As the US descends further into "imperialism lite," it's imperative that a new antiwar movement emerges. The lessons of history are clear: once war begins, its destructive path is hard to reverse.
The anti-Iraq War Movement, which emerged in the early 2000s, was instrumental in eroding public support for the conflict and catalyzing a shift in US policy. Its success was not solely due to the movement itself but also the validation of protesters' narratives by events on the ground. The bravery of Gold Star mother Cindy Sheehan, who demanded to know from President Bush "for what noble cause" her son died, had a profound impact.
However, history is replete with examples of how even the most well-intentioned antiwar movements can fail. In the 1970s and 1980s, a North American solidarity movement aimed to prevent US military interventions in Latin America. Although its efforts were ultimately unsuccessful, they helped forestall greater bloodshed.
The current task for today's antiwar resistance is to stop war before it starts. This will require building an effective coalition that transcends partisan boundaries. While the left cannot alone restrain President Trump, a bipartisan groundswell is essential. Antiwar Republicans should be encouraged and not questioned.
The alternative – "imperialism lite" – may seem like a more palatable goal, but even restrained aggression is a danger. The anti-Iraq War Movement made it clear that once war begins, its destructive path is hard to reverse.
As the US grapples with the complexities of imperialism, there's hope in the growing recognition that unchecked aggression at home and abroad are part of the same authoritarian system. Many Americans remain committed to democratic values, decency, and the welfare of their neighbors.
In this context, a new antiwar movement can make a difference. It must be grounded in its own realism, acknowledging the tendency of empires to overreach. By taking a proactive stance against war and imperialism, we can work towards a democratic renewal that prioritizes human life and dignity over strategic interests.
The anti-Iraq War Movement, which emerged in the early 2000s, was instrumental in eroding public support for the conflict and catalyzing a shift in US policy. Its success was not solely due to the movement itself but also the validation of protesters' narratives by events on the ground. The bravery of Gold Star mother Cindy Sheehan, who demanded to know from President Bush "for what noble cause" her son died, had a profound impact.
However, history is replete with examples of how even the most well-intentioned antiwar movements can fail. In the 1970s and 1980s, a North American solidarity movement aimed to prevent US military interventions in Latin America. Although its efforts were ultimately unsuccessful, they helped forestall greater bloodshed.
The current task for today's antiwar resistance is to stop war before it starts. This will require building an effective coalition that transcends partisan boundaries. While the left cannot alone restrain President Trump, a bipartisan groundswell is essential. Antiwar Republicans should be encouraged and not questioned.
The alternative – "imperialism lite" – may seem like a more palatable goal, but even restrained aggression is a danger. The anti-Iraq War Movement made it clear that once war begins, its destructive path is hard to reverse.
As the US grapples with the complexities of imperialism, there's hope in the growing recognition that unchecked aggression at home and abroad are part of the same authoritarian system. Many Americans remain committed to democratic values, decency, and the welfare of their neighbors.
In this context, a new antiwar movement can make a difference. It must be grounded in its own realism, acknowledging the tendency of empires to overreach. By taking a proactive stance against war and imperialism, we can work towards a democratic renewal that prioritizes human life and dignity over strategic interests.