Remember the violence at the 1968 Democratic convention?

[librechik]

Yes, the DEMOCRATIC convention is where all the famous film clips of protestors in Chicago getting their heads busted--they were trying to get THEIR OWN PARTY, the so-called "liberal" party, to listen to them regarding the Vietnam war and civil rights. As I recall, there was no rioting at the Republican convention that year.

And so we are led to this URL
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0220-02.htm

which is about the Democratic party confining protests in Boston this year to "free speech zones," the sort of fenced-in Twilight Zones that we have objected to so vigorously lately when the Bushies do it to us.

Of course a lot of the violence in 68 was caused by outside agitators (FBI plants)sent in to infuriate the crowd and start trouble, so I don't blame the protest movement or the peaceniks for it so much. Still-- any thoughts on how "our" convention will go this year if we pen up our, say, anti-NAFTA protestors or the like?

[MSchreader]

1. We won't stay in the pens

That's for certain.

Martin

[LuLu550]

2. the Republicans threw anti war protesters out of the

convention hall. Ron Kovic (disabled VietNam vet) and his band of brothers, to be exact.

[MSchreader]

3. That was 1972, IIRC

n/t

[LuLu550]

4. I stand corrected...

It was all so long ago, I get mixed up.

on edit: But I do remember "The whole world is watching."

[Raven]

5. The riots in Chicago would not have happened if

the Chicago police and Mayor Daley had not seriously overreacted. I hate the idea of free speech zones but I wonder how else it can be done given the level of security that will probably be required.

[mobuto]

7. It wasn't Daley's fault really

the police rioted.

Remember also, that in 1968 a majority both of college students (your stereotypical hippies) and persons opposed to the war voted for Richard Nixon over Hubert Humphrey. Humphrey was a great liberal, Nixon one of the worst President we've ever had. Let Nixon be a warning to those who would vote outside the Democratic Party in November.

[chiburb]

9. I disagree...

Persons opposed to the war, McCarthy and Kennedy supporters, stayed home rather than support the Democratic nominee who represented the 'old guard and status quo'. That allowed Nixon his victory, cost thousands of additional lives in Viet Nam. If you don't think we're at risk of the same thing this year, go visit GD 2004 and see the #s of folks saying "no" because Dean/Kucinich/Sharpton/et al isn't the nominee; threatening to stay home rather than support the DLC candidate.

Also, the Chicago police were following Daley's 'get tough' orders when they rioted. For more detail, see here:

Snip:
The violence centered on two things: the Chicago police forcing protesters out of areas where they were not permitted to be; and protesters clashing with police, and their reinforcements, as they tried to march to the convention site.

The violence began Sunday August 25th. Anti-war leaders had tried to get permits from the city to sleep in Lincoln park and to demonstrate outside of the convention site. Those permit requests were denied, although the city did offer them a permit to protest miles away from the Amphitheater But the protesters were undeterred. When the park was officially closed, Chicago police bombed protesters with tear gas and moved in with billy-clubs to forcibly remove them from the park. Along with the many injuries to anti-war protesters, 17 reporters were attacked by police (including Hal Bruno, who was then a reporter for Newsweek and is now political director for ABC.) Throughout the convention, police would see the press as the enemy. Subsequent battles between police and protesters occurred nightly in Lincoln Park and Grant Park.

Also present that first night and throughout the convention were the famous Beat artists Allen Ginsberg and William Burroughs and French poet Jean Genet. Most events and protests featured speeches from Tom Hayden, Rennie Davis, Abbie Hoffman and Jerry Rubin.

http://www-cgi.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1996/conventions/chicago/facts/chicago68/index.shtml

[mobuto]

12. Where's the disagreement

Of the anti-war types and college students who DID vote, the majority voted for Nixon. A lot did stay home.

That allowed Nixon his victory, cost thousands of additional lives in Viet Nam. If you don't think we're at risk of the same thing this year, go visit GD 2004 and see the #s of folks saying "no" because Dean/Kucinich/Sharpton/et al isn't the nominee; threatening to stay home rather than support the DLC candidate.

That is exactly the point I was trying to make. We can't afford to make the best the enemy of the good, we can't afford to stay at home or waste our votes on Nader or some other boutique candidate. The stakes are too high.

Chicago police forcing protesters out of areas where they were not permitted to be; and protesters clashing with police, and their reinforcements, as they tried to march to the convention site.


The protesters were breaking the law, but the Police went nuts. They literally rioted, broke formation, chased down and beat up every protester they could get their hands on. I'm not saying I agree with the Chicago 7, but the fault for the violence really rests with the Chicago PD, not Daley or the protesters.

[chiburb]

17. It's here:

"Of the anti-war types and college students who DID vote, the majority voted for Nixon. A lot did stay home."

I don't know ONE anti-war type who voted for Nixon. I know MANY idealistic types who refused to vote at all because Humphrey was the nominee.

"the fault for the violence really rests with the Chicago PD, not Daley or the protesters."

A brief timeline of why the police acted as they did, and why it was Daley's fault:

April 15: Chicago Mayor Richard J. Daley publicly criticizes Superintendent of Police James Conlisk's cautious handling of the riots that followed King's assassination. He said he was giving the police specific instructions "to shoot to kill any arsonist and to shoot to maim or cripple anyone looting."

April 27: An antiwar march in Chicago draws 8,000 people. When the march ends, Chicago police order the crowd to disperse, then wade in with clubs. The unofficial Sparling report criticizes the police and the Daley administration.

September 9: In a press conference, Mayor Daley makes a now-famous slip of the tongue: "The policeman isn't there to create disorder, the policeman is there to preserve disorder."

Yes, we agree that the police WERE out of control, often initiating the violence. But I contend it was exactly how Daley wanted it to go down, especially after the King riots.

For a great timeline of that year (and era) see this:
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Delphi/1553/c68chron.html

Peace!

On edit: We DEFINITELY agree about the results of people pouting about their nominee not making it! :-)

[mobuto]

19. Exit polls

I'm not making this up. The only real exit poll in 1968, by CBS News (engineered by Warren Mitofsky) showed that Nixon won among college students and among people who listed the war as their biggest issue. That is fact, amd I'll try to find a link to back it up. It was also incredibly stupid, and I'm not going to disagree that a large number - perhaps an overwhelming number - of the above two groups stayed home rather than vote for either candidate. But among those who did vote, Nixon won. I guess they went for his secret plan to end the war.

Yes, we agree that the police WERE out of control, often initiating the violence. But I contend it was exactly how Daley wanted it to go down, especially after the King riots.

Ok. I'm not really interested in arguing that, but we can disagree.

We DEFINITELY agree about the results of people pouting about their nominee not making it! :-)

Well, I am pouting. I worked for a candidate and I really liked him. But I'd be happy with Atilla the Hun leading the Democratic ticket - anybody but Bush. Of course Kerry's not Atilla - he's a very good man and a good candidate.

[chiburb]

21. You may be right, I may be right, but I forgot this:

November 5: Nixon is elected, defeating Humphrey by 500,000 votes. George Wallace receives about 13% of the vote nationwide and wins five Southern states.

Did Wallace hurt Humphrey and help Nixon? I'd forgotten that he actually won 5 states.

As for pouting, that's ok. You've got 'till November to get over it!

;)

[G_j]

20. voted for Nixon???

no way!! Not a single person I knew voted for Nixon. :eyes: :shrug: :think: Let's have a link please.

[mobuto]

22. Look up the exit poll

1968 CBS exit poll showed that Nixon won among college students and people who listed the war as their most important issue.

I can't seem to find a link, but its in several political science books I'm looking at. If I find a link I'll post it.

[G_j]

23. I must have been living on Mars

especially if it was a "majority".
As I said, I knew no peace activists who voted for tricky dick and this is the first time I have ever heard this claim. Maybe those crazy yuppies were lying at the exit polls. Even an exit poll can not make me believe this. It just doesn't jive with my experience and I was fairly active in the peace movement. whatever..


anyway, there are many lessons that can be learned from Chicago '68.
I've been experiencing a lot of deja vu lately.
Also, DK and Eugene McCarthy are the only two real Democratic "peace candidates" I know of.

[Mountainman]

8. Give the protesters a chance to speak at the convention

Let them be heard. Take them seriously. If they are right wing freeper types no but if they are left of the candidate let them have a voice at the convention. Invite them in!

[eyesroll]

6. My dad was there

He was a student/journalist at the time, and he had press credentials. He got tear-gassed when someone threw a gas canister down an elevator shaft (he was riding the elevator at the time).

[ieoeja]

10. Liberal does not equal anti-war.

Revolution: started and won by arguably the greatest gathering of liberals in history.

War of 1812: US fought UK to stand still under Thomas Jefferson, the father of American liberalism.

Civil War: started by American conservatives who were soundly defeated by American liberals under the direction of a Marxist president.

World War I: US led by a liberal, progressive president decades ahead of his time with the League of Nations, no reparations, etc whose insistence on an unconditional surrender drug the war out several months after everyone else wanted to call it quits.

World War II: perhaps the most liberal president in American history led us to our greatest victory.

Cold War: initiated over conservative objections by FDR's hand-picked successor. Eisenhower rode over conservative objections, making Truman's policy of containment a bipartisan effort thenceforth.


Historically speaking, liberals have been the quickest to "man the barricades". The idea that liberal means anti-war dates back to a single issue: Vietnam. Many liberals (elected and non-elected) fully supported the war. And while the conservative establishment derided the anti-war protestors, many of the protestors opposed the war for very conservative reasons and went on to play a big part in the Reagan Revolution a decade later.


As to "Free Speech Zones" ... I first heard of Free Speech Zones at the 1996 Democratic National Convention in Chicago. These were one of Clinton's radically NOT liberal initiatives. * simply took them to the next logical level: FSZs full time away from the president.

[iverglas]

11. thank you

And while the conservative establishment derided the anti-war protestors, many of the protestors opposed the war for very conservative reasons and went on to play a big part in the Reagan Revolution a decade later.

And that's what I keep saying about the "our boys and girls are dying" argument against the war on Iraq.

The Vietnam War was finally ended not because the USAmerican people smacked their heads and said "what are we doing, murdering civilians and children and destroying the environment in a small foreign country for our own (or someone else's) venal interests??" It ended because they didn't like the pix of USAmericans in body bags. No lessons were learned.

There *are* good reasons to send troops abroad, and to risk some of them getting killed. Canada has troops in Afghanistan for such reasons, and some of them have been killed; more troops should have been sent into Rwanda for such reasons. Opposing a foreign adventure because one's troops are getting killed, and not on principle, simply makes it harder to send troops abroad for good reasons and on principle.

The WWI decision you refer to cost the life of my mother's uncle, gassed in France about a month before it finally ended. I was just looking at the album of photos of his grave there, yesterday. Of course, the "no reparations" part of the deal cost many million more lives, ultimately.

But just a quibble.

War of 1812: US fought UK to stand still under Thomas Jefferson, the father of American liberalism.

When Country A (that will be the US) invades Country B (that will be what is now Canada, then a colony of the UK), and gets its ass kicked (what did you think that big porous border was all about??), some of us don't call that a "standstill". ;)

But never mind -- you're absolutely right about what "liberal" always meant, and what it meant to those of us who did oppose the Vietnam War for the *right* reasons. We spat when we said it.

.

[mobuto]

18. Um

While I agree with your premise - that liberalism isn't the same as pacifism (I'm a liberal and far from a pacifist), I think you make some mistakes.

War of 1812: US fought UK to stand still under Thomas Jefferson, the father of American liberalism.

1. The President was James Madison.
2. I'm not sure you can call Jefferson a "liberal." He was something of a radical, sure, but liberal?

Civil War: started by American conservatives who were soundly defeated by American liberals under the direction of a Marxist president.

Abraham Lincoln was not a Marxist.

World War I: US led by a liberal, progressive president decades ahead of his time with the League of Nations, no reparations, etc whose insistence on an unconditional surrender drug the war out several months after everyone else wanted to call it quits.

Neither the Armistice of 11/11/18 nor the Treaty of Versailles said anything about unconditional surrender.

World War II: perhaps the most liberal president in American history led us to our greatest victory.

Fair enough.

Cold War: initiated over conservative objections by FDR's hand-picked successor. Eisenhower rode over conservative objections, making Truman's policy of containment a bipartisan effort thenceforth.

What conservative objections?

Historically speaking, liberals have been the quickest to "man the barricades". The idea that liberal means anti-war dates back to a single issue: Vietnam.

To some extent, yes. But it really goes back to the First World War, when many progressive parties decided to oppose the war - and were destroyed by that decision. The Socialist Party, for instance, was doing very well in the US. But unlike the UK Labour Party, it opposed the war - and it ceased to be a major factor.

[FDRrocks]

26. Lincoln a Marxist?

You don't know what the hell you are talking about. Marx's ideas were not even very well known back then.

[DrWeird]

13. a potential problem.

With potential benefits. The nominee, whoever he or she may be, should publically call for an end to "free speech zones" and ask the barricades be removed in his or her acceptance speech. Make the republicans look bad.

[proud patriot]

14. A Toast to the "Chicago Seven"

and a big hug to Seal :toast: :hug:

[proud patriot]

15. Everybody Go Rent the video "Steal This Movie"

It's a must see if you are not familar with Abbie Hoffman
or the Chicago Seven . Especially you Gen Xers ..

please watch this movie and learn from the Master .

patriot Abbie Hoffman

[Beam Me Up]

24. Good one! Also rent "Berkeley in the Sixties"

. . . a documentary about the UC student political movements. Excelent documentary. Also "The Weather Underground" is pretty good, too, but it isn't out to rent so far as I know.

[G_j]

25. yes! perhaps the best documentary I have seen

at least my favorite.

just saw "The year that trembled" fictional but a very good portrayal of college age folks at the time of the Kent State shootings.

and of course, "Steal this Movie" as PP mentioned was great!

[Hekate]

28. Try the public library

Seriously. They carry lots of films now, and if your branch doesn't have one they may be able to get it through their network. Ditto local college library and inter-library loan system.

Hekate

"Death has a tendency to encourage a depressing view of war."
~Donald Rumsfeld

"But why should we hear about body bags and deaths and how many,
what day it's going to happen, and how many this or what do you
suppose? Oh, I mean, it's not relevant. So why should I waste my
beautiful mind on something like that?"
~Barbara Bush

"I guess the 'nation's grandma' isn't the grandma of those her son sends into harm's way." ~Hekate

ARLINGTON WEST, SANTA BARBARA CALIF.
http://www.veteransforpeace.org/Default.htm
click on the large photo of AW to go here:
http://www.veteransforpeace.org/Arlington_west_121003.htm
Scroll down the page.

[diamond14]

16. my favorite part was where a naked voluptuous woman walked

into the main Conference Hall carrying a great big silver platter with a PIG on it....

'PIGS' was really the 'theme'.....

that's what's missing in today's protests...they are way too overly regulated and overly permitted and all...and no YOUNG people have any backbone or creativity at added at all....and there's no simple one word THEME to hold it together...like PIGS...

the only protest recently WITHOUT A PERMIT was the 'poor people's March into DC'(August 23, 2003)....there was just no money for lawyers and permits, and the 'poor people' just held hands, prayed for strength, and WALKED without permits...right across the KEY bridge in Washington DC, right down the street in GEORGETOWN (one of the wealthiest areas of the world), past the big George Washington Medical Center and into OUR Nation's Capital Center...plopping down signs, old tents, plastic lean-to's and cardboard boxes right on the National Mall, in full view of the Capital and all the tourists, there they were...the poor people and BUSHVILLE...and managed to stay there for more than 12 hours despite heavy resistance from asscroft's thugs...

now that's a protest...WE THE PEOPLE.....

[Hekate]

27. What kind of protests are being planned for the Republican Convention?

Right.

Sigh. It's that we expect so much better of our own party than to shut us out. I remember all too well sitting in front of my tv watching the horrors take place. After all we had been through it was the final betrayal. The friend who recruited me for the Eugene McCarthy campaign was friends with people who were there: he described a squad of Mayor Daly's cops busting into the McCarthy office, throwing kids against the file cabinets, tossing the contents around. I know a guy now who got half a dozen ribs busted in Chicago. I happened to be at the Los Angeles Airport at the end of that week when a whole bunch of people wearing black armbands got off a plane from Chicago. Even seeing a documentary a few years later literally gave me chills. We were so betrayed.

Free Speech Zones are an abomination.

Hekate