- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Letters posted here are associated with the following Salon Premium Member:
Published Letters: 1
I completely agree with your contention that Ayres and the radical side of the anti-war movement was detrimental to the whole anti-war movement. Peaceful demonstrations were encouraging a change in public opinion, along of course, with the much more vivid and graphic images (as compared to now....) of the casualties of Vietnam on the TV every night.
In 1968, if I wanted to watch TV I had to watch Walter Conkrite every night with my parents at the tender age of 10. Those images of the war, knowing that 2 of my relatives were there, made a huge impression on my young mind. Perhaps that's what's missing from these wars?
Anyway, what I saw on TV was enough to make me against the war even if I didn't completely understand the politics of it.
However, I do have to disagree with one of your last statements regarding "aligning" with Mr. Ayers.
Finally getting Mr. Ayre's side is interesting and provides some insight into his thought processes, as well as finally putting to rest his "associations" with Barack Obama.
While I didn't read all of the letters regarding this interview, what I did read did not indicate to me that anyone necessarily "aligns" themselves with Mr. Ayres, whatever that may mean.
Which brings me to my question: What philosophy is it, exactly, that anyone would be "aligning" themselves with? Perhaps I did miss that, because I didn't see a "new" radical philosophy in this interview.
And I don't believe the old radical philosophy will fly with President Obama.
