Another excellent piece with a lot to think about. There is so much to respond to but I'd like to take a crack at your suggestion that the divide on support for the Vietnam War might never be bridged. I tend to agree but add the somewhat bizarre reactions to those who did not go even when they later claimed to have supported the war (NY Gov Pataki said that his class at Yale supported the war from their commons rooms n New Haven.) George W went AWOL without political repercussions, Dan Quayle said that he joined the Indiana National Guard to support the War. (Several Guard units were sent overseas but that was likely not the hope of those who joined.) Many Boomers avoided the war while supporting every recent adventure. Dick Cheney famously had "other priorities" and still was named Sec of Defense. Anyone who said that they were against the war at the time, however, seem tarred with some brush. I keep hoping for an analogy with those who paid someone to take their place in the Union Army only to find themselves Imperialists in the 1890s there seemed as many of them who were not punished as there were 2-S veterans in GOP administrations going back to Reagan.
Such a great read. I moved from journalism to academia at the start of the 90s, and I sort of miss those moments when you mix with people so outside your world but seek to tell their story (like it or not). This is a very cool piece. Thanks.
Another fascinating chapter. I have to wonder how different attitudes you encountered would or would not be now? I loved this quote ““A country that conquers another country with the force of the sword, but whose education is weak, will be conquered by those it seeks to rule, if their education is strong.” In today’s world? I’m not so sure. But, could it now refer to immigrants - if their education (or that of their children) is strong will they rise and surpass those of the community into which they come. Look forward to next chapter
Another excellent piece with a lot to think about. There is so much to respond to but I'd like to take a crack at your suggestion that the divide on support for the Vietnam War might never be bridged. I tend to agree but add the somewhat bizarre reactions to those who did not go even when they later claimed to have supported the war (NY Gov Pataki said that his class at Yale supported the war from their commons rooms n New Haven.) George W went AWOL without political repercussions, Dan Quayle said that he joined the Indiana National Guard to support the War. (Several Guard units were sent overseas but that was likely not the hope of those who joined.) Many Boomers avoided the war while supporting every recent adventure. Dick Cheney famously had "other priorities" and still was named Sec of Defense. Anyone who said that they were against the war at the time, however, seem tarred with some brush. I keep hoping for an analogy with those who paid someone to take their place in the Union Army only to find themselves Imperialists in the 1890s there seemed as many of them who were not punished as there were 2-S veterans in GOP administrations going back to Reagan.
Such a great read. I moved from journalism to academia at the start of the 90s, and I sort of miss those moments when you mix with people so outside your world but seek to tell their story (like it or not). This is a very cool piece. Thanks.
Another fascinating chapter. I have to wonder how different attitudes you encountered would or would not be now? I loved this quote ““A country that conquers another country with the force of the sword, but whose education is weak, will be conquered by those it seeks to rule, if their education is strong.” In today’s world? I’m not so sure. But, could it now refer to immigrants - if their education (or that of their children) is strong will they rise and surpass those of the community into which they come. Look forward to next chapter
I cannot wait for the book to be published, and I know it will be published, it just has to!
Brilliant as ever.