<underfire> chaos, illusions & the 60's

[Michael H Goldhaber]

But similar issues  were evident in Viet-Nam. Neither situation's  
images unambiguously show or showed winning or losing. But y0u are  
right that when an unambiguous victory occurs (and this must be  
rather quickly) the public is likely to be more willing to support  
the (former) war. However, the greater show of images helps make more  
situations ambiguous. And, as I mentioned in my earlier post, signs  
of "enemy" suffering must be considered now in deciding an  
unambiguous victory, which makes the problem harder.

Again, we have to look to history for comparisons. WWI 's long  
stalemate was often not enough to create widespread disaffection  
until many years later. (For instance, New Zealand, which sent many  
troops to the western front in WWI, and has memorials to dead WWI  
soldiers everywhere,  apparently didn't much begin to question their  
involvement in that war until the 1990's.) I think something similar  
occurred in the US Civil War, where it took the North years to seem  
to be winning.

Best,
Michael

On Nov 3, 2006, at 5:14 AM, Eugene Wyatt wrote:

>
> From: "Michael H Goldhaber" <mgoldh at well.com>
>
> "Now a comparison to today: In the US the level of opposition to the
> Iraq war has risen much more swiftly than a comparable movement did
> 30 years ago, although the form of opposition is very different.
> Polls already show a majority quite opposed to the Iraq war, even
> without the draft, without a major youth movement, with one-twentieth
> the number of US deaths. Why? I think largely through the much vaster
> cavalcade of images from all sides that are seen from the Internet
> and other sources."
>
> Perhaps this is somewhat off topic and too obvious, but I suspect  
> that if
> this "cavalcade of images," etc. were showing that the invading  
> forces were
> 'winning' in Iraq, the polls would NOT show that a majority at home  
> were
> opposed to the invasion of Iraq.  'Winning or losing' very largely  
> determine
> war's acceptability for many.  And the sad thing is:  if the war in  
> Iraq
> were to turn around, if the invaders were to be seen as 'winners',  
> so the
> polls would turn.  'Winning and losing' here make temporary  
> bedfellows, "Oh
> you're antiwar my dear, since when and for what reasons?"
>
> Eugene Wyatt
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Under Fire  http://underfire.eyebeam.org
> 16 October - 10 December 2006
> International Biennial of Contemporary Art of Seville
> all writings copyright individual authors
> no commercial use without permission
> to post a message, send an email to:
> underfire at underfire.eyebeam.org
> to unsubscribe, send an email to:
> underfire-leave at underfire.eyebeam.org
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://underfire.eyebeam.org/pipermail/underfire/attachments/20061103/2fbce6e8/attachment.html