General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhat could the average citizen have done to stop the neocons from invading Iraq?
We who opposed it, in the USA, UK, and numerous other countries demonstrated against it six ways from Sunday.
We wrote out Congresspeople, called, etc.
But TPTB didn't care a happy rat's ass what American, British, or any other citizens wanted. Because they wanted their war, and by God, they were going to have it.
Somebody tell me, what could average citizens have done?
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)What was unpopular was having US troops there for years.
Americans like the "invade and blow shit up" portion of wars. They don't like the "everything after that" phase.
Arkansas Granny
(31,518 posts)I was not at all comfortable with a pre-emptive war. GWB and his cohorts have a lot of blood on their hands.
Rosa Luxemburg
(28,627 posts)he traveled on the train every day and people started to gang up on him - saying he was un-American and wasn't welcome on the train.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)... "celebrities and sex charges" for a day or two. Nah, probably not.
http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2003/yir/
MotherPetrie
(3,145 posts)Not the people now in power who aren't holding the criminal perpetrators accountable for it even as they throw the book at pot users and whistleblowers.
elleng
(130,974 posts)PNAC and its henchmen had been doing its propaganda job for some time.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_for_the_New_American_Century
Kolesar
(31,182 posts)...with big wooden plugs shot with a weapon like a shotgun. "Crowd control"
JI7
(89,252 posts)stevenleser
(32,886 posts)impeachment and that wouldnt have worked, the House was controlled by Republicans and so no charges would have been brought.
Initech
(100,081 posts)awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)alsame
(7,784 posts)Democratic Senators (Hillary and Schumer) voted for the war, as did my Democratic House Rep, Nita Lowey.
elleng
(130,974 posts)RebelOne
(30,947 posts)There were protests around the world, but they turned a deaf ear to all those against an invasion.
Demo_Chris
(6,234 posts)The short answer, if that's what you are looking for, is NOTHING.
Drum circles, marches, occupy, all of these things accomplish nothing at all beyond attracting attention to the cause and helping mark the leaders. Often the only people even paying attention are the government, and I will leave it to you to decide if they care more about the message than the messenger.
It is often said that civil disobedience never accomplishes anything. That it is, at best, a distraction that focuses the wrong kind of attention on the movement. Those preaching this gospel point to people like Martin Luther King and the battle for civil rights, or Gandhi and his fight for liberation, and they cite these cases as evidence. This non-intervention philosophy is even taught in schools, and has become so ingrained that it is taken as a matter of faith by most.
It's absolute nonsense.
To believe that these tactics are effective requires some astonishing mental gymnastics and magical thinking. People believe it because every "expert" they have ever seen told them that this was so. To be fair, it's a tempting idea, as it demands nothing of the activist beyond outrage with the status quo and perhaps a saturday march or two to demonstrate just how "serious" they are about the issue. People are not just aught that this works, they are taught that this is the only thing that does work. So that's what they do. When they are really REALLY outraged they march around banging on drums chanting empty slogans. "Hey Hey, Ho Ho! Meaningless Marches are the way to go!"
To believe that this is effective, you have to basically ignore EVERYTHING except the sanitized versions of the civil rights movement taught in school and talked about on the TV. You have to ignore all of history, all of the present, and even reason and common sense. In short, it can ONLY be believed if one accepts it as a matter of faith. We are not talking about a strategy that sometimes works and sometimes does not, it's not fifty-fifty or even thirty-seventy, we are talking about faith in a tactic that essentially never works. It's like dropping a ball and hoping it will fall up.
On the positive side, there is something that you can do that is more powerful than any march. You can VOTE.
Vote for people who believe as you do, convince others to do the same, insist that these representative ALWAYS continue to represent you and only you, and you will see change. If you are willing to compromise your beliefs do not be surprised when your representatives do the same. If you want these wars to end, if you want drone strikes to end, refuse to vote for anyone who supports them. Don't organize a march, organize a recall. It might not get their attention, but it could, and marching around shouting slogans never will.
In my opinion.
raccoon
(31,111 posts)national level. A progressive candidate would NEVER get on the ballot for POTUS.
On the state/local level, voting is more likely to accomplish something.
About the recall, ITA. I don't know what is involved in doing one, but that's a good idea.
Your post give one a lot to think about.
Leslie Valley
(310 posts)Gulf of Tonkin resolution through Congress.
NOTHING! We were screwed.
dem in texas
(2,674 posts)I was so opposed to invading Iraq. I wrote my senators and letters to the editor. I thought it was immoral to attack people who had not harmed us and to cause a war that would kill thousands of innocent people. Where were the Churches and Christians when this happened? So few spoke out. During that period, if you bothered to read the newspapers, you could see that there was no threat to the US. So sad, what a terrible thing the US did, a blotch on our history.