Re: TownHall.com – 4-25-2008 – “The Case Against Cynicism” – Burt Prelutsky

Prelutsky contradicts himself when he says first that “the anti-war sentiment on college campuses had less to do with pacifism or a moral code than with a reasonable fear of being killed or maimed in Vietnam” and then “Even the mere threat of being bossed around by top sergeants who hailed from Texas and Georgia, of having to pull K.P. duty and make their own beds, was enough to give most of the guys I knew at UCLA a case of the vapors. Heck, just the idea that one could never light up a joint whenever you felt like it was reason enough to make any number of them take to the streets or take off for Toronto”.

Giving up ones freedom or exposing oneself to death is not to be taken lightly --- to do so there must be a compelling reason. The anti-war people felt the war in Vietnam was not such a reason, and in fact, war protesters risked giving up their freedom to arrest and jail (and perhaps fleeing their home country) because actively opposing the war, unlike participating in it, was a valid moral goal in their eyes. It is not cowardly to refuse to kill a random stranger for no good reason. It is not cowardly to refuse to get yourself killed for no good reason. It is not cowardly to refuse to fight in a useless war. It is cowardly not to stand up for what you believe. Prelutshy’s knowledge of war protesters must have been very limited and/or very inaccurate to lead him to believe they were cowards. But Prelutesky’s comment about making beds and smoking pot indicates he knew that his claim about protesters being cowards was erroneous --- just as erroneous as calling suicide bombers, who give up their life for what they believe, cowards. Suicide bombers can accurately be called terrorists, criminals, and just plain insane, but cowardly they are not. Anti-war protesters who attempted to avoid the draft can accurately be called draft dodgers or criminals, and I suppose some could be called cowardly (relatively few draft dodgers did so out of cowardice) but saying moral code had less impact than cowardess is just plain wrong.

Prelutsky says “we have millions of Americans who are convinced that whenever anything bad takes place, be it a hurricane or 9/11, it’s George Bush’s fault”. Nobody I know blames Bush for a hurricane or 9/11. But almost everybody I know recognizes that our government’s emergency preparedness to hurricanes was disgraceful, and Bush, as President, is not free of blame for that. As for 9/11, the government could also have been more competent in preventing and preparing for a 9/11, and Bush as President again bears some responsibility, although in this case the responsibility goes further back in time and reflects on past Presidents as well, but the mayor of NYC probably had more blame for unpreparedness to deal with 9/11 that all the Presidents combined.

Not everyone thinks of Charles Lindbergh as “beloved”. You might want to listen to Woodie Guthrie’s “Lindbergh” some time.