The anti-war protesters: what are they for?
December 8, 2002
A recent incident at University of Texas is indicative of the nature of the pacifists opposing a war with Iraq. After the student government of the University of Texas passed a resolution condemning a U.S. attack on Iraq, the Young Conservatives attempted a debate with the "Campus Coalition for Peace and Justice." However, as CNN reported, "Most listeners in the audience seemed to agree with the Campus Coalition, or at least people on that side seemed more vocal about their feelings… When an antiwar advocate began heckling a student in the pro-war camp, other supporters of the President's policies stood up, and a fistfight almost broke out." One can easily imagine what "more vocal" means when reverse-translated through the filter of CNN’s liberal bias. Apparently, the "peace protesters" are not so peaceful. All over the world, they have been rioting against "aggression." What is the true nature of the anti-war sentiment in America then? Much insight about the nature of the "anti-war" protest can be found in their "Statement of Conscience," which has been endorsed by thousands of professors and students across America.
The statement begins with seemingly noble remarks: "peoples and nations have the right to determine their own destiny… questioning, criticism, and dissent must be valued and protected…. such rights and values are always contested and must be fought for."
It is unclear however, just whose "rights" the protesters support. Is it Saddam’s "right" to suppress dissent by bloody executions or his right to make war against his neighbors? If the protesters are truly concerned about dissenters, why aren’t they supporting the opposition groups that seek to establish a democratic government in Iraq? Do they believe that the bloody coup in which Saddam Hussein became dictator gives him a "right" to do as he pleases with anyone who crosses his path?
The resolution goes on to claim: "Dissident artists, intellectuals, and professors find their views distorted, attacked, and suppressed." When one considers the behavior of the anti-war protesters in America’s universities, this statement seems especially misleading. At my own Texas A&M University, stands of the "The Examiner," a local conservative paper were vandalized and the newspapers stolen by an unknown culprit. It is unclear whether he was offended by the article titled "[Condoleezza] Rice: Iraqis cannot eat their oil reserves" or "Conservative student publications plagued by theft." When my "conservative" university banned students from hanging American flags outside their dorms, so as not to "offend international students," the true victims of suppression became clear.
The pacifists ask "What kind of world will this become if the U.S. government has a blank check to drop commandos, assassins, and bombs wherever it wants?" – but they don’t oppose a world where terrorists and dictators have a blank check to the same. Despite their rhetoric, to the peaceniks, there is no difference between a barbaric dictatorship and a free democracy fighting for its existence (as Israel is) or freedom from terrorism (as the United States is). As their "Statement of Conscience" shows, their primary objection is not that America may go to war with Iraq, but that it may do so unilaterally – without the permission of the rest of the world. They accuse Bush of "putting out a simplistic script of ‘good vs. evil,’" but what they really oppose is any declaration of moral legitimacy in fighting the war on terrorism. What the protesters in fact claim, is that any evaluation that a democratic regime is morally superior to a bloody dictatorship is evil, and any difference between the U.S. and Iraq is a probably result of "western imperialism."
A recent CNN photomontage shows young Palestinian kids with automatic weapons and war-paint on their faces screaming furiously at the camera protesting against a war in Iraq. The next slide shows a protest in America, with an unshaven man in a crowd of angry faces with banners proclaiming "no bombing of children for oil." Despite the fact that the Palestinians live in an oppressive, violent, and primitive society and the American protesters grew up in the wealthiest, freest, and most successful nation on earth, the differences almost seem lost in the two photos. Perhaps this is what the pacifists are truly seeking.