It’s a more palpable narrative than “your children are bloodthirsty morons looking to slaughter innocents overseas”.
When people write and craft a narrative, they have an audience in mind.
Direct attacks on a person’s integrity isn’t a popular narrative. But the again, rage bait is a thing, so a change in strategy might have a positive effect.
I personally don’t believe that conceding on basic principles to gain ground with people who are fundamentally opposed to anti-imperialism will have a positive effect. At that point, you’re essentially just preaching labour zionism.
It helped stop the Vietnam war. I’d consider that a positive effect.
But yea, you’re right. We don’t know if pushing the actually narrative will have a similar or greater effect. That’s what I was questioning in my post.
I’d say it would be quite difficult to foment anti-war sentiment in the same way as the Vietnam War era. The West capitalised on 9/11 and was able to very effectively sell the Iraq War (and subsequent wars) to the public because of this. I don’t think there was anything quite like that even in red scare terms for Vietnam.
Plus, another crucial difference is that Vietnam War-era America had conscription with roughly one-third of America’s military personnel being conscripts who were drafted, it’s generally a lot easier to get people to be against something when it obviously infringes on an individual’s ability to choose to not participate without consequence. Nowadays though, it’s an all-volunteer force that is very unlikely to be receptive to the same messaging.
It’s a more palpable narrative than “your children are bloodthirsty morons looking to slaughter innocents overseas”.
When people write and craft a narrative, they have an audience in mind.
Direct attacks on a person’s integrity isn’t a popular narrative. But the again, rage bait is a thing, so a change in strategy might have a positive effect.
I personally don’t believe that conceding on basic principles to gain ground with people who are fundamentally opposed to anti-imperialism will have a positive effect. At that point, you’re essentially just preaching labour zionism.
It helped stop the Vietnam war. I’d consider that a positive effect.
But yea, you’re right. We don’t know if pushing the actually narrative will have a similar or greater effect. That’s what I was questioning in my post.
I’d say it would be quite difficult to foment anti-war sentiment in the same way as the Vietnam War era. The West capitalised on 9/11 and was able to very effectively sell the Iraq War (and subsequent wars) to the public because of this. I don’t think there was anything quite like that even in red scare terms for Vietnam.
Plus, another crucial difference is that Vietnam War-era America had conscription with roughly one-third of America’s military personnel being conscripts who were drafted, it’s generally a lot easier to get people to be against something when it obviously infringes on an individual’s ability to choose to not participate without consequence. Nowadays though, it’s an all-volunteer force that is very unlikely to be receptive to the same messaging.
Not to mention with drones, the US doesn’t need that many bodies on the ground.
My YouTube algo is already starting to manufacture consent