> Of course, in reality the Dems have never been a peace party - as Bob
> Dole put it, exaggerating only slightly, all the wars of the 20th
> century were Democrat wars - but perception was that it was wussy and
> weak, i.e., feminine. Now it's clear - no girlie-men allowed.
Forty years ago, when I started working in the peace movement, the U.S. was addicted to violence at home and abroad, Americans hadn't even an elementary understanding of the rest of the world, they demanded a large, strong military to make them feel safe from this to-them-unknown, frightening world, and both Republican and Democratic administrations were happy to give them what they wanted, since it also made military contractor mega-corporations very happy, and they expressed this felicitude by generous campaign contributions.
Forty years layer, the situation is exactly the same. There hasn't been a centimeter of progress on the peace front. Every argument we could possibly come up with has been presented to the public over and over, and rejected just as many times. Kelley's post from CNN about fear and political attitudes was right on the money.
I doubt that this situation will ever change in my lifetime, or in the next few generations after that, at least. People love military strength, and don't mind the resulting wars very much, it seems -- not enough to get serious about stopping and preventing them, anyway. It's not just Americans -- the whole human race is militaristic. Let's face that fact squarely.
Jon Johanning // jjohanning at igc.org __________________________________ Had I been present at the Creation, I would have given some useful hints for the better ordering of the universe. -- Attr. to Alfonso the Wise, King of Castile