« A Case of Malicious Prosecution | Main | Tempting Fate »
June 04, 2007
Two Americas
John Edwards was right. There are two Americas:
That shrill sound you're hearing isn't coming from the cicadas. It's the cackle of conservatives reveling in war protester Cindy Sheehan's abrupt decision to leave the anti-war movement and return home to California.Typical liberal, they're saying. Cut and run.
"It's not that they don't care; it's that they don't believe they can make a difference," he said. "Students have become very risk-averse. They care, but they're afraid that if they go out and get involved in something they might not get into law school or get the job they want."
Today's activists seem easily bored and distracted, content to simply blog away their angst and then move on to the next issue that flares up. One has to imagine Abbie Hoffman -- Vietnam War protester and proud member of the Chicago Seven -- writhing in his grave.
So what's keeping people from raising hell? Where is the fervor and esprit de corps of the American protester? Why were the rabble-rousers of the '60s and '70s so potent, while those of today are so, to put it politely, "non-potent"?
You want esprit de corps? Fervor? Commitment? A belief in something larger than oneself, that working together, people can make a difference in the world?
Don't look in the living rooms of America. You'll have to go a bit farther afield:
UNDER A sweltering Iraqi sky, the general asked for questions from his troops. Many were reluctant, but one stepped forward.Marine Lance Cpl. Jack Kessel, 19, of Raleigh, N.C., asked about something that had been gnawing at him as he and his buddies go about the dangerous business of winning hearts and minds in Al Anbar province.
"How are we supposed to fight a war when people back home say we've already lost?" he asked.
It was a question that Marine Lt. Gen. James N. Mattis had anticipated as he toured Marine outposts in the sprawling province that is the home of the Sunni Arab insurgency in Iraq. After four years of war — and nearly 900 Marines killed and 8,000 wounded — many Marines believe they have begun to drive a wedge between the civilian populace and the insurgency in Al Anbar.
But at the same time, troops are keeping an eye on what is happening at home, where polls show that an increasing percentage of Americans feel the war was unnecessary, has been poorly executed and is unwinnable, if not already lost. In January, for instance, a Times poll showed that 62% of Americans thought the United States should not have invaded Iraq — up from 43% in November of 2003.
During the Vietnam War, the growing opposition of the American public to the war had a devastating effect on troops in the field. Drug problems among soldiers, race-related disputes — and even faltering support among the troops themselves for their own fundamental mission — could often be traced back to the fact that the public had turned against the war.
So what is the effect on troop morale of declining public support for the war in Iraq and the increasingly contentious political debate at home? Like so much about modern military life, the answer may seem counterintuitive to civilians.
After my fifth trip to Iraq to report on Marines, I've concluded that, at least among Marines, morale remains high — high not despite the public's disaffection with the war but possibly because of it. The declining poll numbers and rising political upheaval appear to have driven Marines closer together.
Marines, for instance, continue to exceed their reenlistment goals; a recent study showed that those who have deployed twice to Iraq are more likely to reenlist again than those who have only gone once — and that the Marine least likely to reenlist is one who has not deployed to Iraq.
John Edwards is right: there are two Americas. One is watching TV or at the Mall, complaining about how utterly helpless they feel about their ability to make a difference in the world.
The other is out there, doing it. You decide which one better represents us.
Posted by Cassandra at June 4, 2007 08:25 AM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.villainouscompany.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/1573
Comments
John Edwards is right. He was watching his
hairstyling clip at the video store. I think that he deserves an Oscar for chutzpah.
Posted by: Cricket at June 4, 2007 09:53 AM
In January, for instance, a Times poll showed that 62% of Americans thought the United States should not have invaded Iraq — up from 43% in November of 2003.
See, this is the problem with polls: there are never enough options in the questions to truly understand the meaning of the replies.
Assuming I was a convert from the original 43% to today's 62%, my reason would not have been that the war was unjustified, that our military wasn't up to the task, or that we were "lied" into war.
My reason would be because it was clearly a mistake to count on the kind of maturity one would both expect and hope for from our media and a large percentage of our ADD-afflicted populace, up to and including our citizen legislators.
If we ultimately fail in this war, I will not blame George Bush or our military leaders; I will blame the NY Times and their cohorts in shame, and the likes of Ms. Sheehan. Oh, I will have very harsh thoughts on our spineless Congress as well.
Posted by: daveg at June 4, 2007 01:20 PM
I hear you Dave!
As for the reenlistment numbers, makes perfect sense to me. The Marines who have never been to Iraq probably never wanted to go in the first place. There have been a few opportunities. It's only natural that they wouldn't reup. The guys on multiple tours are doing their duty, and living life's great adventure at the same time.
Posted by: Casca at June 4, 2007 03:02 PM
John Edwards is a little putz.
Fortunately, he's an unelectable one, IM[NS]HO...
Posted by: camojack at June 5, 2007 01:12 AM