Persevere In The Face Of Indifference

The Nation: As The War Grinds On, The Public Struggles To Be Heard

(The Nation)  This column was written by Christopher Hayes

---

On the late afternoon of the fifth anniversary of the invasion of Iraq, a grim, surreal procession made its way up DC's Capitol Hill. Down Independence Avenue alongside the House office buildings marched a single file of protesters, each clad in a black T-shirt, wearing a haunting white mask and holding a sign with the name of a civilian killed in Iraq. As they trudged up the Hill, a drummer rapped out a spare and mournful beat. Aside from several police escorts on bicycles, few were there to bear witness. Congress was in recess, the usual passel of commuters away or shuttered indoors, the streets empty under a misting gray sky. Like the real-life funerals for the Iraqi dead they represented, this re-creation, too, would pass with hardly a notice.

That morning in Washington, as protesters marched and danced and chanted, as progressives assembled for the Take Back America conference and as thousands of soldiers' families mourned their dead, Vice President Cheney gave an interview to ABC's Martha Raddatz. When she pointed out that two-thirds of Americans thought the war was not worth fighting, he answered: "So?"

"So?" Raddatz replied. "You don't care what the American people think?"

"No," said Cheney.

There you have it. To the millions who marched before the war began, to the hundreds of thousands who have protested since, to the tens of millions who voted for candidates in 2006 who pledged to end it, the Bush Administration says, more or less, Go f--- yourself.

We are now faced with two problems. One is a war that grinds on, subject only to its internal logic, each day further embedding an imperial occupation. The other is arguably even more profound, a terrifying breakdown in the basic mechanisms of democracy whereby the will of the majority is transferred into policy. We have two ostensible democracies (the United States and Iraq), each with a polity that wants an end to the war (the most recent polling from Iraq shows that 70 percent of Iraqis favor US withdrawal), yet the war does not end.

In the face of this official indifference to public opinion, it is tempting to succumb to despair. The antiwar strategy, after all, has not been static. In the run-up to the war, organizers managed to pull together the largest simultaneous worldwide demonstrations in history. That didn't work. Then the antiwar movement channeled much of its energy into electoral politics, helping to elect Democratic majorities in both houses. That hasn't worked either. So we find ourselves in the situation of Beckett's protagonist in Worstward Ho: "Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better."

Although the electoral strategy has not yet borne fruit, it is still the most viable option, barring a draft or a radical turn in public opinion that would once again bring people en masse into the streets. (There are, of course, parallel strategies to be pursued. Passing a ban on mercenaries in Iraq would make the occupation untenable.) The question, then, becomes how to create the electoral conditions that maximize the power and representation of the majority who want the war ended. The antiwar caucus doesn't have enough votes to override a delusional President or enough members willing to bear the political risk of cutting off funding for the war. The solution to this impasse is, in the words of Congressional candidate Darcy Burner, to elect "more and better Democrats" - Democrats who have publicly committed to pursuing a legislative strategy to end the war.

So at Take Back America, Burner - a former Microsoft manager from the Seattle suburbs who narrowly missed unseating a GOP incumbent in 2006 - with nine other Democratic Congressional challengers released A Responsible Plan to End the War. Developed in collaboration with retired military officers and national security professionals, the plan attracted the support of fifteen additional Democratic Senate and House challengers in the first week after it was unveiled (see ResponsiblePlan.com). Unlike the withdrawal plans offered by both Democratic presidential candidates, the Responsible Plan opposes any residual forces as well as permanent military bases. It flatly states, "We must stop counter-productive military operations by U.S. occupation forces, and end our military presence in Iraq." It looks toward restoring "Constitutional checks and balances and fix[ing] the ways in which our governmental, military, and civil institutions have failed us." It also addresses the need to take responsibility for a humanitarian crisis in which thousands of Iraqis who worked with US forces are in danger and millions are displaced across the region.

As an organizer working on the Responsible Plan stressed to me, it is an explicitly legislative road map, to be pursued by Congress with or without a President committed to withdrawal. Among other actions the plan calls for war funding to be brought into the normal budgetary process, as opposed to the ersatz emergency supplementals, which detach the cost of the war from the rest of the nation's discretionary spending. The plan also highlights more than a dozen bills that have already been introduced, like HR 2247, the Montgomery GI Bill for Life Act of 2007, which the signatories would support if elected.

Meanwhile, in Iraq on March 23, the 4,000th US service member was killed (twenty-five died in just two weeks), at least fifty-eight Iraqi civilians died in attacks, the Green Zone was shelled, violence flared in Basra and Muqtada al-Sadr seemed to be toying with the idea of revoking his militia's cease-fire. American generals presented a plan to maintain post-surge troop levels through 2008, and George W. Bush continued to pursue an agreement with the Iraqi government that would keep US troops there well into the future.

At the plan's unveiling, Burner - articulate, impressive and infectiously energetic - refused to be pessimistic. Despite the White House's indifference, despite the war's diminished presence on the front page, the people want the war to end.

"We can do this," she said.

Ever tried. Try again.

[tucano2]

China/Tibet...aren''t the Chinese the ones who backed
North Korea and helped kill thousands of Americans and
other United Nations troops? Wasn''t it the Chinese who
invaded and conquered Tibet? Wasn''t it the Chinese
who had, and likely still have, spies inside the USA''s
most secret defense industry? Wasn''t it the Chinese who
just recently shot down an orbiting "weather"
satellite? (The USA followed suit not long after). After
reveiwing just a few of the many provocations, military
operations, and political/economic strategic and
tactical moves on the part of China since 1950 or so, I''m
struck by the fact that Tibet has not been guilty of any
of those things. Who are we to believe? Are we to
believe the thugs/muggers/murderers? Or are to believe the
surviving victims? On a "10=high" scale of
truthfulness I''ll award a 2 to China, and a 9 to Tibet. The way
we "ordinary" people can support Tibet is to hurt the
economy of China to the point China''s stranglehold on
Tibet is loosened. There are 5 Billion of us. There
are 1 Billion of them. Free people have a numerical
advantage of 5 to 1. Reduce or eliminate monthly purchases
of "Made in China" products (many having USA
logos/brands) and slow down the foreign exchange (mostly USA
dollars) the Chinese government receives each month.
Avoid supporting Terrorists. Avoid "Made in China"
products whatever the brandname on them.

[knyghtwolf]

With folks like d*i*c*k cheney around. why worry about some crazed islamic rodeo clowns when we have the real deal right here in our own white house. The man makes bin Laden look like a candidate for sainthood when you compare the two. What are we REALLY fighting for over there anyway, anyone REALLY know? Sic em shrubbie.......

[itchyb-2009]

"crime against our constitution"? Perceptions5, where the hell in the constitution are the inter-party rules addressed, pray tell? The DNC told the states what their party rules were, the states ignored them, and the result is how you see it. Didn''t know you were so interested in inter-party policies. No matter. John McBush will be beaten like a rented mule in Novemeber.

[clestes-2009]

The people will make their voices loud and clear come November.

All the political pundit BS now is all a waste of time. The American people know perfectly well what they want and they will vote to get what they want.

They want an end to Iraq and Obama will the the winner on that fact alone.

[ki8911]

When Cheney affirmed that he didn''t care what the American People thought and felt, it just showed what a cold hearted buzzard he is. He is the military industrial complex, a vicious vampire sucking out the life of this country, our brave women and men overseas, the families that wait and pray for them to come home safely. I''d like for him to say that in the same room to the parents whose kids were killed for his corporate cronies profit.
Not all Republicans are jerks, it is just sad that they have allowed themselves to be hijacked by a manifest destiny mentality.
It is time, right now, to remove these monsters from the White House. No more bloodshed for our people and the innocent citizens of Iraq and Afghanistan.

[bluestardad]

WAR SUPPORTERS HAVE BLOOD ON THEIR HANDS!

THE ONLY WAY TO HAVE TRUE JUSTICE IS TO START WAR CRIMES TRIALS NOW ON THOSE WHO STARTED THE IRAQ WAR!

AMERICA STAND UP OR SHUT UP!

[it_oldtimer]

When you elect guys like Bush and Cheney you''re electing corporate criminals and con-men who honestly never gave a *** about the American people, only about their own financial bottom line, and that of their close friends.

The very last thing this country needs is more of the came (read: McCain).

[ubrew12]

The War isn''t over. But Cheney is.
Thank God for small favors.

[andor3]

War is Over. if you want it to be

[iknowbest-2009]

When JM gets in, the war will go global - it has to, both to fully effect repair of the economy and to secure, once and for all, the oil supply - and deny it to China and India, by the way. The draft will be coming back - here''s hoping to see YOU on the front lines. Try not to let your liberal tendencies show when you''re under fire.

[perceptions5]

Both Democrats are unelectable in November.

How can the Democrats expect to win the White House when they only recognize 48 states?

Where''s the social justice and count all the vote liberals?

Where?

Why aren''t their massive protests by the "principled" liberals within the Democrat party?

Why aren''t their close pals from the far left-wing hate groups DailyKos and MoveOn.org protesting this crime against our constitution?

Where are all the "self-righteous" liberal Democrat and their close courrupt pals in our mostly liberal MSM wolfpack press when it comes to this Social Injustice?

WHERE?....................................

Now what does that "really" say about the Democrat Party?

...................really?

Why is the left-wingers at "The Nation" silent about this Social Injustice? Are we just going to pick-n-choose issues and stances based on party?

[gkc99]

Yes, there are even a couple of Repubs who have a shred of honesty and principle left, like Chuck Hagel.

[it_oldtimer]

Well said, redstripe11.

[redstripe11]

You had me up until "more democrats." How about electing anti-war candidates irregardless of party affiliation. The Libertarian party is anti-war as well. Numerous high profile Republicans have been against the war. Peace is not and should not be partisan.