The Vanishing Anti-War Left

[Ban Hammer 12,842]

Barack Obama ran for president as the last of the red-hot pacifists, so it might have sounded preposterous to predict that after a few security briefings at the White House, President Obama would follow in the same policy footsteps of horrid warmonger George Bush, with his anti-terrorist wars and strategies.

So where is the anti-war movement now?

"What anti-war movement?" former Congressman Dennis Kucinich asked when called for comment last week. Medea Benjamin of the radical group Code Pink agreed: "The antiwar movement is a shadow of its former self under the Bush years." Cindy Sheehan quipped, "The 'anti-war left' was used by the Democratic Party. I like to call it the 'anti-Republican War' movement."

The "Wonkblog" of The Washington Post ran an article (online only, not in the newspaper) headlined, "How Obama demobilized the antiwar movement." As much as our "objective" media lamely tried to portray the peaceniks mobilizing in the streets against Team Bush as nonpartisan and non-ideological, the truth is the movement collapsed as soon as the Democrats tasted power.

Sociologists Michael Heaney and Fabio Rojas surveyed the leftist protesters for a 2011 paper and found that after Obama won, "attendance at anti-war rallies declined precipitously and financial resources available to the movement dissipated ... the antiwar movement demobilized as Democrats, who had been motivated to participate by anti-Republican sentiments, withdrew from antiwar protests when the Democratic Party achieved electoral success, if not policy success."

This is the natural order of things. It's what happens when you win. The Hollywood Women's Political Caucus was a hugely successful left-wing PAC in the late '80s, mobilized to fight the threat to civilization posed by the Reagan GOP. Shortly after Clinton's victory in '92 it, too, declared victory and disbanded. Conservative icon Midge Decter had her fun, too. She declared victory and deactivated her anti-communist group, the Committee for the Free World, after the Berlin Wall came down.

So Osama bin Laden is dead and al-Qaida doesn't have the same horrific luster. Iraq is finished and with Afghanistan, it appears to be only a matter of time. It's natural that some hard-left protest-organizing groups, like United for Peace and Justice, would collapse for lack of donations. Some, like Code Pink, have become almost invisible. Some groups, like MoveOn.org, have been willing to toss aside principle in favor of access. General Petraeus went from their General "Betray Us" to General Acceptable when Obama tapped him for Afghanistan.

This evolution applies to the press, as well. Were Bush to have made Obama's statement during that Syria press conference, all hell would have broken loose. Warmonger! No evidence! No allies! But there is no appetite now to curb Obama's sudden fixation with war. He wasn't questioned over saying he would take the step of seeking congressional approval but stated he had the power to go it alone. Incredible.

Worse, as with everything else Obama, they're soft-pedaling it. Andrea Mitchell is a delicious example of a damage-control argumentum ad absurdum.

Mitchell lectured extreme leftist Rep. Barbara Lee: "Barack Obama, as you know better than I do, was one of the leading Democratic politicians against the Iraq War. So if he says that this is different, that the evidence is there ... does that persuade you since he has always come at this from a very cautious anti-war perspective?"

War is best waged by the anti-war agitator?

Remember the legend that the Left unfurled in 2003, that our press corps were a pathetic band of toothless dogs that let Bush drag America into a terrible war? This is the same press corps that championed every "peace" march that gathered in the streets, and the same press corps that scolded each other as "zombies" for failing to stop the "rush to war."

George W. Bush had the polls behind him before the war, but he never had a promotional press. Obama has the media fully in his camp, but not the public. Will the subservient press demonstrate the power to turn public support in the president's favor? Or will they, as with the public, grow weary and turn on this president over his decision to pursue yet another fool's errand in the Middle East. Time will tell.

http://cnsnews.com/commentary/l-brent-bozell-iii/vanishing-anti-war-left

[lostinblue 1,989]

[GandD 5,966]

Are there people on VJ that are for US intervention in Syria?

[Karee 4,189]

I was thinking the same thing as I watched who was for and against this Syria thing. Funny how alot of politicians on both sides lose their ability to think for themselves, and blindly support their man in the white house.

[GandD 5,966]

Don't act like you wouldn't hit it.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I was thinking the same thing as I watched who was for and against this Syria thing. Funny how alot of politicians on both sides lose their ability to think for themselves, and blindly support their man in the white house.

Until today, I never realized that Obama was Boehner's man in the White House. Awesome!

[Penny Lane 8,159]

Are there people on VJ that are for US intervention in Syria?

I haven't seen any.

[Karee 4,189]

Until today, I never realized that Obama was Boehner's man in the White House. Awesome!

They should wear different colored shirts like they do in Thailand so you can figure out who is on what side.

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

I haven't seen any.

Wow we all agree on something else. Now that does not mean I am saying you ever supported war in Syria but god knows what you will make up

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

They should wear different colored shirts like they do in Thailand so you can figure out who is on what side.

They should. Thus far, I was under the allegedly false impression that Obama and Boehner sat on opposite sides of the aisle. As was seemngly the case for Cantor and Obama. And yet, all along, Obama was their man in the White House. They played that well over the last few years.

[Peikko 1,575]

It's politics, why would it be played any other way?

I agree with this guy:

UN chief Ban Ki-moon has told world leaders at the G-20 summit that there is “no military solution” to Syria. Meanwhile, a US ambassador to the UN accused Russia of holding the Security Council "hostage" over the crisis.

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon addressed world leaders on Thursday during a closed-door dinner at the G-20 summit outside St. Petersburg saying the situation in Syria “has no military solution,” stressing the need for a political solution instead.

Ban urged the permanent members of the UN Security Council – China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States - that they have a “collective responsibility to mankind” to act. However, he reiterated that any decision “should be taken within the framework of the UN Charter, as a matter of principle,” the UN quoted him as saying.

Of course on VJ the UN is just a pisspot for something or another, I forget now. Whatever, I think he's right.

http://www.dw.de/un-chief-ban-ki-moon-urges-political-solution-in-syria-at-g-20-summit/a-17070514

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

The anti-war left is "vanishing ????" Um, hardly.

Anti-war groups press their case to halt impending Syria attack

Alex Kane on September 6, 2013

Members of Code Pink sit in on a Senate hearing on Syria. Photo: J. Scott Applewhite/The Associated Press.

Anti-war groups are mobilizing across the country at breakneck speed to halt an impending attack on Syria.

While President Barack Obama and Israel lobby groups are flooding Congress with pro-intervention messages, anti-war organizations are giving them a run for their money. And in sharp contrast to the votes on the Iraq War, the Syria resolution being debated in the House of Representatives could very well fail.

“It’s dead in the House,” said a staffer for a Congress member. “The calls are running 100 to 1 against. So that makes a big difference.”

That’s in part due to the efforts of groups like Code Pink and the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, alongside like minded Congress members such as Alan Grayson, who is leading the charge against intervention in the House and whose office is organizing a hearing next week that will feature experts who are skeptical of an attack on Syria. Anti-war forces are finding fertile ground across America, with polls consistently showing broad opposition to cruise missile strikes on the Assad regime. The argument they are pressing is that military intervention will escalate the conflict in Syria, and that it’s time for real diplomacy to halt the bloodletting.

“Just going into the offices, you hear the phones ringing constantly and you hear the receptionist saying, ‘Yes, I will register your opposition to a U.S. invasion of Syria,” said Medea Benjamin, co-founder of Code Pink who is a ubiquitous presence on Capitol Hill. Benjamin was arrested earlier this week after disrupting Secretary of State John Kerry’s pro-war pitch to the Senate, and her group is lobbying Congress ferociously to vote no on an attack Syria resolution. “[Members of Congress] appear to be very torn by what they’re party, what the Democrats, are pushing them to do and [what] their constituents are pushing them do. It’s a real tug of war between the people versus the power,” Benjamin added.

The opposition to a Syria strike, which would further embroil the U.S. in a brutal civil war, is being registered intensely at the local level. In town hall meetings, opponents to intervening in Syria–from anti-war Democrats to libertarian Republicans–have gone on the offensive. Senator John McCain, a key proponent of greater intervention in Syria, faced a groundswell of voices against attacking Syria at a town hall meeting held Thursday.

In Fort Greene, Brooklyn, a local peace group is going back to organizing basics to halt the looming strikes on Syria. Fort Greene Peace, a sister organization of the larger Brooklyn For Peace, has recently hit the farmer’s market in the local park and has set up shop outside a supermarket near public housing projects. They’ve collected over 200 signatures on a petition against an attack on Syria stating “military strikes by the U.S. will not make any Syrians safer.”

Ed Goldman, an activist with Fort Greene Peace, said that “we think it’s immoral, we think it’s illegal, we think it’s crazy politically in the region.” Goldman added that the public seems to agree with him: “It’s unbelievable. We’ve had people lining up at our table to sign this petition. There’s almost nobody that walks by who doesn’t say, ‘yeah you’re right.’”

On Friday morning, a group of about 10 activists met with Democratic Representative Hakeem Jeffries, a member of the generally progressive Congressional Black Caucus. Jeffries has been on the fence about his vote on Syria. He released a statement this week saying that “we must now carefully evaluate whether the use of force is appropriate. The situation in Syria is a serious one and the use of chemical weapons, if proven, must be met with severe consequences.” The anti-war activists wanted to push him to their side.

They didn’t exactly get what they wanted at the meeting, though the activists were pleased that Jeffries was receptive enough to meet and listen to their concerns. In a post-meeting interview, Jeffries said he was concerned about “an open-ended conflict that would divert resources away from domestic spending priorities that we have here in America as well as the possibility of sparking a war that would result in United States’ boots being put on the ground.” While the Congressman said he would take those concerns down with him to Washington D.C., where he will meet with the Obama administration, he has yet to make up his mind on a vote.

Jeffries, like many other elected officials, is caught between his constituents on one side, and his president and party leadership on the other side. The role of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee will also be a factor in how Jeffries votes. He coasted to Congress on a wave of pro-Israel donor money, which poured in to stop his opponent in the Democratic primary, Charles Barron.

“I do think that there will be a variety of groups that will weigh in, into this question. I’ve spoken to at least one member of AIPAC. However, I do anticipate that we’ll have a lot of different conversations with a lot of different folks over the next few days,” said Jeffries. “The AIPAC member was simply asking what my position was. It wasn’t an aggressive conversation at all. It was a very thoughtful conversation.”

Jeffries will likely hear again from AIPAC next week, when the lobby group will send 250 activists to Capitol Hill to push for authorizing a Syria attack as a way to “send a message” to Iran over its nuclear energy program. The Senate is set to vote on a Syria strike next week, though it’s possible opponents of a strike could delay a vote. It’s unclear when the House, where there’s a lot of opposition to military action, will vote. The majority of House members have indicated they will vote no an attack Syria resolution, according to counts compiled by news organizations.

In the meantime, anti-war groups continue to organize. Code Pink’s Medea Benjamin said her group is planning to set up an encampment in Washington, D.C. to oppose force on Syria and will continue to protest. Anti-war events around the country are being held Saturday to rally more opposition to a strike on Syria.

http://mondoweiss.net/2013/09/anti-war-groups-press-their-case-to-halt-impending-syria-attack.html

[duraaraa 203]

Perhaps it's because people are following trends...

I'm still anti-war. I'm anti a whole lot of other stuff Obama and liberals want to do.

The problem is, the conservatives do the same things, plus other stuff to tick me off.

I'm hoping we'll eventually make it out of a two party, controlled-by-money system.

[RGinWA 816]

I wrote my congressman stating I was totally opposed to any Syrian involvement.

I say until we apply humanitarian efforts at home we stay out of other countries.

I personally don't know anyone on the left that's for involvement in this conflict.

On the protest, those world wide protest in 2002-2003 really did nothing. We still went into Iraq...maybe that burned the protesters out? Who knows?

[Karee 4,189]

I wrote my congressman stating I was totally opposed to any Syrian involvement.

I say until we apply humanitarian efforts at home we stay out of other countries.

I personally don't know anyone on the left that's for involvement in this conflict.

On the protest, those world wide protest in 2002-2003 really did nothing. We still went into Iraq...maybe that burned the protesters out? Who knows?

I was living in Montreal during that protest. It was like -20F and there was still around 250k people protesting out there in the cold. I remember thinking I hope they don't hang me since I have Texas plates on my car.