't as naive about war.

[NJCher]

29. a foolish argument

When the mainstream sees that idiocy, they start considering that the pro-war side may have a point.

I can hardly believe Gitlin would write such a thing! First, it's logically unprovable. Second, it assumes motivation, a "no-no" in academic writing.

Finally, how much of the "mainstream" actually sees the puppets and the bongos? What they mainly see are the hundreds of thousands in the street, not the details.

Gitlin is well known for his criticism of the left. Nothing wrong with self-criticism but let's at least make a valid point. This really isn't worth reading.




Cher