A Revisionist View of the Protest Left

If the protest Left of the Vietnam war are responsible for the diminished public and congressional support for that war, then why are public and congressional support for the war in Iraq at comparable low levels when the protest Left has been now so minor and ineffectual?

Sixties radicals enjoy extolling how they brought down President Johnson or stopped the funding in 1975. Sixties conservatives counter how if not for those radicals, in effect or directly supporting North Vietnamese aggression, our successes would not have been undermined, bringing horrible suffering upon millions of Indochinese.

Both sides are exaggerating the role of the protest Left.

More telling, in both cases, is the more generalized disappointments in results flowing slower and with greater difficulty than the promises from policy makers.

The protest Left is fast to exploit these disappointments, but oversteps in denigrating American motive. The reaction to the shocking displays and words of the ‘60’s radicals propelled many, then and after, toward conservatism. Skillful conservative politicians and organizers built a successful movement on this broadened foundation that increased conservatives’ power in electoral politics for a generation.

Meantime, the graduates of the protest Left, and those influenced by their themes, advanced through media and academia, some through electoral politics, to increase their relative power over the national discourse. Their increased weight more than offsets the relatively minor ability of the Left to mobilize public protests.

One can easily point out the irresponsibility of policy opponents who find overblown fault first with America, as they ignore or excuse far grosser excesses by foes, or who blithely deny the stakes that we have in national security, world order or greater freedom among others on our planet. One can easily point out that they offer no constructive paths or alternatives.

But, what about the fault that justifiably falls upon our policy makers? They have failed to deliver the degree of progress they presented, particularly within the time frame and extent of resources they expected.

In both Vietnam and Iraq, lessons were painfully learned about the enemy, intelligence developed, and our military overcame. This is natural in war, no nation capable of perfect preparation, and events and enemy adaptations presenting new and unthought of hurdles. Immersion, experience and adaptation yield success. American forces excel in this flexibility.

The desire to be or have loved ones home by Christmas was powerful during all our wars.
Those with military experience or understanding, and those with faith in America and its goals, are patient with the natural confusion and elongated time frame of wars. Those without or with less are more impatient. As time wears on, all’s patience is tried.

The hesitancy of presidents Johnson and Bush to follow tried and true military experience in applying more force and denying the enemy sanctuaries, and to more rapidly change military command and strategy, fed this impatience.

Are we, then, to primarily blame the protest Left for diminished public and congressional support, or primarily blame their affiliates in today’s media, or primarily blame those with the leadership responsibility? I suggest the latter.

This, by no means, excuses those opponents of policy or protestors who act irresponsibly, and who fail to either be constructive or offer constructive alternatives. The distractions and restrictions they cause definitely restrain our leaders from greater force or from more openness at recognizing errors and altering course. But, the policy leaders, still, have the responsibility to create confidence through boldness and honesty.

When we have appeared more successful, the voices of opponents or protestors have been more muted and their declarations of defeat given less credence. When we seemingly flounder, their voices are louder and more followed. The constructive changes that President Bush is initiating are not given their chance by many.

No one can deny that we’re late in the innings in Iraq. No one can deny that the natural impulse of politicians is to be re-elected. What remains to be seen is whether today’s view of the 2008 elections is more important to our politicians than boldness and honesty, not to mention national security and a more benign Middle East. So far, too many appear lacking in those leadership traits. The protest Left is not to blame for that.