[Peace-discuss] RE: misgivings on Iraq War: A Four Year Reflection

[Joseph Thomas Miller]

Dear Friends,
 
I would agree with Thomas and Bob on this question. We in VVAW have
often utilized the flag in our various antiwar events over the past
forty years. This is a symbol for most people of what they wish the
United States to stand for, and while there are those who can make the
historical arguments about the flag as a symbol of U.S, imperialism, to
any family who has lost someone in any of the U.S. wars, the flag is
personal.
 
http://www.vvaw.org/veteran/article/?id=438
 
We can be pure and say we know better. We know what sordid acts have
been carried out under that flag, therefore we should ignore what the
flag means to folks who still believe in the formal values of the United
States, the folks who have seen loved ones die or come home injured
because they believe they were doing the right thing. My questions is,
how do we get to even talk with folks we want to reach, if we deny their
current reality? It might be comfortable individually to be "pure" and
to have what amounts to an elitist position on the flag. But, it is not
very smart politically, because that only isolates you from the folks
you need to reach.
 
 
Joe Miller
National Coordinator, VVAW,Inc.


________________________________

From: Thomas Ayala [mailto:ayalat at uiuc.edu] 
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2007 12:10 PM
To: naiman.uiuc at gmail.com
Cc: Martin Christopher Smith; Allison Jane Lale; Elizabeth Esch;
coalition at iresist.org; rhomberger3000 at gmail.com; Peace Discuss; Peace
List; Tom G Miebach; Paul Thomas McGuire; Joseph Thomas Miller; carol
inskeep; can.uiuc at gmail.com; Karen Elizabeth Medina;
codybralts at gmail.com; Michael Martin; Tom Abram; esbenshd at uni.uiuc.edu;
Andrew Patrick Zimmerer; Kevin Hartman; Eric Uskali; Christopher Michael
Dressel; Peter C Rhomberg; Walter L Pituc; Christopher Hugh Calvey;
mukta_tripathy at yahoo.com; Justin R Cajindos; akaplan3 at law.uiuc.edu;
enslin.mark at gmail.com; cge at shout.net; nich.shoom at gmail.com; Steven
Wyatt; clairewang002 at gmail.com
Subject: Re: misgivings on Iraq War: A Four Year Reflection


I agree with Robert Naiman.  As someone who has spent time in a war
zone, I couldn't wait to get back to the United States of America.  My
grandfather died in Korea, and I proudly display his American flag in a
memorial case in my living room.  When Mexican-Americans proudly wave
their flags in Chicago every May and September, do you think they are
supporting the PRI, Vicente Fox or Felipe Calderon?  Of course not!!
They are supporting their people, their indigenous heritage, their
language, their religion, their cuisine--the flag has become more of a
representation of their culture, not a show of support for the
government. 

I think it is time to stop this bickering and unite as a coalition
behind efforts to stop the war.  I am proud, as a veteran and member of
Iraq Veterans Against the War ( and who was actually in combat) to
support the College Democrats and their efforts to end the war, no
matter if I disagree with their tactics.  It is not my place to tell the
college democrats how to run their anti-war efforts.  I am just so glad
they are doing it.  Don't let the fringe far left crowd deter you from
your efforts.  

I just go an email showing the original email by Martin Smith, of the
local socialist organization, was posted to a listserv to a lot of other
community members.  I think that is a shame.

Allison we (nearly everyone on the left, except those on the fringe
left) support your efforts to end this war, by any means necessary.

Thanks
Thomas

_____________
Thomas Ayala
Ph.D. Candidate, Department of English
Center for Writing Studies
University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign

c: 217.840.6973
h: 217.398.5624




On Mar 21, 2007, at 11:55 AM, Robert Naiman wrote:

I was very disturbed to receive this email.

People may have legitimate differences over the proper use of the
flag, but organizing a campaign against the College Democrats for
using flags as part of a memorial to U.S. troops who have died in the
war on the grounds that the flag is intrinsically tied to militarism
is sectarian and extreme.

I would ask Mr. Smith to desist from this campaign, and focus his
efforts on working constructively with other organizations to end the
war, rather than attacking organizations which have a long track
record of advocating for peace and justice in this community.

Robert Naiman

On 3/21/07, msmith46 at uiuc.edu <msmith46 at uiuc.edu> wrote:

	(please see bottom of email for information on how to voice your
concern to the College Democrats on their proposed U.S. flag display on
the quad)
	******************************

	Dear Allison of the College Democrats and all student leaders:

	My name is Martin Smith and I am with Iraq Veterans Against the
War at UIUC.

	I want to share with you my misgivings about the proposed
display by the College Democrats to have 3,223+ U.S. flags in the quad
to commemorate the U.S. troops that have died in the war.

	First, when troops die, families are given a flag by the
government and a flag is draped over a given soldiers' coffin.  To me,
this is the ultimate act of hypocrisy by our government.  We, the
antiwar movement, need a symbol that does not mimic and copy what our
own government does.  That is, we need a symbol that is clear and
distinct from our government who claims to "support our troops" but in
reality sends them to an illegal and immoral war to die, only to return
to failed VA hospitals or worse yet, gives them a flag to mark their
ultimate sacrifice.

	You see, in my opinion, Peace is NOT Patriotic and having the
flag at an antiwar event is a concession to the war drive.    The flag
became inescapably identified with militarism long ago.

	In his successful campaign for a U.S. Senate seat in Indiana in
1898, Albert Beveridge gave a notorious speech called "The March of the
Flag" that called for the annexation of the Philippines. "[W]e are of
the ruling race of the world," Beveridge declared. "Ours is the blood of
government; ours the heart of dominion; ours the brain and genius of
administration...Will you remember that we do but what our fathers
did?--we but pitch the tents of liberty further westward, further
southward--we only continue the march of the flag!"

	As well, the U.S. flag can't be symbol of justice and freedom
when it was used to justify the genocidal conquest of Native Americans,
the seizure of half of Mexico and the slavery and racism suffered by
African Americans.

	The great abolitionist Frederick Douglass noted that Blacks had
to struggle for the right to vote despite fighting under the American
flag in the Civil War--while ex-Confederates received pardons. "Do you
intend to sacrifice the very men who have come to the rescue of your
banner in the South and incurred the lasting displeasure of their
masters thereby?" Douglass asked. "Do you intend to sacrifice them and
reward your enemies? Do you mean to give your enemies the right to vote
and take it away from your friends?"

	A century later, African Americans were still struggling--and
dying--for the right to vote. "Being born here in America doesn't make
you an American," the Black revolutionary Malcolm X said in a 1964
speech. "I'm one of the 22 million Black people who are the victims of
Americanism. One of the 22 million Black people who are the victims of
democracy, nothing but disguised hypocrisy. So I'm not standing here
speaking to you as an American or a patriot or a flag-saluter or a
flag-waver--no, not I. I'm speaking as a victim of this American system.
And I see America through the eyes of the victim. I don't see any
American dream; I see an American nightmare."

	Finally, how can the flag of the government that supported death
squads and dictators from Latin America to the Middle East to Africa be
seen in the Third World as anything but a symbol of imperialist
domination?

	S. Brian Wilson, a Vietnam War veteran who became a peace
activist, wrote an essay on how he changed his view of the flag while
reading the military newspaper Stars and Stripes. "There was a story
about an arrest for flag burning somewhere in the United States," Wilson
wrote. "I had recently experienced the horror of seeing numerous bodies
of young women and children that were burned alive in a small Delta
village devastated by napalm...I wondered why it was okay to burn
innocent human beings 10,000 miles from my hometown, but not okay to
burn a piece of cloth that was symbolic of the country that had horribly
napalmed those villagers.

	"Something was terribly wrong with the Cold War rhetoric of
fighting communism that made me question what our nation stood for.
There was a grand lie, an American myth, that was being fraudulently
preserved under the cloak of our flag. So when I see the flag and think
of the Declaration of Independence, instead of the United States of
America, I see the United Corporations of America; I see the blood and
bones of people all over the globe who have been dehumanized, then
exterminated by its imperialism; and I see a symbol that represents a
monstrous lie maintained by excessive, deadly force. It makes me feel
sick and ashamed."

	That is why those of us opposed to Washington's war must march
under a different banner--one that stands for international solidarity
and justice.

	In the final analysis, utilizing the flag is problematic because
it calls for unity with the very people who put soldiers and troops in
harm's way in Iraq.  It calls for unity with the people who promote
anti-Arab racism.  It calls for unity with all the pro-war people.

	I prefer that you consider utilizing a non-nationalistic symbol
in your display.  Utilize dogtags, utilize boots, utilize cardboard
cut-outs of tombs.  As well, consider some memorial symbol for all the
deaths of Iraqi people as well.  We cannot only mourn for American
troops but must mourn all the innocent lives that have been lost by this
illegal and immoral war.

	I realize that this may be costly.  However, you don't have to
have 3,223 symbols (the number of casualties as of this 3/21/07) or one
million plus symbols for Iraqis.  Even just 322 of whatever
non-nationalistic symbol, with each representing a hundred, would be
powerful.  It is really dangerous to merely go for the cheapest cost,
i.e. small flags, without considering the overall message that you are
promoting.

	Please consider NOT utilizing the flag as your display.  Because
if you do, your message will be misconstrued and your antiwar position
will be mistaken to represent a pro-war position that supports of all
the past wrongs our country has engaged in.

	As such, Iraq Vets Against the War will have to consider
rescinding our endorsement of this event.  We will not support a pro-war
display.  The flag does not pull people together--it divides people!

	respectfully submitted,
	Martin Smith

	p.s. I encourage other student leaders to stand with me in
requesting the Democrats reconsider the symbolism and message of their
display.  Please voice your dissent to Allison of the College Democrats
at: lale at uiuc.edu

	If you have any further questions, please call me:
	Martin Smith
	217 649-8830



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/private/peace-discuss/attachments/20070326/0138cfff/attachment.htm