OH DEAR, OH DEAR, WHAT CAN THE MATTER BE? – AT 10:58 A.M. ET:  National Public Radio has very graciously given us one more example of why it does not deserve to be financed by the American people.  This new "report" laments the decline of the anti-war movement.  Where have all those good, decent "anti-war activists" gone?  The story is written entirely from the political left, making heavy use of quotes from, are you ready, "peace studies" professors.  Consider this gem, our painful quote of the day:

And what about the younger generations? With the American anti-war movement of the 1960s came a widespread interest among students in peace, justice and conflict resolution. Today, dozens of colleges and universities offer courses — and some offer majors — in peace studies. There are professional organizations such as the Peace and Justice Studies Association and the International Peace Research Association.

Oh please.  You can just imagine what "peace and justice" studies consist of.  That term is an old chestnut of the Marxist left, on a par with "the People's Rnepublic of..."

With America mired in a myriad of military pursuits, what do professors of peace studies say in the classroom? "The 'why' does get a bit complicated at times," says Juniata's Celia Cook-Huffman, but the students "seem willing to struggle with that."

She adds, "We also try to talk about war broadly, so the war on the poor and the war on the environment get mixed in there as well."

I'm sure.  Very mixed in, as in, "You foolish kids, don't you know what we're doing to your minds?" 

And how do students respond? In various ways. "Some are ready to take action and do," she says. And "some feel overwhelmed and aren't sure what to do."

COMMENT:  There are a number of reasons for the decline of the "anti-war" movement – the lack of a draft; the fact that we were attacked directly, Pearl Harbor-style, on 9-11; the relatively low level of the conflicts we're engaged in, and the assumption, wrong it turned out, that Barack Obama was some kind of bringer of peace.

But there's another reason:  Many Americans, I think are on to the "anti-war" activists who only oppose any war that America has a chance of winning.  As Christopher Hitchens has written, the "anti-war" movement really isn't anti-war at all.

Further, from what I've seen, young people today don't appear quite as naive or vulnerable as their predecessors of the 1960s.  In fact, I've been heartened by the support given by students to the return of ROTC on many "elite" campuses.  That support may not extend to some elements of the faculty, still stuck in the 60s.

The "anti-war" movement of the late 60s was never constructive.  It was manipulated by the far left, a fact made clear in North Vietnam's own history of the war.  It contributed mightily to our defeat in Vietnam, a defeat that occcurred despite the fact that we never lost a single military battle.  The collapse came long after American troops had left 'Nam, when our Congress, in an act of supreme dishonor, cut off funding to our South Vietnamese allies in 1975. 

I don't miss the "movement."  If you honestly oppose an American military action, there are far more constructive ways to register your feelings than a mass demonstration, run by old red groups, and followed inevitably by pizza parties and hookups at night.

April 16, 2011