Hard Hats, Hippies, and the Real Antiwar Movement

[unrepentant progress]

This looks like a fantastic book. It was highly recommended by Corey Robin, author of The Reactionary Mind.

The story we tell ourselves about social division over the war in Vietnam follows a particular, class-specific outline: The war "split the country" between "doves" and "hawks." The "doves," most often conflated with "the movement," were upper-middle-class in their composition and politics. The movement was the New Left, and a big part of what made the New Left "new" was its break from the working-class politics and roots of the Old Left. Think of Dr. Benjamin Spock, Tom Hayden, Jane Fonda, Eugene McCarthy, George McGovern, Students for a Democratic Society, Weathermen: students, intellectuals, professionals, celebrities; liberal or radical privileged elites.

<snip>

Most accounts of the working class depict them as largely supportive of the war and hostile to the numerous movements for social change. We need look no further than the most enduring image of the working class from that period, a certain cranky worker from Queens, N.Y. The TV character Archie Bunker, who brought the working class to prime time as white, bigoted, sexist, homophobic, and yearning for the good old days before the welfare state, when everybody pulled his weight, when girls were girls and men were men.

<snip>

Working-class opposition to the war in Vietnam was far more widespread than is remembered.

But this memory of the Vietnam era contains only half-truths, and overall it is a falsehood. The notion that liberal elites dominated the antiwar movement has served to obfuscate a more complex story. Working-class opposition to the war was significantly more widespread than is remembered, and parts of the movement found roots in working-class communities and politics.

In fact, by and large, the greatest support for the war came from the privileged elite, despite the visible dissension of a minority of its leaders and youth. The country was divided over the war, alongside many other pressing social issues—but the class dynamics of those divisions were complex, contradictory, and indeterminate.

Many books briefly discuss the discrepancy between our historical impression of class-based sentiment and its reality. Yet no account systematically explains why such a misperception exists, its extent, or its impact.

http://chronicle.com/article/Hard-Hats-Hippiesthe/139125/?key=QT8lcgNkMSdGbSw1MT9HPW4DanI9MUh1MnMdYikmbltUEQ%3D%3D

If the Chronicle link above doesn't work for you, Robin has excerpted a good chunk of the article at his site: http://coreyrobin.com/2013/05/16/everything-you-know-about-the-movement-against-the-vietnam-war-is-wrong

[Curmudgeoness]

1. This is good to hear.

I am glad that someone is trying to set the record straight and take the truth back.

I come for a working class family. My father worked in a mill, just a welder. I was involved in the anti-war movement (as were a lot of people I knew who were working class), and it was with the blessing of my parents, who probably wanted to be out there too. But they had other priorities, like working. But they were definitely in support of the anti-war people.

[RainDog]

2. kick to find later n/t

[raging moderate]

3. This book tells the truth. I was there.

I know who was with me at those anti-war demonstrations. They came from a wide variety of social and economic backgrounds. We poor kids used to get grim chuckles out of being called members of the elite while scrambling to get enough to eat. Oh, and about the rich kids with us, well, at least they were voluntarily stepping out of their privileged world to try to help some people who needed help. That should count in their favor.