In his April 2005 FPIF Discussion Paper “Reclaiming the Prophetic Voice (RTPV),” John Humphries describes how a group of clergy and lay people—Christian, Jewish, and Muslim—drafted a Call to Resist the War in Iraq, which committed signers thereof to become actively complicit in differing acts of civil disobedience designed to end the illegal U.S. occupation and warfare in Iraq. Humphries describes the RTPV c all as inspired by and modeled after the 1967 Call to Resist Illegitimate Authority, which led to the formation of an organization named RESIST that actively opposed the illegal U.S. war against the South Vietnamese. The model indeed fits, as both calls are grounded in basic ethical principles rather than purely utilitarian concerns: The wars and occupations must be resisted, not because they were and are too costly or might drag on too long but because they were and are morally loathsome.
The author’s account of the RTPV call is excellent overall, but the article may be misleading in one respect because it suggests that the RESIST of 1967 is a thing of the past, which it most assuredly is not. It is the oldest progressive funding organization in the United States today, distributing a third of a million dollars last year to 146 groups actively struggling for peace and social change. It also provides technical assistance to startup groups, publishes both print and electronic newsletters, and participates in organizing demonstrations and supporting like-minded organizations.
Most of the groups that RESIST has funded for the last three decades transcend
anti-military organizing. They confront oppressive policies and actions at
all levels of government ranging from prison-building to assaults on reproductive
rights, from racism and homophobia to police brutality and attacks on immigrants.
RESIST broadened its scope beyond the war in Southeast Asia in the belief that
the United States cannot contribute to lasting peace abroad unless and until
it has achieved social and economic justice at home. Parallels between the
war situations in 1967 and today are numerous, and RESIST’s work may
thus be of interest to those planning strategies to end Middle Eastern violence.
The Call to Resist Illegitimate Authority was drafted and circulated
in the late spring of 1967, and a section of the final version was published
in the New York Review of Books and the Nation in early autumn.
By year’s end there were over 20,000 signatories to the call, and it
received added notoriety when it was placed in evidence at the arraignment
of the “Boston Five,” a group of signers arrested for conspiring
with the 281 young men who had collectively turned in or burned their draft
cards at the Arlington Street Church three months earlier.
Although the early members of RESIST actively organized and participated in
demonstrations, spoke at teach-ins, engaged in civil disobedience actions,
and offered extensive draft and military counseling, the organization has always
also been a funding source providing financial support to anti-war and draft
resistance groups around the country. These grant monies came from many small
donations made regularly by people increasingly morally outraged by the continuing
war and wanting to help stop it in any way they could, including financial
support for resistance activities that the government regularly claimed were
illegal.
RESIST’s pledge system of regular small donors rendered these donors
complicit in the “illegal” actions of the activists. This involvement
by association contributed measurably to maintaining and increasing opposition
to the war even after early resistance efforts seemed not to have been successful
as Nixon, Kissinger, and Laird replaced Johnson, Rusk, and McNamara, and the
killing fields spread from South Vietnam to North Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia.
As opposition to the war grew, RESIST began to expand its support for resisters,
first to the equally confrontational civil rights and anti-racist movements
that paralleled anti-war efforts and then later to the burgeoning women’s
movement. Support for parallel movements was not undertaken merely because
they opposed the war (“the enemy of my enemy is my friend”) but
because a multiplicity of consciousness-raising ideas and actions nationwide —think
of Betty Friedan, Gloria Steinem, Shulamith Firestone, Martin Luther King Jr.,
Malcolm X, and groups such as Redstockings, NOW, SNCC, and CORE—made
it abundantly clear that racism and sexism were as morally wrong as the war
in Southeast Asia and were indirectly linked to the violence of militarism.
Given that link, it was morally obligatory that any governmental actions encouraging
or condoning any prejudicial behavior against minorities or women be resisted
by anti-war activists.
A decade later RESIST expanded its outreach still further, aiding and abetting
progressive groups struggling against homophobia, oppressive U.S. policies
in Latin America, and environmental degradation, especially in poor communities.
It also supported organizing for prison reform, immigrant rights, universal
health care, and more.
There are thousands of courageous and commendable small groups struggling
for basic political change and social justice in the United States today, many
more than in 1967. Because their efforts regularly challenge both liberal and
conservative thinking, these groups are usually seen as marginal, not candidates
for funding from mainstream foundations or governmental organizations. And
they are all but ignored by the conglomerate-owned media except when they achieve
a significant victory against heavy odds.
Three organizations—all RESIST grantees in 2004—won such victories
very recently:
- The Oregon Toxics Alliance (OTA) is a coalition working to prevent a gas-burning
power plant from opening in a restricted airshed. Buoyed by a RESIST grant,
the group successfully rallied several communities to stop a 900 megawatt
gas power plant from locating on farmland in Coburg, Oregon. As OTA director
Lisa Arkin wrote: “Our ability to play a significant role in the denial
of the Turner Power Plant application may well send the right signals to
other out-of-state corporations seeking to build merchant power plants in
the Willamette Valley, namely that the residents of Oregon prefer renewable
energy production over large-scale gas-fired plants.”
- Two member groups of the Coalition of Immokalee Workers—the Student/Farm
Worker Alliance and Interfaith Action of SW Florida—received RESIST
funding to help the coalition in its struggle to convince Taco Bell to increase
wages and benefits for migrant farmworkers. The campaign succeeded in March
of this year. “This is an important victory for farmworkers, one that
establishes a new standard of social responsibility for the fast-food industry
and makes an immediate material change in the lives of workers. This sends
a clear challenge to other industry leaders,” announced Lucas Benitez,
an activist in the coalition.
- Some of The Prometheus Radio Project ’s work is obvious from the
June 12 headline: SUPREME COURT REJECTS CORPORATE MEDIA APPEAL IN PROMETHEUS vs. FCC. “The
FCC chose a course that would add a few percentage points to the profit margin
of a handful of corporations, while exposing Americans to a throttled public
debate,” charged Prometheus member Pete Tridish. His colleague Hannah
Sassaman emphasized that the Supreme Court’s decision “… adds
fuel to our desire to help organizations across the United States start up
Low Power FM radio stations, essential… to bring media control to
the hands of communities.” The Prometheus Radio Project does not simply
litigate, however. It also engages in radio “barn raisings” each
summer, using its expertise to help local communities build an entire station,
from microphones to antennae, over the course of a long weekend.
Much less noticed by the media (except in their hometowns) are many other
grassroots groups that seek support from RESIST, whose board of directors meets
every other month to evaluate the many and varied grant applications submitted
to it. Among the more noteworthy dimensions of these applications are the following:
1) their number (over 400 each year), 2) the funds requested ($3000 maximum,
in keeping with RESIST’s limited resources), 3) their variety (see examples
above and below), and 4) their geographic diversity (RESIST funded groups from
34 states and the District of Columbia last year). Below is a brief sampling
of some of the other 2004 grantees.
Opposing the Iraq war directly are such groups as Non-military Alternatives
(Chicago), Veterans for Peace (Santa Fe Chapter), San Diego Military Counseling
Project, and Alternatives to the Military (Lincoln, NE). Groups struggling
on behalf of women include Georgians for Choice, Vecinos Unidos (CT), Women
of Color Alliance (ID), Appalachian Women’s Alliance, and Arab Women’s
Gathering Organizing Collective (OH).
RESIST also supported such diverse groups as CISPES-Bay Area, South Carolina
Progressive Network, Coalition for the Human Rights of Immigrants (NY), Alaska
Youth for Environmental Action, Queers Undermining Israeli Terrorism (San Francisco),
ACT UP (Philadelphia), ADAPT (CO), Citizens for Quality Sickle Cell Care, Jobs
With Justice (Denver and Seattle Chapters), Palestine Media Watch (PA), Lynne
Stewart Defense Committee, Kentucky Alliance Against Racist and Political Repression,
School of the Americas Watch, and Campaign to Abolish the Death Penalty (national
office). One hundred eighteen additional groups also received grants, and many
others worthy of support had to be turned down for lack of funds.
RESIST has certainly not succeeded in bringing about a peaceful and just
United States or world, but in its organizing it has contributed to lessening
violence and injustice, especially during the Vietnam War. As a funder it has
also provided assistance to many other groups who have won struggles for a
better world. Its success and longevity—plans are currently under way
for a major fundraising 40 th anniversary celebration—stem from its understanding
that most issues have both material and ideological roots. These factors loom
large in most of the ongoing evils destroying societies at present and are
themselves thus further links between peace and social justice.
Regarding material conditions, much of the death and destruction abroad in
the world today is traceable to poverty. Violence reigns in Iraq, Kashmir,
Afghanistan, Palestine, Colombia, the Congo, and wherever else hunger, disease,
premature death, and grossly inequitable distribution of wealth plague a society.
The ideological roots of contemporary violence are often expressed most vocally
by Christian, Jewish, Muslim, and Hindu fundamentalist sects. But passions
can also be fanned by both liberal and conservative secularists who insist
that achieving the sacrosanct universalist ideals of freedom and democracy—as
they narrowly define these terms—fully justify U.S. intervention in the
internal affairs of other sovereign nations.
RESIST addresses both the material and ideological dimensions needed in the
dual struggles for peace and social justice. Its modest financial support,
provided by pledges and donors, has contributed much toward peace and justice
on the material front, and its consistent and continuous opposition to U.S.
military interventionism and unjust domestic policies has provided a secular
moral basis with which many other individuals and groups can identify, no matter
what, if any, their religious allegiance.
The organization’s ethical foundation differs from both the religious
fervor characteristic of many fundamentalist sects and from the dogmatic moral
certitude of secular conservative and liberal interventionists. By rejecting
meddling in the internal affairs of other countries, RESIST and its supporters
do not have to engage in endless means vs . ends debates. The invasion of South
Vietnam would not have been any more morally defensible had there been no tiger
cages, Operation Phoenix, or My Lai. Likewise the invasion and occupation of
Iraq would remain morally abhorrent even without the Abu Ghraib atrocities,
the killing of tens of thousands of civilians, and the widespread physical
destruction and environmental degradation that have occurred.
Those who condemn these evil means or unfortunate consequences of warfare
but nevertheless claim that the United States always has a right—and
at times an obligation—to attack another country in the name of freedom,
democracy, or human rights should reflect more on the past. U.S. governments
have directly intervened overtly or covertly in the internal affairs of other
sovereign nations more than 100 times since the end of World War II, but it
is very difficult to find examples of any peoples who are better off for our
intervention. Are the Vietnamese, Laotians, Cambodians, Guatemalans, Nicaraguans,
El Salvadorans, Panamanians or Colombians happier as a result of U.S. military
activities in their countries? Somalia remains a failed state whose inhabitants
are no less hungry now than when Clinton ordered the troops in. And how did
our occupation of Lebanon help the Lebanese? Moreover, Washington’s covert
actions undermining democratically elected governments and replacing them with
dictators in, for example, Iran, Guatemala, and Chile certainly were not beneficial
to the Iranians, Guatemalans, or Chileans. Unfortunately, the list of horrors
is quite long.
In the same way, there is precious little true freedom, democracy, or human
rights in Iraq or Afghanistan today. By no conceivable moral argument can the
100,000 plus Iraqi civilians killed in the past 28 months be considered better
off on account of the U.S. invasion and occupation of their country. And the
killing is ongoing. To be sure, the death toll thus far represents less than
half of 1% of Iraq’s population, but the dead were not asked whether
they were willing to make the supreme sacrifice for their fellow citizens,
nor were their parents, children, or grandparents.
Instead, that decision was made unilaterally by the United States government,
which was not elected by its citizens to play God with the lives of innocent
others. Unless a physical invasion of the United States were imminent, no end
could justify such actions. The immorality of Washington’s aggression
in the Middle East is further compounded by Abu Ghraib, Bagram, Guantanamo
Bay, and the high probability that the United States will not bring any more
freedom and democracy to the Iraqis and Afghanis tomorrow than it brought to
the numerous other countries it invaded or otherwise meddled with yesterday.
The moral stance and political analysis that characterize RESIST, its supporters,
and its grantees shatter any claim that conservatives, Republican or otherwise,
are more concerned with values than are progressives. They also undermine any
claim of superior virtue on the part of the United States vis-à-vis
the rest of the world.
It has always been a bedrock assumption of RESIST’s work that the American
people are intelligent, decent, and capable of acting justly when empowered
to do so. Some polls seem to indicate that this assumption is false, suggesting
that in addition to being overweight, Americans don’t read any more,
narrowly worship a vengeful God (and celebrities), are largely apolitical,
and are self-serving or hawkish when they do become involved. But the one-sidedness
of this assessment is revealed when it is acknowledged that the government
commissions many of these polls and resorts to fabrications and rhetoric to
gain the support of the people for its adventurism abroad. From the Tonkin
Gulf nonincident to the nonexistence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq
to the bogus Iraq-al-Qaida link, U.S. governments consistently misrepresent
why they engage in acts of war. Somehow there is always enemy “provocation.” As
casualties mount and victory becomes elusive, this rationalization evolves
into claims of fighting to bring freedom, democracy, and human rights to the
enemy’s oppressed people.
Groups struggling for social justice at home often help broaden and deepen
opposition to foreign wars, since the issues remain closely linked. Without
poverty and racism in the United States, for example, the Army would have a
difficult time meeting its recruitment quotas even in peacetime. One month’s
budget for the war in Iraq could fully fund Head Start into the 22 nd century.
It is a short step from abusing prisoners abroad to abusing prisoners at home,
from ignoring popular sentiment overseas to ignoring it domestically.
At their nexus, domestic and foreign policy issues are wedded economically.
A more humane, multilateral, and equitable foreign policy requires a re-industrialization
of the economy (as Germany and France have done) with far greater energy efficiency,
environmental sensitivity, and wealth distribution than currently obtains.
Thus, struggles against U.S. violence overseas should be recognized as extensions
of struggles for social justice at home, and vice versa. With no Soviet Union
and only a relatively weak United Nations (largely due to U.S. obstructionism),
the only real checks on the Pentagon and corporate juggernauts today are the
American people themselves. Only the resistance of U.S. citizens can truly
check the government—difficult though the effort may be—through
a long-range struggle for true freedom, democracy, and human rights both at
home and abroad. As long as political openness continues to exist, Americans
will not likely have to risk their lives to press for progressive change, but
activists need a long-term vision and commitment. The dual passions for peace
and social justice inspired the first Call to Resist Illegitimate Authority in
1967, which urged “…active resistance to all forms of illegitimate
authority until such time as the United States ceases to be a terror in the
politics among nations.” These are heavy moral burdens, but they must
be borne by all Americans of good will. Now, more than ever, is the time to
resist.
Author’s Note
Readers who wish to: 1) learn more about RESIST and its political orientation,
2) request funding from RESIST, or 3) contribute to RESIST should look up its
website at resistinc.org or talk to a member
of its most helpful and knowledgeable staff directly at (617) 623-5110. The RESIST
website includes addresses for the groups mentioned in this article and for all
others receiving assistance from RESIST. For readers wishing documentation or
suggestions for further reading, please write the author: Henry_Rosemont_Jr.@brown.edu,
or hrosemont@smcm.edu.
Henry Rosemont Jr. signed the 1967 call, joined RESIST in 1969, has been a member of its board of directors since 1971 and thus claims only accuracy and not impartiality for the contents of this article. When not engaged in political activity, he studies Chinese philosophy and religion and teaches at Brown University, where he is currently Distinguished Visiting Professor of East Asian Studies.