Anti War Demonstrations Then And Now

This evening as I was leaving my office I came across a small anti-war demonstration on East 40th Street. I stood and listened to the woman who was speaking to the small crowd without the benefit of a loudspeaker. I listened for a while but had a depressing sense of deja vu, remembering similar demonstrations against the Viet Nam War. Of course, in the late 60s I was young and naive enough to believe that street demonstrations by tens of thousands of people would help end the war. And to a degree it did — the very fact that on an ongoing basis more and more people of all walks of life, not just students, were showing up in Washington or on Wall Street — the eventual growth of a mass movement helped shorten the war. But the speeches were appalling to listen to. People with little connection to reality yelling slogans that were tired in the 60s. And that's what I heard on East 40th Street Friday evening. The organization behind it, World Can't Wait, is not the kind of group I want to be connected to — anything with Gore Vidal on the board just reeks to me.

Mind you, I believe Bush and Cheney have committed impeachable crimes, and war crimes they should be prosecuted for. Not like I don't agree with these people on that. And I wish that there were tens of thousands in the streets on an ongoing basis protesting just about everything this government is doing. But somehow I feel that today something else is called for. The tactics of the 60s don't make sense today. And the kind of semi-incoherent talk I heard from the speaker does not inspire confidence. I don't know what is called for though. There certainly is power to thousands in the streets that simply going online does not create. The street is public, though increasingly without media coverage it feels as though if there a demonstration in NYC and the media doesn't cover it, did it really happen?

I don't have answers to these questions. With a craven Democratic party, unwilling to call the administration out on its treasonous acts, I find myself uncertain what the correct course of action is. And I'm open to all well reasoned suggestions from those who read here.

Comments

[Moi]

Remember the 1972 election?
Perhaps the Democrats are not "craven", just unwilling to commit suicide.

[Moi]

Remember the 1972 election?
Perhaps the Democrats are not "craven", just unwilling to commit suicide.

[Mark H]

--Welcome back M. I think that in 1972 the Democrats didn't so much commit suicide, it was more of a murder by Republican dirty tricks. -AQJB

[Moi]

Well, Nixon was a dirty mofo and McGovern was in over his head, but I don't believe that any Democrat who advocated unilateral withdrawal from Vietnam could have won. The American electorate just would not accept that.
In the case of Iraq, there's no draft, and the number of combat deaths is much smaller.
And with oil at $95/barrel, there's a reason for the war that Americans can understand.