Tweet
So today Republicans went after Tom daschle for his comments: this is not particualrly about daschle, but about an interesting reality about America today.
Over the last 50 years the amount of real sacrifice the average American has to undergo while the nation is at war has gone down, and down dramatically. This phenomenon, of Amercian civilians having to sacrifice was highest during our independence and the Civil war of course, with the two world wars also demanding much sacrifice, mainly economic. In both Korea and Vietnam millions of conscripts saw combat as they were rotated. Since the end of the concript army and the growing dependence of high tech, the number of Americans at war has gone down greatly, and any real home front sacrifice has also come to an end. Our current technological advantage means that the possible US casualties get lower and lower every day. Our tech lead means fewer and fewer American families will have to mour the loss of family.
Yet, while the amount of sacrifice to be had has gone down, the intollerence of dissent at wartime has increased with time. Read what the anti-war press said during the civl war of Lincoln, at the same time hundreads of thousand fought and towns and cities burned. It was vicious, little above libel. Even during world war 2, opposition press could be very harsh about Roosevelt, if not as harsh as before, and during the Vietnam and Korean wars, wars which lasted years and took thousands of American lives, the critism of politicnas like truman and Johnson was common. Today, we are about to embark on a war that shall be nowhere near as long, nor costly in US lives, and yet to say a bad thing about president bush becomes an act of treason...
So, why has America become less open to critisms of our political leaders during war than before? Is this a good thing?
Over the last 50 years the amount of real sacrifice the average American has to undergo while the nation is at war has gone down, and down dramatically. This phenomenon, of Amercian civilians having to sacrifice was highest during our independence and the Civil war of course, with the two world wars also demanding much sacrifice, mainly economic. In both Korea and Vietnam millions of conscripts saw combat as they were rotated. Since the end of the concript army and the growing dependence of high tech, the number of Americans at war has gone down greatly, and any real home front sacrifice has also come to an end. Our current technological advantage means that the possible US casualties get lower and lower every day. Our tech lead means fewer and fewer American families will have to mour the loss of family.
Yet, while the amount of sacrifice to be had has gone down, the intollerence of dissent at wartime has increased with time. Read what the anti-war press said during the civl war of Lincoln, at the same time hundreads of thousand fought and towns and cities burned. It was vicious, little above libel. Even during world war 2, opposition press could be very harsh about Roosevelt, if not as harsh as before, and during the Vietnam and Korean wars, wars which lasted years and took thousands of American lives, the critism of politicnas like truman and Johnson was common. Today, we are about to embark on a war that shall be nowhere near as long, nor costly in US lives, and yet to say a bad thing about president bush becomes an act of treason...
So, why has America become less open to critisms of our political leaders during war than before? Is this a good thing?
.
I have yet to see an anti-war commitment from CNN. Since CNN looks pretty conservative to me, I assume the whole "liberal media" thing is a myth to push the media to the right.
Comment