We all know that during Vietnam, veterans returning home were spit on by protestors and called “baby killers.” Right?
But in a recent article in our local weekly paper, a journalist made the case that this rarely if ever happened – and that there is no documentation of its occurrence during the Vietnam War.
Is this guy correct? It’s a little hard to believe, frankly: the image of a protestor spitting on a veteran is one of the enduring images from the '60s. Does anyone have the evidence that could refute this professor’s conclusions?
Mods, I think this has a factual answer and therefore belongs in this forum; however, if it starts veering into Great Debates territory, my apologies in advance, alongside a humble request to move it into Great Debates rather than closing it. Fellow posters, please make this paragraph unnecessary by limiting responses to the factual.
Notice Lembcke’s use of the word documented. What would be the occasion on which such an event was documented? When Lembcke first published his book, I encountered a small number of Vietnam era vets who recalled being spit upon, reacting to the article. In each case, they were alone and their assailant was alone. Going to the police to report “I was spit upon by an unknown person.” was probably not a viable option.
If Lembcke wants to posit that there were no lines of protestors greeting returning ships and planes, with large numbers of spitters showing their contempt, I suspect that he is right.
When he extrapolates that the event “never happened,” I suspect that he is ignoring the situations under which such events would have occurred. The lack of references in letters from GIs is his strongest case, but I suspect that there were events, perhaps rare, that set in motion the “memory” of it occurring. (I also would wonder how often a GI would have recorded such an event and how many letters we already have from Vietnam era GIs in collections that we could actually search.)
I always thought also that a lone attacker, doing that to a soldier, would have resulted in the attacker’s ass being thoroughly kicked; I think that was a reason why those affected soldiers did not report the incidents.
I still think they were a few cases, but not on the level many on the right want to believe.
I was a veteran, in 1969, and was spit at by protesters during an anti war rally, in Blacksburg, Virginia. I was spit at by a pro government spectator, watching as I protested against the war. No one in the anti war movement ever spit at me. I was spit at again, in both the October, 1970, and November, 1970 Moratorium Marches, again on both occasions, by pro government spectators, objecting to my acts as I protested against the war.
The anti war movement was never militantly anti soldier. Many of the earliest organizers of the actual marches were veterans, like me. We didn’t seek to belittle the common soldier for defending his country as he thought was his duty. We did seek to reveal the hypocrisy that allowed the civilian government to use the military to promote its own economic and political goals by pretending that military junketism in southeast Asia was in some way related to American security. The little tin pot dictator we supported was no less a despot that the one we opposed. OUR SUMBICH, as opposed to theirs.
War as a tool of political influence is always a matter of selective historical recall. We seldom bring up our past experiences in protecting the freedoms of the nations we invade. We have good reason not to. Without even considering the morality, or ethical standards of such a practice, it would be entirely to embarrassing to have to consider them in purely objective terms, like say, “Did it work?”
And just for those of you wondering just how long the Iraq war is going to last, consider this little tidbit: My father also served in Viet Nam. That’s another whole generation. So, consider your own children, when you think about it.
The last time this question was asked on GQ, no one could come up with any first hand evidence that spitting on GIs ever happened. It would be terrific if Tom could locate the “Vietnam era vets who recalled being spit upon” so that he could debunk Lembcke. But in the meantime, I’ll go with the evidence and my personal experience as a GI in the U.S. 1968-70 put spitting on vets in the category of life on Mars and Nessie: could be, but I’ll reserve judgement until I see some evidence.
I don’t recall ever hearing or reading any Vietnam veteran (before Triskadecamus just now) who said he had been spat on.
I do recall Lt. Frederick Downs writing in his foreword to The Killing Zone, his memoir of his Vietnam service, about an encounter on a university campus. A student walked up to him, pointed at the hook that had replaced Downs’ hand (he had lost it to a Bouncing Betty land mine) and asked, “Get that in Vietnam?” When Downs responded in the affirmative, the student said, “Serves you right,” and walked away.
Regardless of the truth about “spitting,” I am not yet prepared to discard the accepted version that Vietnam veterans came home to a reception far more hostile than any previous American veterans.
Lembcke’s comment about the absence of a letter “penned by a GI writing home at the time” seems silly to me. The protestors were in America, not in Vietnam. Why would a soldier writing home describe an experience that didn’t happen to him until after he got home?
Thanks for the information, folks! I do think that the qualifications were in the original post: while saying “there’s no documentation of this” doesn’t equal “this didn’t happen,” it does suggest that it didn’t happen regularly.
Trisk, your story is interesting, and it makes me wonder: is there contemporary (i.e., from the late sixties) documentation of people spitting on anti-war protestors? Not that I’m casting aspersions on your story, but it would be interesting if there’s documentation in one direction but not in the other direction; it would cast even more doubt, I’d think, on the peacenik-spitting stories.
Before he became persona non grata in Chicago, journalist Bob Greene wrote an entire book on this very subject. The OP might find it useful.
"The Homecoming: When the Soldiers Returned from Vietnam
by Bob Greene "
It started with a newspaper column in which Greene wondered about the truth of the “hippies spitting on vets” myth. First of, Greene, observed, most of the anti-war protestors he knew were NOT angry at the soldiers themselves (indeed, “bring the boys home” was a common slogan among protestors). Second, what are the odds that a battle-hardened Green Beret would simply let a scrawny, wimpy, longhaired hippie spit on him?
Greene got a lot of responses to that column- and those responses led to this book, which should be available at most good libraries.
Hell, I was spit on when I was walking across campus in my ROTC uniform in the early 80s. It was accompanied by the woman saying “Rape, Murder, Kill!” to me as she walked by. I was stunned.
> It’s a little hard to believe, frankly: the image of a protestor
> spitting on a veteran is one of the enduring images from
> the '60s.
Lots of “enduring images” never happened. We have an image of a gunfight in the old West: Two men face each other separated by about 50 feet on a deserted street, calling out to each other to draw, until finally one does and they both fire. It’s doubtful if this ever happened.
Actually, the ill treatment of veterans came more from the establishment (military and government) than from any hippies. The hippies mostly got us stoned and laid. Both of which were salve for some very bruised souls.
Peace, (and love)
mangeorge
