Search Results

In Washington in the spring of 1968, George Mische indicated to Phil Berrigan—whose trial in federal court in Baltimore he had been attending—that he was beginning to assemble a group that might be willing to take part in a second demonstration at a draft board. Mische knew that the entire draft couldn't be completely crippled by such protests; there were simply too many boards to attack, too many files to destroy. But he was certain that demonstrations targeting draft boards would at least help to publicize the glaring racial and socioeconomic inequities of the military draft. Mische was eager to strike a blow against the Selective Service Act, the measure that made conscription possible. Hogan sensed “the urgency on Phil's part. He was trying to get another action to happen before he went to jail” for his role in the Baltimore Four protest. Berrigan made clear how he wanted this second protest to proceed. “He wanted to burn files this time,” Hogan recalled, “because the message of blood hadn't gotten through to people the first time.” It would be “a symbol, something that would reach more people.”

This chapter focuses on the structural features of political systems and their possible influence on social movement sectors in the eight countries—Belgium, Britain, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Spain, Switzerland, and the United States—that participated in the February 15, 2003 protests. It seeks a direct link between general political structures, and the structures of a large social movement sector, or even specific kinds of movements. Large antiwar protests usually recruit from a cluster of movements referred to as a social movement family. For the most part, peace movements consist of progressive and leftist groups. The chapter concentrates on the size and character of the progressive left, labeled the “progressive movement sector”.

With their convictions, the Baltimore Four faced terms in federal prison of up to fifteen years each. Given the nature of their offenses—and that two of them, Phil Berrigan and James Mengel, were clergymen—few expected the quartet to receive maximum terms from Judge Edward Northrop. Still, with the federal government increasingly eager to rein in antiwar dissent, it seemed possible that the Baltimore activists would be headed for at least short stints behind bars. Their attorney, having spoken with Northrop and federal prosecutors, certainly thought so. “Weisgal says that we're going to get time,” Berrigan wrote to a family member after the trial. The priest did not fear going to jail, but first he wanted to strike another blow against the draft. Berrigan put the idea to Tom Lewis. They quickly agreed that they would try to recruit others to join in a second witness against the draft that would extend and amplify what they had done at the Custom House. The recruitment effort began even before the Baltimore Four went on trial. A dynamic Catholic peace and social justice activist named George Mische played an essential role in bringing together a larger group. Mische and the confederates he helped to organize in the spring of 1968 would become the Catonsville Nine.

Drawn from analyses by Hayashi and McKnight, Mōri, and Noiz, and personal interviews with activists ECD, Oda Masanori, Matsumoto Hajime of Shirōto no Ran, and others, this chapter recounts the prehistory of vehicular sound systems in protests in the 1990s, the original reclaim-the-streets rebellion in 2003, conflicts with the police, ECD’s protest anthem, and the subsequent adoption of the format for precariat (precarious proletariat)/freeter (temporary worker) rights and anti-globalization movements. Several of the central characters became involved with antinuclear demonstrations, carrying over some practices.

This chapter details the life and career of Denise Levertov from 1962 to 1967. The 1960s was an auspicious time to be a poet. Poetry magazines, publishing houses, poetry readings, and writer-in-residence programs at colleges and universities proliferated, allowing for greater exposure for poets, especially for women, who previously had little opportunity for recognition of their talent. Levertov benefited from these circumstances. She was in demand as a poet, and in 1962, was granted a coveted Gugenheim Fellowship. In addition to its prestige, the accompanying monetary award allowed her some luxuries: a new washing machine, dryer, and dishwasher. Each made domestic life simpler. In 1963, with Gugenheim support ended, Levertov contributed to the family's finances through her poetry readings by working as poetry editor for the Nation, staying until early 1965, and by serving as a consultant first for Wesleyan University Press and a year later for W. W. Norton. Levertov also engaged in antiwar activities.

This concluding chapter explains how the book has explored how the state manages its citizens' lives and deaths by convincing individuals to sacrifice their lives for their country. Using an integrative approach and drawing on Israel's experience, it has discussed casualty sensitivity and its social origins, how it relates to bereavement discourse and bereavement-motivated collective antiwar protests, and its implications for civil-military relations. Israel formulated a death hierarchy that took into account the right to protect and the right to protection. However, these rights became imbalanced after the 1970s, especially following the First Lebanon War, resulting in a drop in motivation among the secular middle class, who had benefited most from the right to protect. This book has examined the strategies enacted by the state to strike a balance between the right to protect and the right to protection and suggests that these rights are not equally applied. The practice of both rights is governed and determined by the social hierarchies embodied in the death hierarchy.