Film Documents Lost History of GI Movement Against the Vietnam War
April 19th, 2007 by Vicki Baker
Some of us of are having a discussion in another thread about military recruitment strategies. Personally, I think those of us opposed to the war should be directing our energies toward counter-recruitment rather than accepting the poverty draft as a fact of life. We should also do everything we can to support AWOL and deserting soldiers who have experienced the futility of our presence in Iraq firsthand. If you know anyone in the military who wants to get out, please give them the GI rights hotline number: 1-800-394-9544 and the GI rights web site: http://girights.objector.org
This leads me to the title of this post: a documentary about the last real revolutionary working-class social movement in this country’s history: the GI movement against the Vietnam war.
From the Sir! No Sir! website:
In the 1960’s an anti-war movement emerged that altered the course of history. This movement didn’t take place on college campuses, but in barracks and on aircraft carriers. It flourished in army stockades, navy brigs and in the dingy towns that surround military bases. It penetrated elite military colleges like West Point. And it spread throughout the battlefields of Vietnam. It was a movement no one expected, least of all those in it. Hundreds went to prison and thousands into exile. And by 1971 it had, in the words of one colonel, infested the entire armed services. Yet today few people know about the GI movement against the war in Vietnam.
You can watch the theatrical trailer here, the extended 12 minute trailer here, and the punkass crusade counter-recruitment spot here.
April 19th, 2007 at 9:45 pm
Vicki, the links in your post led me to some sites that give a wealth of information about military recruiter access on high school campuses. Pretty amazing stuff. For example, I learned that “Section 9528 [of the "No Child Left Behind Act] requires school districts that receive NCLB assistance to share student information such as names and addresses of students to military recruiters.”
Little did I realize that NCLB meant no child left [unrecruited].
Your links led to this link, which I found to be a good summary of the military access connection to NCLB: http://www.ncpie.org/nclbaction/armed_forces.html
April 20th, 2007 at 10:05 am
Thanks Vicki, you saved me a lot of leg work here, as I am a product of the “hippie” generation. I was born in 1975, thus I am likely missing some key details on things like Vietnam and Woodstock and Women’s Lib (although I have probably had more than the RDA of women’s lib). I am curious how Grumpy will respond to this *attack* on our finely tuned military machine (which runs on blood).
April 20th, 2007 at 10:50 am
When does Volunteer really mean volunteer?
The major difference between Vietnam and now is that Vietnam was supplied with draftees. They had no choice. One may argue whether a particular individual really understood what the contract meant when he or she signed, but that argument can’t hold for all of them. Through the 80s and 90s a great many people signed up to cash in on the education benefits. During the first Iraq War, a small number acted aghast at the idea that volunteering for military service really meant they might have to get shot at. I found that objectionable then, and to a large extent I do now. If a soldier disagrees with the war under present circumstances, let that soldier state it up front and fight it out in court (which is provided for, contrary to some opinion). Running away wins no battles, legally, morally or militarily.
I’m no hawk and I find this war a horrid waste, but if we wish to keep the draft at bay, then the volunteer army must be seen to work and work well. I personally find the draft far worse morally than what we presently have. Undermining that system will lead to nothing better.
Unless you believe we would be better off without a military of any kind, which is a different debate, but still not advanced by supporting desertion.
April 20th, 2007 at 12:37 pm
Erich:
The No Child Left Unrecruited provision has been front page news off and on around here, since a student at Santa Cruz High organized a campaign to make the release of student records to the Pentagon an “opt-in” policy rather than “opt-out”. Only 50 out of the 2000 students in the District opted in. Then the feds put the squeeze on, threatening to pull funding. The school board caved, but at least the opt-out check box is now on the emergency contact card that all parents have to turn in at the start of the school year.
April 20th, 2007 at 12:43 pm
Jason wites: “If a soldier disagrees with the war under present circumstances, let that soldier state it up front and fight it out in court (which is provided for, contrary to some opinion). Running away wins no battles, legally, morally or militarily.”
That’s why we need the GI rights hotline, so they can be informed of that right.
April 20th, 2007 at 6:59 pm
This is an excellent post, Vicki. It contains a wealth of information that is enlightening, practical and timely. Well done!
Now, before Ben has an apoplectic fit, let me explain. I oppose military recruiting practices, especially the outright coercion used to force young men to register with Selective Service. I absolutely despise it. The draft is nothing but a means by which rich, old people force poor, young people to fight their wars. And, judging by the past fifty years, America’s rich, old people are remarkably stupid about they wars they choose to fight. If they feel so certain that war is the right thing to do, then they should be the first ones to send their sons and daughters to the front lines. America would have a lot fewer warmongers if the people who supported a war, or their children or grandchildren, were the first ones to be drafted. Notice I said sons AND daughters: women are perfectly capable of performing military jobs, so they should be drafted, too.
That said, I also reject the suggestion that military recruiters “exploit” young men and women by offering them better paying jobs than they might be able to get elsewhere. If a man or woman doesn’t want to be in the military, no one is waterboarding them to force them to sign up: they can simply look elsewhere for a career. True, that might be hard to do for some segments of our society, and it might involve some hard work and sacrifice, but the fact remains that PLENTY of career options exist outside the military, and PLENTY of poor people manage to get through life without enlisting. To suggest that people who accept these better paying military jobs have been “exploited” by military recruiters is simply ludicrous. We all must live (or die) with the decisions we make: they should, too.
September 2nd, 2008 at 5:47 pm
The GI Rights Network has undergone some reorganization and it and the GI Rights Hotline are no longer administered by CCCO (Central Committee for Conscientious Objectors), whose website is objector.org.
The GI Rights Network now has its own website, http://www.girightshotline.org,
and toll-free phone number, 877-447-4487. This new website makes it much easier for users to find information and regulations regarding discharges and GI Rights. Moreover, the entire site is in English and in Spanish. In addition, the links to the regulations on the new site are maintained and up-to-date.
Susan
Administrator of girightshotline.org