Right now there’s a relatively modest anti-war protest going on in the Chicago federal plaza. Really nice to see. I’m sure the question has been asked before (heck - I maybe asked it myself) but why do you think such public displays of antiwar sentiment are not more common? What does it take to get the American public into the streets?
Personally, I don’t think the problem is a lack of government interest in getting out. The problem is that we’re in a quagmire, and there’s no good way out until things get under control. We don’t need protests to tell Bush that we want our boys home, I think he wants them home too, so he can declare victory and earn political points.
Apparently, something beyond bad poetry, tribal drums, and devil costumes.
I saw flyers being handed out earlier this week advertising this rally, and adjusted my plans this afternoon to avoid delays caused by what I thought would be a significant march. My mistake.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/custom/newsroom/chi-061005march,1,2077805.story?coll=chi-news-hed
Perhaps if folks were drafted to go to a war they didn’t support there might be more protests. That and a handful of deaths a week compared to the Vietnam War doesn’t make the current one personal enough for the majority of Americans.
Bush wisdom. Dont tax to support it. Dont draft to fight it. Keep the dead bodies off tv.Pretend it is going well.
Things were somewhat jammed up, tho. The police were out in force, having been bussed in. The busses parked along the streets alone were restricting traffic! They marched down Jackson to Dearborn - most of the N/S streets were blocked off.
Their main slogan (while I was there) was People rise up, Bush steps down.
Not bloody likely! I must say, the protesters were very pleasant and polite, thanking the police for their escort, inviting bystanders to join them, and such.
Just seems wierd when over the summer we had multiple huge marches supporting immigrant rights, but the US citizens can’t be troubled to protest a policy which at least a significant number of folks consider immoral and indefensible.
I think you have a good point, gonzomax. It is easy to ignore, especially when weighed against the unpleasantness of being labelled unpatriotic.
Willingness to march is related to depth of commitment to a particular course of action. I went to three major antiwar marches in the fall/winter of 2002/2003, because I was firmly convinced that the proposed Iraq invasion was a Bad Idea and we absolutely shouldn’t do it.
I still think so, but I have no opinion anywhere near as strong about what the right course of action would be now. As I’ve mentioned before, I gave up having an opinion on what we should do in Iraq sometime in the summer of 2003, when it started to become clear that these jokers did not have any postwar policy worth the name.
ISTM that we have clusterfucked ourselves into a situation in Iraq that simply doesn’t have any good choices anymore, and such a realization discourages activism. What would I do, march with a sign that said “US TROOP WITHDRAWAL NOW: PROBABLY SOMEWHAT LESS DISASTROUS THAN THE ALTERNATIVE(S)”? Not worth getting out my bullhorn to make that statement, sorry.
If we look like starting another war that I think is stupid, I’ll hit the streets again to protest it. But in this case, I just don’t really know what I’d be marching for.
That’s because people march for themselves or for people like them. Latinos march against what they see as racism against Latio immigrants; workers march because of labor disputes; college students march against a war they maight be drafted to fight. Who are the antiwar protestors marching for?
Well, speaking for myself, it seemed to me back in 2002/2003 that the folks chiefly at risk were my longtime idols Truth, Justice, and the American Way, y’know?
And I’d go out and march for them again if I felt confident they could be saved or felt I knew what should be done to save them.
Too many presumptions. College students only march in hope of ending a war they might be drafted for? Then what about the returned vets who marched with us? And just by the by, in the Dark Days, being busted at any anti-war march was a very good way to find yourself at the very tippy-tip-top of the Selective Service list.
Some of us did it, and do it, because we give a damn. Just in case you didn’t know that.
“Hell, no! Too old to go!”
I just realized how long it has been since the words “Selective Service” sent a chill down my spine. That quite a few of the Dopers reading this have no idea what those words mean.
Now get off my lawn!
Perhaps **Alessan **was being too general, but I think he/she got it mostly right. If the Iraq war were to escalate and Congress reintriduced the draft, don’t you think college campuses would errupt like crazy (or, like sane)? Sure, some college kids are going to protest even now, but the number of protestors would be much, much higher if there were a draft.
I simply don’t see how my participating in a public protest against the war would have any effect at all. A few years ago, my father-in-law–who is a dyed in-the-wool child of the 60s–asked his children and their spouses (rather condescendingly) why young people aren’t involved in politics. I told him that I follow politics closely; I always vote; I donate to candidates; and I’ve volunteered for political campaigns. By “involved in politics,” he meant “marching in the streets.” It’s a tactic that may have worked in the '60s, but I don’t see it at as an effective tactic now. Someone waving a sign and shouting certainly wouldn’t convince me to change my mind about anything.
The thing is, 'luci and Kimstu, you guys are idealists, and you can’t fill a plaza with idealists - not unless you’re REALLY well organized. Like it or not, you’re a witheringly small minority, and always have been. Most people get actively involved in politics because of some perceived self-interest.
Earlier protests were motivated by a belief that they might make a difference; might affect the decisionmaking process in Washington; that Bush and the GOP Congress actually gave some thought to what We the People wanted our employees to do. Now we know different. Bush has said he’ll “stay the course” even if only his wife and dog still agree with him. The GOP Congress has proven time and again they’ll simply rubberstamp whatever he does. So what’s the point? Best use your energies campaigning to vote the bastards out, ya know?
You’re not seeing war protests because the media ain’t showing them to you. At least, not the local media. Thank goodness for other venues:
Sing it, sister. Here in NYC, I’m happy to say we know how to speak out.
Well, what exactly is the purpose of street protests? What exactly are they supposed to accomplish, besides pissing off commuters?
My understanding is that there’s some sort of protest scheduled for early November. All across the country. A chance for the people to rise up with one, like, voice, man.
So maybe instead of you damn dirty hippies taking over the streets and chanting “Ho Chi Minh is gonna win!” and reliving your youth, it might be more productive to organize in this radical new form of protest. Never been tried before, I know. But get people to show up for the November protest, and it just possibly might be more effective than a couple of hippies with giant puppets. Just saying is all.
And if the November protest doesn’t get enough anti-war people to show up…well, what good is it gonna do for those few anti-war guys to blockade the streets later? You’ve had your, like, chance, man.
Nobody can possibly know for sure what affect reinstating the draft would have on the country, but it would have a massive affect at every level. My WAG is that demonstrations would occur on every college (excluding the service academys, and VMI-type colleges). High schools too. I know it’s been said over-and-over-again but if white middle/upper class families had to send their sons to war we’d never have “liberated” Iraq in the first place.
Because anti-war protests don’t work. They’re a great example of the American ideals of free speech, but they have never changed policy.
For all the protests and turmoil of the 60s, it did absolutely nothing to hasten US involvement in Vietnam. Nixon won by a slim margin in '68 (mostly because Wallace split the Dems) but then, after four more years of the war, Nixon won by a huge landslide in '72. Four more years of a very televised war. And yet the anti-war candidate in 72 still got resoundly defeated (even with the voting age now nationally lowered to 18).
And, IMO, comparing Vietnam to Iraq is not only apples & oranges, its apples & plutonium. The two are not even remotely similar. Vietnam was a shooting war against communism but without a commie 9/11. And, as others have said, no draft makes it immensely different. No draft, plus the fact that, like it or not, those who have chosen a military career overwhelmingly believe in what they’re doing there. Re-enlistments have not only not declined, but have increased.
I think people realize that the best way to ‘end’ the war is t continue at this point. The old saying ‘you broke it, you own it’ rings true for many people, even some of the anti war.