What was the impact of the anti-war movement of the late 1960's and early 1970's?
Respond to this post with your probing questions, observations, and/or analysis of the impact that the anti-war movement had in the United States. Consider both short and long term impact and the different levels of impact the movement had (response to veterans, pressure on government policy, change in culture/respect for authority, etc).
The purpose here is to continue a discussion that was cut short in class. You don't need to write a whole essay, just share a comment, question, or response to a classmates' question that is interesting to you. Remember to read what your classmates have written to avoid repeating earlier ideas and to make this a dialogue rather than a list of responses!
I think that the anti-war movement created unity among the people in the 60's and 70's. We were shown many different groups of people that had the common beliefs, from the "hippies" to religious people who all believed that war was not the answer. My question is how did the government respond to all of the people's beliefs?
ReplyDeleteI agree with Jackie that the anti-war movement provided the country with a sense of unity that we didn't have earlier when all the american people were conflicted with whether or not we should go to war or not. My question is how long did it take the government to realize that people were skipping out on the draft by staying in school? Another question I have is the men that burned their draft cards how long would their jail sentence have been?
ReplyDeleteI think that war isn't needed. I think there are other ways we can deal with our conflicts. Killing people from the country we are having conflict with have nothing to do with the President or ruler of that particular country who make all the decisions. We have a say in the matter, but why bother fighting something that is really never going to get resolved? I think war is not a real tool that should be used.
ReplyDeleteIf there was as much exposure to the war from the media in WWII, would there be a same kind of anti war movement? The media played a big role in portraying the war as bad and just an extra pain that isn't necessary for the american people. When there are people dying in anyway there will be people who are against it and the reality of the media just gave them more reasons for the anti war movement
ReplyDeleteThe anti-war effort in the 1960's was different than what people in the United States have seen in the past. I think that it helped show our democratic government because the people were letting the country know that the war in Vietnam was a mistake. The media helped this along, by providing images that portrayed the war as a bad thing. As much as we can all say the war is bad from viewing photos and such, are we really one to say that if we haven't been soldiers actually experiencing the war?
ReplyDeleteI think that the anti-war movement has changed our society completely. Before the anti-war movement people respected authority, and the 1960's was a time where people rebelled. Since then our society hasn't respected authority the same. People no longer supported war just for the mere fact that they were supposed to support their country. Not only has our society lost respect for authority, but they have lost respect for our soldiers. During the World Wars soldiers were greeted with huge celebrations and they were said to be heroes. This doesn't happen anymore since people have spoken out against the war.
ReplyDeleteI think that the anti war movement was really a time of acceptance. I think that even before we had reporters and cameramen going into the battlefield, we knew what was happening in war, we just did not want to accept it. People knew family and friends that had served in the wars, so they definately had a taste of what was going on. So why didn't we just accept it back then? Why did we wait until it became apart of everyday life to try to stop it? I feel that we only tried to stop it because we were finally having to face what soldiers faced everyday. Either we are a very selfish country that only tried to stop war because it thrown in our faces by the media, or maybe seeing really is believing, and we just didn't understand war yet...
ReplyDeleteI believe that the anti war movement was a good thing to a point but overall it only hurt America in the long run. I believe that the people who were against the war should have the right to express their feelings but personally attacking soldiers that have returned is going to far. The people who were against the war mainly had never experienced what was going on in Vietnam and didn't understand how it was affecting the soldiers. That movement then making it so soldiers were ashamed and didn't have support when they got home i think is wrong.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the anti war movement split the american citizens against the government. Vietnam was the first time that the people were not supporting the war back at home. Vietnam was also the first war that had the media constantly sending pictures back to the states. These pictures were the first thing that showed the true colors of war. The media showed the public what was going on which started the movement against the war. Once the movement started the american public was completely against anything the government did to support the war.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Terry that having the soldiers feel no support when they got home is wrong, but also what happened in Vietnam wasn't the best thing either. I don't think that it is something that they should necessarily be proud of, and the Anti-War Movement expressed their feelings in regard to that. What I don't understand is why we had to go to war in the first place and cause such a huge mess that is still affecting us all today. Was there another possibility to end the war and make it so there were not as many deaths throughout the war? Is there a reason as to why we did what we did in such a horrifying/terrible way?
ReplyDeleteI think that this changed the way America is as a whole. We now question our government without even thinking it over and that never happened before. Now the public will do anything it can to make sure its government is doing what it should be doing. This is all because of the media. The media reported everything it could no matter if it was bad or if it was good. They even sent photos home of things that no one would have ever thought could have because you never saw photos of bad things during the war because you wanted every one to support the goverment and if they saw the bad it would be bad for the governemt. America was never the same after this because people now can speak out and not be traitors and not have to worry about being singaled out by their peers and government. America was never the same after this era.
ReplyDeleteI agree with terry on this one. The hippies were joining together, doing drugs and all of this "Love and peace stuff", and they were trying to "end the war" through these riots and forms of rebellion. Their attacks that were aimed towards the government, especially the soldiers that were coming home were completely disturbing. First of all: at time of war, you should NOT attack our own soldiers who are fighting for our country. Second of all, you shouldn't rebel against the government at time of war. These are both things that these hippies did, and I completely disagree with it. And going to the monks who burned themselves in public, I believe they were just a bunch of crazy people who committed mass suicides in order to try and get people's attentions. Did this help them? Did this help others? No. It only killed themselves, and no one really cared about them. Sure, it helped bring some attention especially to Macnamara when he saw the guy burning to death with his child... But, long story short: hippies were a bad thing to this country, and whenever I hear or see anything about modern hippies, I look at it in disgust.
ReplyDeletethe impact on the Anti War movent during the vietnam conflict caused many different things. One of those things was to keep that question fresh in the mind of all soilders in the war or who were drafted "Why am i in or going to be in this war? and what are we fighting for?" these questions were always in the minds of americans during the time and without the anti war movement that idea would not be as prevelant in soilders fighting. so i guess you could say it was both a good and bad thing that the anti war movment exsisted the good being that it made the government question every little decision during the war and without the movement the government could do anything they wanted with little repocussions. but the bad part of the movement was how far some of these people went to spitting on veterans returning from war was just not only rude and repulsive but almost unamerican i mean that because no matter if you support the war or not none of the soilders fighting wanted to be there they were forced to be there and no matter what you should help support the soilders returning from the front lines and help them get back into society without having to live with just stepping foot in vietnam for the rest of there lives i think that this caused more post tramatic stress disorder than would've been seen if the anti war movement never exsisted.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Ryan that the movement made the United States question their decisions during the war, but even further I think it made them question the war itself and whether we should be fighting it or not. I think that the anti war movement definitely influenced America's withdrawal from the war. This was in a way a good thing because the war was incredibly dangerous and was costing many American lives fighting for a country that was not our own. It also contributed to us losing the war though because our withdrawal caused the communists to win.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the movements were neither completel destructive nor completely productive for Americans. People like musicians expressed their thoughts through music and people protested out against war peacefully and they got to express their opinions which was good. Because, at the time people were angry and it was better for them to express their feelings through songs and protests then through violent terms. Some people did choose violent terms however like assaulting soldiers when they came back hom but I believe it was only because they didn't understand the war and blamed the soldiers for the war. Just because they didn't support the war didn't mean they shouldn't have supported the soldiers. One thing that really disturbed me however was when I learned that men were burning themselves to get attention by the government. I think that forms of protest like that were extreme but necessary to get the attention of the government as sad as that is. I just wonder what other severe actions were taken to prove points to the government.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Jess that our society has been openly rebellious since the anti-war movement. I think the movement divided our country. It also showed the unsettling feelings that a lot of Americans had regarding the war in Vietnam. The attitude toward war significantly changed in the U.S. after Vietnam. Thanks to the anti-war movement it is now common to speak out against our government and wars.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Adam in the idea that the media and images that were publicized had a huge impact on the anti-war movement. People that weren't directly in the scene of the war were being exposed to brutal pictures of what was going on. The pictures that were shown in class led me to believe this. For example the girl running down the street after being burned, or the faces of the young innocent soldiers fighting. These images make people realize how cruel war really is and without the media releasing these images, no one would really understand how drastic war actually is and the majority of people may not be as opposed to it.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the anti war movement in America was both good and bad for America. The good thing about it that it brought all the people who were into "peace" together, and like jake said "unifying" a large group of Americans bringing our country together, and not letting us get split apart by war. But as Terry said, it may have gone too far with not recognizing Americans who served in the war, because everything they had sacrificed and went through and to come home with no recognition is very bad, and they need recognition to give them some support to show them they have done something right, and not be put down emotionally when most soldiers were already mentally affected by war as it was.
ReplyDeleteJust another question..Were there any other big events part of the anti war movement?
The anti-war movement was huge during the 60's and 70's, and a lot of people protested the war. This was pretty important, and I feel that as much as it provided unity among the country like Jackie had said, I feel that it also persuaded people who had viewed war as something necessary to be volatile. To think that war was the answer for everything was something people always believed in, but if it were them who were going to war, they'd think that war wasn't the answer either. I just want to know, why is it that we seem to make assumptions about another country and assume that it's a threat against us? Do we feel so paranoid that we have to imagine an attack as an excuse to push us into a war?
ReplyDeleteI agree that the horrible treatment of soldiers coming home wasn't good at all and our soldiers would have surely been better if we had supported them. The movement's actions in the past have given themselves, the hippies, a bad name. As Ryan said, it was unamerican. However, I think that what the movement wanted, to end the war, was in our best interests considering the amount of casualties of our marines. In addition, the influence it caused, to ask questions, could only really help. It's like a socratic seminar. We learn by asking questions. I think that, in the socratic way at least, this new mindset of asking questions we have inherited years later is an improvement. My question is, if the media had not reported back with their photos, would the war have continued on longer than it did? Also, how much resources and casualties were associated with the war?
ReplyDeleteI think that the anti-war movement affected everyone in America. It made us look like we weren't serious about this war, and it showed because we lost in Vietnam. The patriotism normally shown was not shown during this time period, and I think it should have shown the government that we maybe shouldn't be in this war in the first place. I wonder if the great lengths people went to such as setting themselves on fire ever made the government rethink their original idea of going into this war.
ReplyDeleteI think that the anti-war movement really helped the nation notice that people were really taking the war seriously. These people knew that the war had no real point and innocent people were being killed for no exact cause. These people wanted an exact answer to the war and since they never got one, they fought that this war was unjust and wrong. They knew that they could educate people in a cultural way, by producing music, having concerts, and parades. Some even risked their lives to make big statements such as people burning themselves in front of national monuments to prove their point. These big statements really got to the government and started to make plans to slowly come out of this war.
ReplyDeleteI think the Anti war movement shows people's individuality. It shows that citizens are not always going to trust the government and agree/support everything that it says and does. Somewhat like Caitlin, I agree that the citizens of the United States took the war seriously, they understood and felt the loss of individuals much more deeply than political leaders of that time. My question is: why did the government not listen to the anti-war citizens?
ReplyDeleteI think the Anti war movement shows how a democracy is a successful concept in government. Finally people began speaking against the US Government and they were doing it through media, music, movies, and books. If that were to happen in any other country you could be killed or jailed. I just don't understand why our government didn't want to listen to the anti war citizens? We choose who is in office so shouldnt they have to listen to us?
ReplyDeleteFrom the previous things that people have written I believe that among the others I had the similar question as Evan where I wonder why they did not want to listen to us when we decide who goes into power.
ReplyDeleteDuring the anti war movement I believe that these "hippies" definitely showed us that people wanted to go with the rights they have. I believe during class we had mentioned the movie across the universe. When watching this movie it had allowed me to see the decade during the time and petitions were one of the main things.
People during this time wanted to make a difference but as others were saying before why didn’t the government listen to these people; they were doing these movements for a purpose.
For the most part i think that the anti-war movement was a time of recognition in this country. This was a huge thing that the US citizens were experiencing. I find it interesting however that during this time the citizens were extremely segregated into groups, such as the hippies. How is it that a group such as those can make more of an impact than the government? I agree with Amber when she mentioned the extent people went to, in order to prove a point such as burning themselves. Why should people have to go that far in order to prove a point. I feel as if this time was a part in history when people were trying to find a place for a voice in the world.
ReplyDeleteThe anti-war movement impacted the worlds view. Because some people were against the war, (due to propaganda and the media) others were influenced to have similar views. When one person has a problem with someone else, they will try and show others the flaws of the being. The anti-war protestors did not respect authority and would find demonstrations to get others on their side. Vetran's would have groups and groups of people who did not respect them. Their lives became miserable, and “peace” became a priority and a must for most Americans in the US.
ReplyDelete