February 24 2010
The United States Needs a Broad-Based Anti-War Movement
var addthis_pub="surferjoseph";
Can the Right and Left Work Together to Oppose War and Empire?
By Kevin Zeese
There has to be a better way to stop wars and reduce military spending.
Polls show U.S. voters at worst divided on current wars and more often
show majority opposition to them. Yet, when Congress “debates” war the
widespread view of Americans is muffled, not usually heard.
For the last decade, with President Bush in office the peace movement
has been politically left and Democratic leaning. The right wing has
been kept off the stage as a result the anti-war movement does not
reflect the breadth of American opposition to war. For too long the
peace movement has been like a bird with only a left wing. It can
barely fly and when it does it seems to go in circles. Perhaps a bird
with two wings will fly better?
This past weekend Voters for Peace sponsored a meeting of 40 people from
across the political spectrum who oppose war and Empire. The people
attending see the U.S. military as too big and too expensive and
recognize spending $1 million to keep a soldier in Afghanistan for one
year is a symptom of mistaken militarism that weakens U.S. economic and
national security.
The purpose of the meeting was to see if we could work together. Could
we put aside our differences on other issues and focus on reducing
American militarism and in the long run ending reliance on war?
The conversation began with discussions of the history of anti-war
advocacy in the United States and what we can learn from it. One point
repeatedly made by people on the left and right was that historically
there have been conservatives who opposed war and empire. Today those
voices are heard in a whisper, if at all. Before the Spanish American
War, World War I and World War II, strong opposition to foreign
intervention not only came from progressives but also from traditional
conservatives rooted in the recommendation of George Washington’s
farewell address – ‘avoid foreign entanglements.’ How can we re-awaken
that common sense conservatism and forge a broad based anti-war
movement?
What would a broad based anti-war movement look like? Some of the
conservatives in the room warned against this 21st Century movement
looking like the anti-Vietnam war protests of the 60s. Many on the left
and right acknowledged that the mass weekend protests against Iraq were
large in size but ineffective in result. While there is a role for
such protests, they are not sufficient for the task at hand. Some
conservatives warned against describing the United States as imperialist
– that would get up the hackles of many Americans. But, they were
comfortable describing the United States as an Empire.
Personally, I found that of interest. Americans never hear discussed in
the media whether or not our country is an Empire. And, if we were to
have such a discussion the critical questions would be is Empire good
for us, for our national security, for our economy, for our democracy?
Having those questions debated would be a breakthrough in political
dialogue.
It is hard to deny the American Empire. The U.S. has more than
2,500,000 DoD personnel deployed across the planet and 761 military
bases on foreign soil not counting more than 100 in Iraq and more than
400 American and NATO bases in Afghanistan. U.S. troops are now
stationed in 148 countries and 11 territories according to DoD’s “Active
Duty Military Personnel Strengths by Regional Area and Country.”
America has spawned a military network larger than the Roman Empire,
which at its height had 37 major military bases, and the British Empire
which had 36. More bases are planned; billions spent building bases in
far off lands while large swaths of American cities degrade into
impoverished zones and the infrastructure of the nation crumbles.
When the Cold War ended, rather than reducing troops in Germany, Japan,
Korea, Italy, the Philippines, and so many other nations; ending the
NATO alliance which was designed to combat the now non-existent Soviet
Union; and shrinking the weapons and war budget, the U.S. decided to
seek to become the sole superpower on Earth. U.S. military spending is
now as much as the whole world combined. The U.S. Navy exceeds in
firepower the next 13 navies combined. When all the budgets are
accounted for – the Pentagon, the wars, the 16 intelligence agencies,
the super-sized embassies – total Empire spending is more than $1
trillion annually.
And, the Empire has deep roots. General Smedley Butler, the most
decorated Marine in history joined the Marines in 1898 and served 34
years in China, Nicaragua, Haiti, Cuba, Mexico and other nations as part
of the early American Empire. When Butler retired and thought about his
career he described himself as a “racketeer” for U.S. business
interests around the world and said “war is a racket.”
But, this massive Empire is not discussed. It is the elephant in the
living room of American foreign policy. And, the entrenched
military-industrial complex that President Eisenhower warned us about in
1961 is now so powerful that cutting the military budget is off the
table in Washington, DC – despite cost over-runs of hundreds of billions
in weapons contracts, the GAO consistently describing the Pentagon as
un-auditable and budgets filled with waste, fraud and abuse. The war
budget grows and grows despite a fragile if not collapsing economy at
home.
After a long day of discussion it became evident that people from across
the political spectrum, despite differences on other issues, could in
fact work together to challenge American militarism. Some in the room
who had been working on these issues for forty years thought such a
coalition was decades past due. Some of the students in attendance had
their eyes opened to the history of traditional conservative anti-war
efforts as in their lifetimes it had not been heard from.
In discussing this publicly, so far I have only heard from one person on
“the left” who opposes it. He was a co-founder of Progressives for
Obama and he lumps everyone on the conservative side into what he calls
“racist populism.” Such broad stroke descriptions of people are prima
facie evidence of prejudice and certainly not consistent with people I
have met from across the spectrum. But, his opposition shows the
challenge on “the left” – too many are unwilling to stop their support
for the Democrats and Obama.
The challenge on the right is also difficult. The Neocons have taken
over almost all significant conservative organizations. How can we
attract traditional conservatives to anti-war advocacy? The day after
the conference, the surprise land slide victory of the anti-war
conservative, Ron Paul, at the CPAC convention gave hope that there were
more right wing peaceniks than we may have imagined.
While our task is urgent – something which the 1000th death of a U.S.
soldier in Afghanistan and the weekend’s killing of two dozen more
civilians in an aerial attack brings home – our job is immense. Undoing
a century old Empire that is larger than any that ever existed is no
easy task, but for citizen patriots it is an essential one for the
survival of the nation and the benefit of the world.
To join our efforts sign the Voters Pledge at www.VotersForPeace.US and get involved.
Kevin Zeese is executive director of Voters for Peace.
Opinion • More about 
