is making a difference.
first realized this when commentators
our little circle of noninterventionist policy wonks and activists
to "the War Party" in heartily derisive
course, itís a logical name for the interventionists, a name
that tells it like it is, as well as being deeply rooted
in American history. But the foreign policy lexicon, always
weighted in favor of interventionism, has dubbed the War Party
the "hawks." On the other hand, we are cast
in the role of "doves," who make pretty cooing noises
but are lost in the real world of international power politics.
So, while we hardly invented the phrase, I think we can take
credit for its current ubiquity.
other things, too, like the "chickenhawk" argument.
A recent column of mine, "Attack
of the Chickenhawks,"asking why anyone should listen
to a bunch of pointy-headed little policy wonks against the
good advice of experienced military officers, was posted on
August 2. By the end of the month we were hearing it out of
the mouths of General
Anthony Zinni and Senator
Chuck Hagel, leading Republican critics of the Presidentís
rush to war with Iraq.
point is not that Zinni and Hagel read and consciously
echoed little old me, but that, in the age of the Internet,
ideas spread quickly, and Antiwar.com, which has been pushing
the "chickenhawk" theme for all itís worth, did
much to set the tone of the debate.
good news is that we are winning the battle of ideas Ė and
just where we thought weíd have to win it. Itís fascinating
to see conservative Republicans in Congress standing up against
the war hysteria Ė the very people that Antiwar.com has always
made a special point of reaching out to with the noninterventionist
message. Itís all very interesting Ė and, from our point of
view, intensely gratifying. For if even conservatives are
coming out against this war, along with our top generals,
then this could be enough to tip the balance in favor of peace.
audience is broad enough to include a very large number of
those who consider themselves women and men of the Left, but
also includes perhaps just as many who consider themselves
conservatives of one sort or another. Since we are libertarians,
adherents of a credo that is beyond the tired old categories
of "left" and "right," we have freely
encouraged this sort of ideological cross-fertilization, featuring
a piece by John Pilger or Noam Chomsky alongside a scathing
denunciation of the neocons' war plans by conservative columnist
Charlie Reese or Patrick J. Buchanan. We made a conscious
decision, in recent months, to pay particular attention to
the conservatives, on the grounds that, if successful, this
effort would really make a difference.
making a difference
is what Antiwar.com is all about.
arenít just another little nonprofit thinktank, content to
comment from the sidelines: we are at war with the
War Partyóand polls show that we now have a chance to win.
CNN-Time poll shows a precipitous drop in support for an invasion
of Iraq, from Decemberís 70 percent to only 51 percent today.
40 percent of Americans now say heck no, we shouldnít go.
Half say they envision a long and bloody war, and a whopping
77 percent agree that war with Iraq would increase the likelihood
of another terrorist attack on the U.S.
now for the really good news: a solid majority, 68
percent, remember what it says in the Constitution and insist
on the President getting congressional authorization before
ordering the destruction of Baghdad. Gee, I guess they werenít
swayed by the
War Partyís lame argument that their attack plans were
authorized way back in 1991, when Congress authorized Gulf
the good news is that the Peace Party is winning; or, at least,
weíre enjoying a big upswing of support.
But we canít rest on our laurels, because we havenít won yet.
Far from it. But when you think how far weíve come from a
year ago, when the 9/11 terrorist attacks set off a wave of
war hysteria that is only now beginning to be beaten back,
you have to be encouraged. Antiwar.com, I am proud to say,
has been in the front lines of this battle, but itís up
to you to decide whether weíre going to run out of ammunition.
rather, run out of money.
it happens every year: we manage to raise enough, throughout
the year, to pay
our bills, and make it through on a shoestring budget
Ė but not quite.
War Party, with their endowed thinktanks and huge propaganda
apparatus, has the bucks to emit a daily stream of high-priced
demagogy. We, on the other hand, require a lot less to accomplish
a lot more: and our low-budget, high-tech strategy seems to
be working. But none of it is possible without your support.
We are planning a series of upgrades for the site, including:
Email to a friend, print, and save articles.
Easier, clearer navigation on every page of the site, including
the ability to access the entire site from any page.
Quicker page downloads.
Better archiving and more special topics pages.
our new features arenít limited to cyberspace. A number of
requests for speakers have come in from college campuses and
other venues, and
Iíll be doing a campus tour this fall. We are beginning
to develop a network of campus activists, and next year we
would like to schedule a kind of Summer School for anti-interventionists,
at the fabulous Randolph Bourne Institute in sunny Atherton,
California. Antiwar.com is educating the next generation of
have the energy to do all this. We just donít have the money
Ė unless you decide that the tax money you have to pay anyway
is better spent
helping to keep Antiwar.com alive and growing. Because
every penny you give is tax-deductible.
Iím only half-kidding when I say, yes, you can cancel
out all those tax dollars you involuntarily contributed to
Sharon Helicopter Gunship Fund with a contribution to
Antiwar.com. As the U.S. gets ready to unleash hellfire not
only on Iraq, but on a
large portion of the Middle East, itís important to make
a statement. Not everybody can be an activist. But by making
a tax-deductible contribution you are indeed taking vitally-needed
action on behalf of whatís right Ė and against the clique
of war-maddened chicken-hawks who seem to have taken over
the U.S. government.
is not the time for Antiwar.com to make radical cutbacks in
its service to you. We donít want to decrease our coverage,
our payments to writers, our updates, and our already tiny
staff. But we will have to take all of these measures unless
and until you come up with the difference.
donít mind asking for your support,
every year, because I think weíve earned it.
have indeed made a difference. You have made a difference,
with your support Ė especially
your financial support. Our readers have been generous
in the pastóand now we are asking you to come through with
the bucks to help keep those poll numbers for peace rising.
The public is just now beginning to wake up to the danger
posed by the militarists in the White House, and we have to
keep the momentum of the protest movement going strong.
why we need
your contribution a.s.a.p Ė because there isnít a moment
to lose. The great national debate now unfolding will shape
the course of history for decades to come. Shall we give up
our old republic, and take the road to Empire? That is the
question now facing the American public, and we must mobilize
all our intellectual and political support to deliver, in
answer, a resounding "No!"
Please Support Antiwar.com
520 S. Murphy Avenue, #202
Via our Secure Server
Credit Card Donation Form
contributions are now tax-deductible