Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
What the Peace Movement Has Wrought and Opportunities for the Future
Millions of peace activists throughout the United States and the world were unable to prevent the Iraq War from starting and likewise, have been unsuccessful in stopping it. Some might say that the peace movement has been a failure.
However, something has changed among peace activists over these past five years of war. They focus less on George W. Bush and more on expanding the peace agenda through good works and advocacy.
For example, in my town last week peace activists held yet another night of fun and entertainment. This time it was a fundraiser for playground equipment for the newly-established Catholic Worker House whose focus is on poor neighborhood children.
A few weeks before an improv troupe put on a fundraiser for our district's Department of Peace (www.thepeacealliance.org) and the local peace group.
One of our group's latest projects is Iraqi Health Now, which collects medicines and medical supplies to send them to Iraq where doctors need gauze, blood bags antibiotics and syringes. They sent their first box of supplies in December 2006. Last month they sent two semi-trucks full of medicine, supplies, toys and food. This local initiative is now part of Healing the Children.
Peace activists across the nation have also been circulating petitions to support Rep. Dennis Kucinich's bill to establish a U.S. Department of Peace, which calls for providing practical, nonviolent solutions to the problems of domestic and international conflict.
Global warming, energy conservation and the local food movement have also captured the imaginations and volunteer hours of more and more activists.
Of course, peace activists continue to hold weekly street demonstrations as well as observances for the war's fifth anniversary and the death of 4,000th American soldier. Many activists still do these things because they wish to witness for peace, stand up for victims of war, and challenge the government's war policies. They also want their fellow citizens to know there IS and continues to be opposition to the war, especially since the mainstream media tend to shy away from covering peace and justice issues.
If horn honking at public demonstrations is a measure of support for peace, then activists have noticed fewer nasty remarks, scowls and bird flipping salutes. Nevertheless, those people who changed their minds about the war haven't visibly joined the peace movement. Even the numbers of peace activists attending the demonstrations and activities have dwindled considerably.
Instead, local peace groups seem to nurture a "remnant crowd" that has consistently spoken out against war and injustice over the past 40 years. They have created a loving and open community, which allows them to keep the peace and justice agenda alive among themselves and among local citizens.
Unfortunately, neither African Americans nor Hispanics have showed up at peace demonstrations, at least in my town. Muslims and Arabs come out occasionally, but mostly for special events. Young people are barely involved and some college students even admit they don't know a war is going on! (Actually, I find young people are more focused on the environmental movement.)
In other words, the peace activists have been largely composed of white, middle-aged, middle-class people. (In my research, the same types of people comprised the pro-war contingent.)
Fortunately, peace groups' demonstrations, events, letters to the editor, visits to congressional representatives give the peace agenda a PUBLIC face and these efforts have surely contributed to declining support for the war.
In 2003 before the war began, 43 percent of Americans were against the war compared to 66 percent last month, according to CNN opinion poll. That's real progress for peace.
However, Scott Ritter in his 2006 book, Target Iran, articulated another reason for the rise in anti-war sentiment. The former Marine Corps intelligence officer and U.N. weapons inspector claims that Americans like to win wars so when it looks like we're losing, we also lose interest in the war.
This sentiment may have influenced the 2006 election when voters kicked out Republicans who supported the war and took over the majority in both the U.S. House and Senate. In February 2007 negative perceptions of the war were at 67 percent.
However, a year later the momentum changed. A February 2008 Pew Research Center poll found an even split (48-48) among Americans who believe the military effort in Iraq is going well and those who don't. Obviously, the administration that sold this unjust, immoral, unnecessary war is now doing another PR job on Americans by touting the success of the surge.
Unfortunately, they are believing it. And it's no wonder. These days there is precious little mention of the war in the mainstream media and certainly nothing on the death and displacement of Iraqis or the destruction of their country.
During the presidential primaries, candidates largely skirted the subject.
Concerns about the wobbling economy and dire mortgage crisis have superseded concerns about the war even though half a trillion dollars have been sunk into this fiasco.
One other difficult development peace activists have been unable to prevent is the increasingly negative perception of Muslims. The Progressive (February 2008) reported on the dastardly ways Republican presidential candidates tried to capitalize on Americans' fears of Muslims by associating them with terrorism.
Likewise, films like Stop Loss illustrate that we are fomenting dangerous prejudicial feelings in our soldiers who fight in the Middle East. This stuff will spread as frustration over the endless war and the sinking economy increases.
Finally, if the peace movement has one glaring failing, it is in its relationship to the U.S. military. That work seems to have been taken up by military families and Bush supporters in the form of sending care packages and participating in send-off and welcome home ceremonies.
However, peace activists have a real opportunity here to demonstrate that peacemaking is about reconciliation. Returning soldiers need to be reunited with the community as full and participating citizens, says war psychologist Ed Tick in his book War and the Soul.
Tick, who has been working with Vietnam veterans with PTSD since 1978 and is now working with Iraq and Afghanistan War vets, says that soldiers must be forgiven for the acts they have committed on behalf of their nation. Who better than peace activists can do that!
Reconciliation with our Republican neighbors is yet another opportunity for peace activists in order to heal the divisions of our country after this disaster of an administration leaves office. I'm finding that more and more Republicans are expressing their painful embarrassment, utter dismay and sorrowful disorientation at having lost their party to the Bush gang.
So bemoaning and denigrating Bush (especially after he's gone) does little for the real work ahead of us including environmental degradation, global warming, universal health care, housing, restoration of the public domain, post-carbon energy alternatives, education, etc.
Hope and integrity are qualities that characterize peace activists even though many Americans consider these qualities naíve. Let's show them we CAN make a difference!
Olga Bonfiglio is a professor at Kalamazoo College in Kalamazoo, Michigan, and author of Heroes of a Different Stripe: How One Town Responded to the War in Iraq. She has written for several national magazines on the subjects of social justice and religion. Her website is www.OlgaBonfiglio.com. Contact her at olgabonfiglio@yahoo.com.
51 Comments so far
Show AllWe can make a difference when we eschew mild moderation and embrace militance and confrontation.
Let peace begin with me; or to paraphrase Mahatma Gandhi: be the change you want to see in the world. In other words,if you are not a peaceful person working for peace, you are part of the problem and not the solution.
If peace activists can help get Obama elected this time, then indeed they will have made a crucial difference. If the election somehow flips to McCain anyway, then we won't blame the peace activists, but we will have to conclude that the crucial difference didn't get made.
Daniel David:
Obama is not a peace candidate. He's what the industrial-media-military complex has handed us. With Zbigniew Brzezinski behind him, he's very likely a militarist in sheep's clothing. To put hope blindly in the current political system is to continue the militarist agenda our nation has pursued for the last 60 years.
The "peace movement" will have to re-invent itself. Petitions, letter writing, marches and demos are no longer effective. The last president who appears to have been influenced by such actions was Richard Nixon, who admitted it privately after one of the huge Vietnam moratoria (71 or 72) in DC. Since then, they have chosen to ignore such efforts all the while shrinking the legal and civil space available for them. I'm glad the writer's peace community is unified and active and trying to help, but more or something different is required. Bush is just running out the clock. He obviously no longer gives a damn one way or the other. He's had his shot and now lucrative post-Presidential business opportunities await. The rest of them are just angling for soft landings in lobbying or think tanks or academic posts with some corporate board work thrown in. Then there's Cheney. Cheney has actually classified the VP's office's public contact information. He just spent a month of so warning Middle East that the US was intent on attacking Iran. He is clearly paranoid and delusional and he wears these patholgies openly, with pride. General Petraeus, apparently coordinating with the Cheney tendency within the Regime, is blaming the recent inter-Shi'a conflict in Basra and Baghdad on Iran (Nevermind that Iran actually brokered the cease fire). If there is a "peace movement", I suspect, in the near future, it will be called upon to face down the Cheney wing of the ruling elite. If there is a "peace movement" it will have to take sudden, massive and disruptive action vs. the federal government in the event of attacks on Iran. If that doesn't happen and I have little faith that it will, then we will be watching whatever is left of a once (at least partly) free, democratic society disappear in the rear view mirror for good. We''ll just speed away to a timeless present with no past and no future, only endless war, endless economic exploitation, environmental degradation and authoritarian rule.
(Actually, I find young people are more focused on the environmental movement.)
This is understandable. There's been a lot "out there" about global warming and the environment. That's very scary for kids. There's no indications of a war going on, so they feel no threat from it like they do all the horrors they've learned could affect the very earth beneath them from global warming.
As for the Blacks and Mexicans, they're sort of in their own kinds of wars right here.
"During the primaries, candidates largely skirted the issue" of the Iraq war. Really?
I think the initial array of Democratic would-be nominees "skirted" the issue only because there was uniform agreement among them that a solid majority of the potential voting public now saw the invasion as a big mistake, and it was clear that George Bush was going to do absolutely nothing to rectify the catastrophe his policies created before he left office.
Within the continuum of opposition to the war represented by the Democratic field, Barack Obama benefited most from the peace issue by repeatedly pointing out he publicly opposed attacking Saddam from the beginning, even when it was potentially a partisan political risk for him to do so. If the war had been a quick cakewalk resulting in gas at $1.25 a gallon, Obama wouldn't have been welcomed if he tried to join the big victory parade.
Given John McCain's declared hard core position and the high level decision of the GOP's national PR strategists to showcase Iraq as central in the war on terror this fall, don't expect the Democratic ticket to "skirt" the issue of ending the occupation much longer. Unless, of course, the 2008 approach of the DC beltway brain trust tries to mimic the disasterous tactics of the John Kerry/John Edwards campaign.
Bill from Saginaw
The worst thing that peace activists can do is to support yet another pro-war, pro-corporate Democrat. Made that mistake in 2004 ... please don't do it again.
Obama is not a peace candidate.
-- Obama supports expanding the military
-- Obama supports more money for the military for training and equipment.
-- Obama supported the funding for the Iraq war until it was politically convenient to vote no during the campaign.
-- Obama has supported every bloated Pentagon budget.
-- At various times Obama has supported expanding the war to Iran and Pakistan.
-- Obama is all over the place on Iraq. He's opposed the war in 2003, but he was widely quoted during the Dem convention of 2004 of saying there was very little difference between his policy and Bush's. He's supported loophole filled Dem fake-withdrawal plans that would leave some 70,000 or so troops in Iraq. He's promised that we'd still have troops in Iraq in 2012. He uses very slippery language about 'combat brigades' to qualify any withdrawal statements he's made lately.
Obama is not a peace candidate.
What you can expect the Dem ticket to do is to lie and dissemble and say whatever they think will get them elected. But there's certainly no commitment to peace there.
Remember, the Democratic Party has always been a pro-war party. The only exception was a few years at the end of Vietnam when the public forced them to support peace. Otherwise, the Democrats have been a pro-war party for the last 100 years.
The Dems skirted the issue in the primaries because
-- most of them had voted to authorize the war.
-- everyone except Kucinich who was in Congress had been voting to fully fund the war every year.
-- every one of them except Kucinich has opposed every real measure that would end the war. (real measures that would end the war are cutting the funding and impeachment. These are the powers the founders gave Congress for just such an emergency. What the Dems have supported are BS political theater moves that pretend to try to end the war but really won't do anything.)
So, the reason the Dems did indeed skirt the issue is because the Democratic Party is very out of touch with the American people who have long since figured out we need to get out ASAP. But the Dems are funded by the same oil and arms interests as the Republicans, so the money behind the Dems want the war to continue. Thus all the BS from the Dems where they pretend to oppose the war to try to fool voters while protecting the money that allows the war to continue as strongly as they can.
I will say the Peace movement has been very successful. Look at the 70% or so of the American people who now oppose the war and support a quick and complete pullout.
What's broken is our democracy. Our political system does not represent the will of the people, even when 70% agree on an issue like this. We have a fake-opposition party (the Democrats) that effectively block all attempts for change. Since they keep a monopoly on the political system only allowing two parties to exist, and since now both of the two parties are controlled by the same corporate money and since both of the political parties support the war, the political system is unable to reflect the will of the vast majority of Americans who are convinced this war must end.
The peace movement has done all it can. Now we need a democracy movement in this country.
WOW! part of the problem is pretty clear. Corporate media sets the agenda for Americans. The name of Cinthia McKinney and Ralph Nader weren't mentioned in the article and even stranger, I didn't see them in any of the comments. Both McKinney and Nader pledge to stop the war. So why isn't the 'peace movement' behind them? Because they have been marginalized by corporate media and spun as kooks or communists. They aren't allowed to run because they pose a threat to the status quo. The only ones allowed to run are those who will no rock the boat.
Hoa binh
"Millions of peace activists throughout the United States and the world were unable to prevent the Iraq War from starting and likewise, have been unsuccessful in stopping it. Some might say that the peace movement has been a failure."
I'm tired of this nonsense. Frank Capra's It's a Wonderful Life is the basis of how reality really works. The difference between Bedford Falls and Pottersville is the difference between those millions protesting and those same people staying at home and playing video games. Ask yourselves one simple question: Would you really want to live in an alternate reality in which no one took to the streets? As bad as things may seem in this reality, the alternative would be a hundred times worse.
The right-wing WANTS folks to "think" the peace movement is impotent and ineffective, that (besides OiL, of course) is why Iraq was invaded: In Feb. 2003, ten million people protested in 800 cities around the world. In Mar. 2003, the very next month, Iraq was invaded. If Emperor Cheney didn't invade after the Feb. 2003 protests, HE'D look impotent and ineffective!
"Unfortunately, neither African Americans nor Hispanics have showed up at peace demonstrations ... the peace activists have been largely composed of white, middle-aged, middle-class people. (In my research, the same types of people comprised the pro-war contingent.)"
That's because ...
a) People of color are deathly afraid, and rightfully so, of the pigs. Whites don't seem to have a problem getting busted at protests because the pigs don't have a problem with them. Who's world is it?
b) The predominately white left has yet to make people of color feel at home within their ranks: Whenever so-called comrades tell unemployed blacks they're simply not trying hard enough -- or whenever people like me are told to "tone it down" lest that archetypal conservative brother-in-law at the Thanksgiving dinner table be offended (I dare say a Human rights violation is more important than whether a spoiled good ol' boy is alienated by a Rev. Wright-esque statement) -- it splinters the left-wing.
http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=3100
The right, the corporate media and elite policy makers persist in painting "mainstream America" as white and middle class. Even many white liberals cling to the notion that building a mass movement against war necessitates the use of techniques and rhetoric that "don't scare away" middle class whites. This way of thinking is anachronistic. The nation's demographics have changed sharply over the last 40 years, even more dramatically over the last decade, with the result that people of color are fast becoming a majority in the U.S. More importantly, since people of color--war's principal targets--have the greatest interest in holding back the war tide and, thus, activists of color have the most politically developed perspectives on the subject, they are a key source of ideas on how to strengthen work and improve outreach.
"Young people are barely involved and some college students even admit they don't know a war is going on!"
Bring the draft back, that'll do it ... That and having Brad Pitt/Johnny Depp appear on MTV WITH NO SHIRT ON, saying, "End the war, share the wealth!" Three words: Benefit concertS, plural! Whenever the Black Panthers needed bail money, they went to Marlon Brando -- who could afford it thanks to his success as an actor. FUND peace!
The bottom line is -- seeing as how Amy Goodman's Democracy Now! reaches thousands and FOX News' The O'Reilly Factor reaches MILLIONS -- the movement is doing the best it can, all things considered. Free speech ain't just a quality, it's also a QUANTITY. This means it's not just a matter of whether you're allowed to have free speech, it's also a matter of HOW MUCH free speech you have. How does that old expression go? "A lie can run around the world before the truth can get its boots on." Acknowledge this David and Goliath disparity!
As far as the election goes, I'm voting for Nader, but if you're going to submit to Obamamania, just remember what the Co-Chair of the Delaware County (PA) Wage Peace & Justice, Terry Rumsey said, "The day after John Kerry is elected President; I'm reaching for my sign and heading for the streets."
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0806-06.htm
I REPEAT: Terry Rumsey said, "The day after John Kerry is elected President; I'm reaching for my sign and heading for the streets." Simply replace Kerry with Obama and you'll get the idea ...
"Cast your whole vote, not a strip of paper merely, but your whole influence."
--Henry David Thoreau, Civil Disobedience
"Although publicly I continued to ignore the raging antiwar controversy ... I knew, however, that after all the protests and the Moratorium [the nationwide protests of October 1969] American public opinion would be seriously divided by any military escalation of the war."
--The Nixon Memoirs
"The ultimate solution is not with the people on top. The ultimate solution is for people in the streets to create an atmosphere for people on top to be accountable."
--Professor Howard Zinn, author of A People's History of the United States
"...soldiers must be forgiven for the acts they have committed on behalf of their nation."
I'll be happy to forgive any soldier who asks forgiveness and acknowledges what they have done, as the Winter Soldiers have. To merely forgive and forget condones the war and encourages them to believe they have done something good. That's nonsense--they did it out of naivete or greed. And certainly not on my behalf.
"I'll be happy to forgive any soldier who asks forgiveness and acknowledges what they have done ... To merely forgive and forget condones the war and encourages them to believe they have done something good ... They did it out of naivete ..."
AMEN, AMEN, AMEN!
"He was deceived by a lie -- we all were. It appears that the Chancellor was behind everything, including the war."
--Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/0211-02.htm
"... huddled with aides at the White House, President Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair were not sure there was enough evidence to convince the Security Council. Without the council's explicit authorization, their plans for an invasion to depose Saddam Hussein could be difficult to defend under international law. Bush proposed an alternative: paint a U.S. spy plane in United Nations colors and see if that didn't tempt Hussein's forces to shoot at it. In any case, he said, the war was 'penciled in' for March 10 and the United States would go ahead with or without a second U.N. resolution. Blair replied that he was 'solidly with' the president."
--The Los Angeles Times, Saturday, February 11th, 2006
There is no "peace movement," not even a "peace mob"... There's nothing but a few people waving signs on street corners.
"Honk for Peace."
You might as well say "Honk for Futility."
Obama and Clinton have voted to fund the war in Iraq exactly the same number of times as John McCain, which is to say, every time it ever came up for a vote.
Public opinion is almost completely dominated by media conglomerates, and until those monsters are destroyed, the "peace movement" is nothing but a little noise on the blogs and a few pitiful signs on street corners.
Olga wrote in part
"So bemoaning and denigrating Bush (especially after he's gone) does little for the real work ahead of us including environmental degradation, global warming, universal health care, housing, restoration of the public domain, post-carbon energy alternatives, education, etc."
That may be true, but I sincerely hope that Bush/Cheney et. al. will be arrested and tried for high crimes and misdemeanors.
Excuse me - last post from me was for previous article - mea culpa
An anemic attitude is seen by this author to be some sort of sign of strength, which it is definitely not. I see this all the time amongst the principally elderly middle class local activists, who oftentimes will berate others who are not quite the turn the other cheek types as themselves for supposedly turning off people.
Got it just today on a vigil outside a weapons bizarre, and just seconds after being asked to not carry a sign that read 'USA, how many kids have you killed today?' and putting it away just to be nice to my liberal co-protester. Within seconds, the person who asked me to put my sign away and not to be so confrontatinal got a Right Wing passerby telling him to go fug himself. Too funny for words.
Peace activists should make every effort to avoid the caricatures to which most people are so partial in this country.
The activists belong to a tradition that includes some of the greatest thinkers and poets that the world has known. They should take pride from that and never submit to anyone else's characterization of them.
Easy to say-- right? So how does one do it? Well, first, by knowing the caricatures and not being predictable.
With orginality. While fully utilizing their superior powers of organization due to their conviction.
Voices crying in the wilderness.
The only way to achieve peace is to punish those who profit from war. Tax them out of existence. Cut off their hands. Tar and feather them. You have to break the connection between war and profit.
But that would mean getting rid of capitalism. The pigs wouldn't be happy about that, would they? Oh, no! Gorging is their favorite pastime.
P.S. Would getting rid of religion help? Dangerous Creation.
Well said bottle.
I just learned that Mike Gravel is running for pres. as a Libertarian. http://antiwar.com/radio/2008/04/07/mike-gravel/
"(I dare say a Human rights violation is more important than whether a spoiled good ol' boy is alienated by a Rev. Wright-esque statement)"
Good ol' boy? Human rights violation? If you can't recognize racism, bigotry, hate filled race bashing and cabalistic conspiracy theories as important, what can I say. That don't you know what a human rights violation is? What the people that perpetrate them are like? How they start?
"I'll be happy to forgive any soldier who asks forgiveness and acknowledges what they have done"
Where exactly did you recieve the power to forgive? Not that any of these serving need anything from you and certainly not forgiveness. Sometimes I despair at the arrogance and naieve platitudes evinced by some.
"only way to achieve peace is to punish those who profit from war. Tax them out of existence. Cut off their hands. Tar and feather them."
Oh good, I'm glad we are going to solve things peacefully. Look at what you just said. By the way, I'd be careful while you're doing that, someone might get the idea you aren't too peaceful.
This kind of thing sets the whole agenda back. Like the idiots at the Marine recruiting office in Berekley. Maybe it was very emotionally satisfying for them, but it hurt us all. People look at things like that and think every one that favors peaceful practices is nuts.
I wish I could find it online, but there's this adbusters two panel photo gag: The first panel is a picture of a white suburban family sitting in front of a wide screen TV. Underneath is the caption, "How we view the war."
The second panel has an Iraqi family sitting amidst a bombed out shack, peering through a hole in the wall. Underneath is the caption, "How they view the war."
The reason why you'd call Rev. Wright "hate filled" and call those counterrecruitment protesters in Berekley "idiots" is because it's clear you view the war on TV with popcorn. Those of us (black, white, green, purple with pink pokadots) with a li'l thang called EMPATHY will feel the pain of those who suffer from Amerikkka's policies. As a result, we will occasionally lose our temper and say stuff like, "tar and feather them." DEAL WITH IT. Here, read this ...
http://www.blackcommentator.com/111/111_moral_universe.html
"Blacks and whites see the world from opposite ends of American Manifest Destiny, which is at the very core of the white national personality, worldview, and sense of self. Like a Black Hole, Manifest Destiny exerts a near-irresistible pull on white Americans, distorting history and even the near-past beyond recognition. Realities are made invisible, even as they unfold in plain sight."
--Harvard professors Michael C. Dawson and Lawrence Bobo
"Not that any of these [soldiers] serving need anything from you and certainly not forgiveness. Sometimes I despair at the arrogance and naieve platitudes evinced by some."
Really? Good thing you weren't a judge at Nuremberg! So I suppose Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay means nothing to you? What about the use of phosphorus in Fallujah? What about all those whom the CIA "renditioned" ...
http://www.commondreams.org/news2005/1215-11.htm
... if you don't think the MANY evil deeds of the military-industrial complex need forgiving, you're not Human.
I wouldn't mind an American equivalent of South Africa's Truth and Reconciliation Commission ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truth_and_Reconciliation_Commission_(South_Africa)
... whereby Emperor Cheney and Dubya could escape the shower room of HBO's Oz by confessing and apologizing just as those behind Apartheid did. Not because I give a three-legged rat's ass whether such a soft approach would appeal to the likes of this "Thomas More" person, but because that's the kind of guy I am.
Someone called "SKF" said earlier, "I sincerely hope that Bush/Cheney et. al. will be arrested and tried for high crimes and misdemeanors." I wouldn't mind that either, but let this "Thomas More" person tell it, there's nothing more that needs to be done. Rev. Wright must've been seeing things because everything's just hunky-dory, huh? Oy vey, how masochistic do THEY expect US to be ..?
"The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppose."
--Frederick Douglass
We can't afford to buy our Congress - the rich own them bastards so we must scare them into serving the people. We are not mad enough yet.
What happened to the retired professor who walked to Washington DC to push for the impeachment of Dick Cheney? Perhaps that should be the foundational level upon which future protests are made?
Truth is a set of ideas that almost anyone can see.
First, the peace movement needs to move from the peace churches and from not a few mainline churches to the evangelical megachurches. It's hard to imagine people not understanding "All who live by the sword shall surely die by the sword", but they do, by the millions.
Dr. Martin Luther King said a dangerous thing when he spoke out against the Indochina conflict. We don't really know if it contributed to his assassination a year later. We do know that after the riots there was no legacy of a black antiwar / pro justice movement. Many black folk saw the military as a bastion of tolerance. 50,000 or more disabilities later, guess what? We can grab Dr. King's text off the shelf and again read that black men and women are doing more of the share of suffering for the war.
kudos Saab, it's about time we had a US Truth & Reconciliation Commission, if just so we can find out what's really been going on under the radar. Maybe seizure of all illegal war profits too. It'll probably happen right after Cheney hands Satan an ice cream cone, though. I do have to say that the peace movement sounds pretty strong in downtown SF today- Free Tibet Now!!
As long as everyone focuses on Bush, and pays no attention to the men behind the curtain, the regressives will ALWAYS win. They know us all too well and we fall for it every time
We are not really getting anywhere sending a few supplies when our troops are still bombing and killing innocent people by the thousands.
We need to elect an entirely new Congress that will uphold the Constitution and value humanity.
Hi Fellow Thoughtful, Compassionate and Peaceful People,
I have been active in the peace movement for many years but more focused since before the War in Iraq. I am very disappointed by the lack of most Americans who just don't seem to care enough or believe in themselves enough to get involved in taking back this government from the power hungry people in charge. I keep on trying to feel optimistic as the next election approaches hoping that people have gotten so feedup that positive action will come about. The turnout by Democrats across the country in the primaries have been inspirational and this could be the start of people getting involved. Maybe things have to get so bad that people can't take it anymore, before action happens.
I have come to think that the money interests have even more power and influence than we can possibly imagine and that until we the people get fully involved and demand change, nothing positive will ever happen. By being involved I mean: voting, boycotting products/companies, committing to going green, stop paying taxes, creating new froms of protest and most important of all, finding our own inner peace. War and protest that is angry and hateful will never ever create peace.
Joseph Bernard, Ph.D.
www.peace-together.com
www.explorelifeblog.com
Jacob,
The movement is bigger than you think...it just doesn't make the media....
There is a way for Congress to end the Bush/McCain war in Iraq NOW. Military Families Speak Out is launching a campaign this week to call on Senators who claim to oppose the war in Iraq - including Senators Clinton and Obama --to lead and sustain a filibuster that will prevent the Senate from passing President Bush's latest funding request to continue the war in Iraq.
Senator Hillary Clinton -- (202) 224-4451
Senator Barack Obama -- (202) 224-2854
Senate Switchboard -- (800) 828-0498
Go here to sign the petition:
http://www.mfso.org
Call Senator Clinton, Senator Obama and your own two Senators and tell them you want them to filibuster the war spending bill.
Military Families Speak Out
mfso@mfso.org
http://www.mfso.org
They wouldn't even need a majority of their colleagues to back them up -- all they need is 40 Senators .
If Senator Clinton and Senator Obama aren't willing to use the power they have now as U.S. Senators to end the war, what makes anyone think they will exercise bold leadership on January 20, 2009? If they fail to take action to stop funding the war that is killing our troops and the Iraqi people, we can only conclude that when their campaigns talk about ending the war, they are just using the memory of the fallen, the sacrifices of our troops, and the grief and pain of our families, for political gain.
No one wants this war; it would be great to just be able to pull up stakes and get out. But we simply cannot. Millions will be massacred.
We are making such progress. You just are never, ever told of this in the media. Why don't they interview people who have actually been there? Because it would simply undermine your "Bush Hating, America Hating Agenda", that's why, and you know it. You'd rather see defeat over anything that would let our president be able to say, "We made the right decision."
How many of you bleading hearts are actually veterans...what have YOU sacrificed....how have you helped?
As one who has been part of the solution vice part of the problems, I wonder how you can stand yourselves. All you do is bitch and bitch and bitch.
Don't like it in My United States? Move to France; they'll take you, that's for sure, by golly.....
Millions massacarred? You couldn't care less. Call in your 'coulselling teams' for these ruthless animals they call terrorists.
If a suicide bomber blew up a fruit market where one of your family was buying pears, would you still pity them? Time to wise up.....
You all bore me to tears.....
Edited for being troll food and stupid.
But "MY United States" dude? C'mon now...
-matti
This edit feature make matti crazy.
Crap. Have I actually FED a troll?
The Horror...
The Horror...
-matti.
But my basic theory still holds.
The kind of people that are so far down the rabbit-hole of TeleCulture that they are STILL spouting banjoman's kind of nonsense -and they are legion- will simply NOT RESPOND to polite discourse.
They need a physical shock, in whatever form, to yank them from their Hive-Mind precipice and throw them back into the World.
THEN they can be reasoned with, not before.
People that have lost their minds CANNOT be persuaded by logic or compassion, those are functions of the mind.
But they CAN be assisted in retreiving their minds from whever they have gone.
Agree/Disagree?
It's just a theory.
-matti.
Let me see if I have this right. China forcefully puts down demonstrations on its own territory, kills hundreds, and thousands protest in San Francisco. The US invades a country illegally and kills one million people but nobody protests at all. Self serving? You bet. Americans are truly screwed up people. We care more about baby seals than Iraqi babies, even though Iraqi babies have no beards.
Peaceful actions are an integral part of Green lifeways. We cannot change the world but we can change ourselves and that is our responsibility.
The Ron Paul rEVOLution is the US Peace movement in that it has united three time Nader voters like myself with GOP, Ex-Greens, Ex-Democrats, Libertarians and Independents.
The way Ron Paul sees it, Bush has destroyed the GOP, McCain is a MSM Straw man (with a policy that is flawed and why RP will not conceed to McCain).
The election is offering Americans 4 liberal candidates (McCain is considered a RINO..he and Hillary are more alike than not...Obama has no recod to compare really just words (not much). Clinton, McCain, Obama and Nader..4 liberal choices..oh Gish MC KINNEY Green Party...that makes FIVE...so liberals have allot to choose...but what do conservatives have? Well Ron Paul...who is the only candidate that has a plan for peace by not being a dictator or the world.
… now onto this "banjoman" character …
"How many of you bleading hearts are actually veterans … Don't like it in My United States? Move to France"
Love it or leave it, huh? Y'know, another vet once said that before he wised up — his name is RON KOVAC ..!
http://course1.winona.edu/pjohnson/h140/born.htm
"No one wants this war; it would be great to just be able to pull up stakes and get out. But we simply cannot. Millions will be massacred.
We are making such progress. You just are never, ever told of this in the media."
a) Emperor Cheney wanted this war …
http://www.counterpunch.org/cohn07302003.html
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/0211-02.htm
"… huddled with aides at the White House, President Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair were not sure there was enough evidence to convince the Security Council. Without the council's explicit authorization, their plans for an invasion to depose Saddam Hussein could be difficult to defend under international law. Bush proposed an alternative: paint a U.S. spy plane in United Nations colors and see if that didn't tempt Hussein's forces to shoot at it. In any case, he said, the war was 'penciled in' for March 10 and the United States would go ahead with or without a second U.N. resolution. Blair replied that he was 'solidly with' the president."
–The Los Angeles Times, Saturday, February 11th, 2006
b) we ARE CONstantly told by the handful of complicit corporations who own every MASS media outlet there is that everything's supposedly oakley dokley over there …
http://www.fair.org/index.php
Look at the dandy there: Mister Banjo
Doesn't he put on airs?
"Millions massacarred? You couldn't care less. Call in your 'coulselling teams' for these ruthless animals they call terrorists. If a suicide bomber blew up a fruit market where one of your family was buying pears, would you still pity them?"
So the ONLY responce is to blow something up or blow someone away? Sounds like YOU'RE the one who doesn't care about millions being massacared! Go watch wrestling or play some paintball and squeeze all that aggression out of your system, but don't drag the rest of the world into your madness.
Las Vegas odds — basic statistics dictate that the chances of you dying from suicide means YOU are a greater danger to YOURSELF than any terrorist. Ask a statistician, the odds of you dying of poverty or police brutality is greater than the odds of you being blown up at a fruit market — so why aren't you all hot and bothered over poverty and police brutality?
I'm all for CATCHING (NOT killing, I'm anti-death penalty, NON-lethal weapons, if that, all the way) terrorists, but that's not a top priority. Neither is impressing the likes of you, banjo. Besides, if the CIA hadn't put Saddam Hussein in power in the early '60s …
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Zepezauer_Mark/Iraq_Boomerang.html
… and if the CIA hadn't dealt with Osama bin Laden in the '80s …
http://thirdworldtraveler.com/Afghanistan/Afghanistan_CIA_Taliban.html
… you wouldn't have anyone to play GI Joe with! Again, find a morally superior way of getting that rush!
Anger is good when it comes from thoughts of real injustice and targeted correctly. Unfortunately, most Americans only become angry when someone gets in the way of their acquisitions. Violence as a mode of mediating conflicts is an anachronism, continuing to use it is nonsensical and imperiling the survival and well-being of every single human being on the planet. If that is not something to oppose, then there is no reason for doing anything. Obama or Clinton, neither is anti-war, but the Republicans are so radically aggressive, our survival may depend on electing the Democratic nominee. I hate to make the lesser-of-two-evil argument, but...
A great article from Olga. Balanced, attempting to see all the various and complex aspects to the ongoing peace movement in the U.S. Social activism seems to be a culturally based phenomenon: If you are white, older, have enough education and are open to being disappointed (read: carry forthright idealism), not to mention have the time ... well, then you have to decide to act or sit on your hands in frustration.
Olga's article gives some much needed perspective without all the hand-wringing.
"The numbers of peace activists attending the demonstrations and activities have dwindled considerably." Why have our numbers dwindled? In February 2003, 200,000 people marched in San Francisco. And then, in Civic Center Park, we were treated to THREE HOURS OF SPEECHES! Instead of speeches WE NEED ORGANIZING. Imagine if those 200.000 people had been asked to TALK to their neighbors. All the people from South Berkeley here, and all the people from the Haight Ashberry there. And people who want to do media - talk radio, letters to the editor, blogging, over there. People who want to leaflet downtown, by the statue. Go around the circle and get some ideas and plans; name a time and place for a future meeting, and form work teams and affinity groups. Our motto. A meeting or a demonstration is never finished until EVERYONE LEAVES WITH A JOB TO DO AND SOMEONE TO DO IT WITH.
We live in a Military - Industrial - entertainment complex. And the entertainment, propaganda industry is owned by the same few billionaires who control the rest of the economy. The average American watches 4 hours of TV a day. Not only do we get our ideas from the media but, worse, we are losing our social skills. If Americans seem politically passive it is primarily because we don't know how to talk to each other in groups. No one can be a social activist by themselves. When activists learn how to help people create and sustain human communication, and make shorter and fewer speeches, THEN we will have a growing movement. We cannot change the entertainment - passivity complex by imitating it.
"The numbers of peace activists attending the demonstrations and activities have dwindled considerably." Why have our numbers dwindled? In February 2003, 200,000 people marched in San Francisco. And then, in Civic Center Park, we were treated to THREE HOURS OF SPEECHES! Instead of speeches WE NEED ORGANIZING. Imagine if those 200.000 people had been asked to TALK to their neighbors. All the people from South Berkeley here, and all the people from the Haight Ashberry there. And people who want to do media - talk radio, letters to the editor, blogging, over there. People who want to leaflet downtown, by the statue. Go around the circle and get some ideas and plans; name a time and place for a future meeting, and form work teams and affinity groups. Our motto. A meeting or a demonstration is never finished until EVERYONE LEAVES WITH A JOB TO DO AND SOMEONE TO DO IT WITH.
We live in a Military - Industrial - entertainment complex. And the entertainment, propaganda industry is owned by the same few billionaires who control the rest of the economy. The average American watches 4 hours of TV a day. Not only do we get our ideas from the media but, worse, we are losing our social skills. If Americans seem politically passive it is primarily because we don't know how to talk to each other in groups. No one can be a social activist by themselves. When activists learn how to help people create and sustain human communication, and make shorter and fewer speeches, THEN we will have a growing movement. We cannot change the entertainment - passivity complex by imitating it.
"The numbers of peace activists attending the demonstrations and activities have dwindled considerably." Why have our numbers dwindled? In February 2003, 200,000 people marched in San Francisco. And then, in Civic Center Park, we were treated to THREE HOURS OF SPEECHES! Instead of speeches WE NEED ORGANIZING. Imagine if those 200.000 people had been asked to TALK to their neighbors. All the people from South Berkeley here, and all the people from the Haight Ashberry there. And people who want to do media - talk radio, letters to the editor, blogging, over there. People who want to leaflet downtown, by the statue. Go around the circle and get some ideas and plans; name a time and place for a future meeting, and form work teams and affinity groups. Our motto. A meeting or a demonstration is never finished until EVERYONE LEAVES WITH A JOB TO DO AND SOMEONE TO DO IT WITH.
We live in a Military - Industrial - entertainment complex. And the entertainment, propaganda industry is owned by the same few billionaires who control the rest of the economy. The average American watches 4 hours of TV a day. Not only do we get our ideas from the media but, worse, we are losing our social skills. If Americans seem politically passive it is primarily because we don't know how to talk to each other in groups. No one can be a social activist by themselves. When activists learn how to help people create and sustain human communication, and make shorter and fewer speeches, THEN we will have a growing movement. We cannot change the entertainment - passivity complex by imitating it.
the american public isn't concerned about the atrocities committed in their name overseas, - palestine, iraq, afghanistan- if anything they might be a little peeved over the financial cost of the war. i wonder what the german public was feeling in 1938......
1 a small percentage of americans are participating in the war effort (no draft). therefore, many americans are disconnected from the negative consequences of the war. however, the MIC is spread out over every congressional district. hence many americans concerned about their economic welfare (jobs) see the positive (in their minds) effects of war (boeing etc..).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_US_defense_contractors
2.americans are preoccupied w/ consumer culture.
3.about 50% of americans who voted last round, voted for bush (let's even take malfunctioning voting machines and long lines into consideration). america is america because a large percentage of the population is nationalistic (patriotic) and bound by fear of uncertainty.
3. 1 in 4 or 5 americans is functionally illiterate, hence the local papers publish stories at a 6th grade reading level (although i've heard chomsky say he could summarize geoploitics into a 5 minute presentation that an 8 yr old could comprehend)
if the general population doesn't have critical thinking skills, it's gonna be difficult to communicate with them...
4. progressives/left of center voters comprise a smaller portion of the electorate then we imagine. look at nader's #'s in 96,00,04 and look at kucinich's numbers in 04,08. maybe we make up 10% of the voting population total. it's painfully real when one listens to clinton's and obama's tv ads in PA (i listened to them today on NPR - zero content - except obama wants to create a movement and clinton vacationed in scranton as a child).
i see the peace movement as a fixture in the larger counter culture. it's intricately tied w/ other social movements (voluntary simplicity, alternative political parties, multiculturalism, tolerance of divergent lifestyles - all ideas i embrace). it's part of the counter culture b/c the ideas espoused are counter to the prevailing mores. remember there is a very powerful prevailing culture. pacifists and progressives at this point are but a fraction of the overall left-center-right political culture.
i spent the day grading writing equivalency exams of children from a large southern state. the question, what do you want to be when you grow up? what career you would choose. amongst the boys (not to be sexist) the standard answers dr, lawyer, athletic star etc... what struck me was the amount of children (mostly boys - all the kids were about 13) who wanted to be a soldier or a police officer (huge #, like 35-40%). yes MSM feeds these conceptions but parents, friends and relatives also hold these views; and they're reflected in the children's responses, it's frightening. the kids make comments like they want to kill terrorists, they want to fight to protect their country. the military is a way out (in the minds of the rural and urban poor). i'm certain the kids in the hitler youth movement had similar ideas in their noggins.
until these entrenched values, which have evolved over 400 years of anglo conquest, (rape, pillage, conquest, kill, god, king, country) are thrown into the dustbin of history, america is doomed to be the imperial power it was groomed to be.... this will take time, whether the change emerges from the domestic forces of change or is superimposed on america by an occupying power that has to reeducate americans.
i've exercised my 1st amendment rights in the name of peace for 22 years. 2 years ago i demonstrated in fayetteville, this year in iowa - for 15 years i participated in the peace movement in olympia. my siblings in other states also have demonstrated against this war. i've noticed you'll find dissident opinions in communities that foster free speech (university/college towns) and in large urban areas. the rest of america (as reflected in the contentious red/blue - purple map of the 2004 election) is still watching american idol and reruns of cops.
...peace....
I stopped going to anti-war/peace rallies/protests because:
Incredibly poor speakers
Horrible music
Lack of focus
Much too long, esp. in cold weather
No real effect on politicians (which matters)
Unpeaceful signage (which matters)
Lack of respect
Ultimately, all that matters is that more people start thinking outside of the box and reject the two-party system; vote only for REAL anti-war/peace candidates, which is def. NOT Barack Obama!! AND in all elections, not just the "president" (abolish the presidency & the U.S. senate, adopt a multi-party scandanivian style parliamentary system)