Worldview Blog

Earlier I posted the following two paragraphs as an update to my article called To Hell with Obama. The question of US public support for our wars, at least since Vietnam, seems crucial enough that I would like to pursue this in a thread of its own. The basic idea is that, according to reliable polls, a large majority of Americans were against both the Vietnam war and the current war in Iraq. Yet both wars ended only slowly, with the establishment largely ignoring public opinion, and even lying about it.

US Public Was Against Wars in Vietnam and Iraq

POSTED (8 July 08): Glenn Greenwald brilliantly shows what liars the talking heads are on the pro-establishment Sunday morning shows. Mara Liason claims that it is a fringe 'left-wing' view that wants the troops out of Iraq now, even if civil order is not achieved. Bill Kristol claims that this shows how 'radical' the Democrats have become — a ridiculous assertion given that the Dems have continued to fund the war and have been less than forthright on leaving. Greenwald simply quotes all of the latest mainstream polls to debunk this propaganda. The majority of Americans clearly want out of Iraq regardless of 'conditions on the ground'. The establishment talking heads function just as Pravda did. They simply lie and make facts up to support the empire. In fact, they're worse than Pravda, because the Russian people knew not to believe their elites, while the American people continue to be mostly clueless, especially if they get their news from the Sunday morning networks. Do we have a truly brainwashed public? Or do most of us realize the truth, and the establishment is simply putting on a fake show of a democratic discourse?

UPDATE (12 July 08): In this video, Noam Chomsky reports that in 1969, at the height of the Vietnam War, polls showed that as many as 70% of Americans were opposed. Yet it dragged on for another 8 years. This number surprises me. Weren't 'average, working-class Americans', supposedly represented by the notorious hard-hats, busy beating up college-age protesters? Or maybe it was the the public knew that the Democrats got us into it, and Nixon said he 'had a plan'? I guess all this goes to show that a large majority can be opposed to the war, but the elites have ways to play politics to keep the war going, at least for a while.

Gallup Polls of Support for Vietnam War

Jim Miller, a conservative blogger, provides a webpage detailing support for the Vietnam war, from 1965 through 1971, as reported by Gallup. It is interesting to observe that younger people were more likely to support the war throughout this period, even at the end when it became unpopular. This contradicts the common perception and shows how media images of the college protesters were rather misleading. My guess is that younger people, especially males, tend to exhibit the aggressiveness that comes with hormones and immaturity. Even today, the gossip at campuses can be nasty, as revealed by a new 'bathroom wall' internet site.

Moreover, there was much support, especially early on, for increasing the war effort. As late as 1968, for instance, a good 53 percent wanted to increase or dramatically increase the effort, even if it brought in China or Russia. Only 24 percent wanted to discontinue the struggle. Hence, when interpreting public dissatisfaction with a war, we must distinguish between those who want to withdraw and those who want to fight harder.

In the poll numbers showed by Miller, he claims that the same question was asked throughout: 'In view of the developments since we entered the fighting in Vietnam, do you think the U. S. made a mistake sending troops to fight in Vietnam?' Almost every time the question was asked, people under 30 were more likely to answer no than people aged 30-49, and people aged 30-49 were in turn more likely to say no than people over 50. Of course, a 'no' answer is taken to indicate support for the war. No wonder many ancient societies placed older people in charge, who were more likely to remain cool-headed in times of crises, if only because their hormones were running out! (But let us also credit experience and the resulting wisdom!)

Another fascinating and counterintuitive fact revealed by this data is that educated people were more likely to support the war. Moreover, Miller claims that, despite a paucity of data, draft status did not seem to affect the results. This trend agrees with Noam Chomsky's assertion that intellectuals have often prostituted themselves to the powers-that-be, contrary to the popular view of academics and pundits as liberal eggheads. This may be because semi-informed (i.e. 'educated') people are more likely to be swayed by 'grand ideas' like the spurious domino theory. Also, those who rise to the top of society are often greedy and ambitious, to put it bluntly. They are more used to feeling powerful and getting their way, and this may translate to their political views. This should be especially true of the establishment and its hangers-on, like the pundits at the New York Times and the Washington Post.

Some common perceptions are correct. Women tended to be more 'dovish' than men, and blacks more dovish than whites. This reinforces my claim that those used to getting their way, i.e. white males, are likelier to have big egos which project into their political views (enhanced of course by the hormones). Also, those who have suffered discrimination are much more likely to care about others who are oppressed, such as Vietnamese villagers being napalmed because of a Cold War chess game.

Yet another interesting claim put forward by Miller is that the same patterns were found in the Korean War and in World War II, suggesting something fundamental about human nature, or at least about American society. Miller recommends a book by John E. Mueller, called 'War, Presidents and Public Opinion'. He mentions that he once took a course from this author, which adds to his credibility as a political blogger.

So do Miller's numbers agree with Chomsky's claim that opposition to the war approached 70% around 1969? Unfortunately, he breaks the numbers out by age without telling us how many Americans were in each age group. Yet one notes that the opposition to the war in, say, September 1969, was 63% in the under-50 group and 75% in the over-50 group, so Chomsky's 'approaching 70%' is close enough. Clearly, a majority of Americans were opposed. But that does not mean that they wanted to pull out immediately. Nixon's 'secret plan' and 'peace with honor' campaign rhetoric were evidently enough to get him elected.

Gallup Polls of Support for Iraq War

This recent article from the Gallup website makes it clear that a good 60% of the American public thinks that the Iraq war was a mistake. Moreover, the number has been steadily rising, since starting at only 20% in early 2003. Of course, the low early numbers occurred during the invasion itself, when the public was still fooled by the administration into linking Saddam with Osama. One could argue that the public always supports wars at the beginning, before the casualty figures come in. However, the antiwar number rises precipitously to 40% by early 2004, much quicker than for most wars, and this is no doubt due to the shock that no WMD were to be found in Iraq, even after searching for a year.

By January 2005, the pro and antiwar percentages are equal at 50%, and from then on the antiwar percentage steadily rises. This led to the Democratic takeover during the 2006 midterm elections. The Democrats then ignored public opinion and continued to fund the war. For this and many other reasons, it seems pretty clear that the Democrats support the American empire every bit as much as the Republicans, but they also have no shame in using the war issue to gain votes, in a way that is both deceitful and opportunistic.

Polls on Universal Healthcare

The establishment also lies about Americans and Universal Healthcare. This recent CBS News article reports that 'two-thirds say the federal government should guarantee that all Americans have health insurance'. That's a huge majority! You'd think it would be law by now, as in most other industrialized countries. You'd be wrong. Here is yet another glaring sign that our politicians obey their corporate masters — in this case the huge health insurance lobby. If we do get UHC, it will probably be because other big businesses are tired of paying for healthcare for their employees while competing with nations that already have UHC. It won't come because the people want it! They've already made their opinion heard, loud and clear, as with the Iraq war, but it makes little difference (except that a charlatan like Obama can skillfully exploit the rhetoric while proposing no drastic change). Even if Congress starts to move, as Americans become desperate, the insurance lobby has other tricks up its sleeve, as in 1993, when it scared the middle class with a massive ad campaign misinforming them that they wouldn't be able to choose their doctor. I suppose the subliminal message is that the doctor the government gives you will probably be some kind of pervert, which would be especially disturbing to women. Once again, fear works!

Polls on NAFTA

So what about NAFTA? This recent Rasmussen poll says that 'Amricans are divided on free trade' but '56% want it renegotiated'. That's quite a bit more than half! Most elections are won by a smaller margin. Of course, nothing is happening. Obama gave us some populist anti-NAFTA rhetoric during the primaries, which he immediately rescinded once he secured the nomination. No surprise there for those who read 'radical' (i.e. informative) websites like CounterPunch. Pam Martens had been reporting for quite a while about Obama's close ties to Wall Street.

Other Polls

POSTED (22 July 2008): In this radio interview on Antiwar Radio, David Bromwich and Scott Horton discuss some other polls. Horton refers to a recent blog post by Glenn Greewald citing a poll that 71% of Americans want an 'unbiased approach' to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which is surely not what we get on Capitol Hill or in the mainstream media. Bromwich cites a comparable statistic, that at least two-thirds of the Iraqis have wanted the US out for 'more than two years now'. Moreover, about half of them think that US troops are legitimate targets! It is almost impossible to win a guerilla insurgency unless the bulk of the population is on your side. It is truly shocking how little we hear about Iraqi opinions in our press. This represents a violation of our allegedly democratic motives, as well as proof that the American press — or at least the elite press that loves to be close to power — engages in blatant self-censorship. Bromwich also goes on at length about how much more fair and professional is the leading Israeli newspaper Haaretz, despite the dangerous situation in Israel itself.

Online Articles

Glenn Greenwald: Beltway myth: Left-wing on Iraq

Noam Chomsky: In 1969, most Americans opposed Vietnam war

Jim Miller: Support for the Vietnam War

RADAR: A nasty 'bathroom wall' campus internet site

Gallup: Majority continues to consider Iraq War a mistake

Ted Rall: Nothing honorable about the Vietnam War

CBS News: Most Americans favor Universal Health Care

Rasmussen: Americans divided on free trade

Pam Martens: Obama's money cartel

Antiwar Radio: David Bromwich on the NYT and the War Party

Back to the Home Page