Appropriately, in researching for this post, it was extremely difficult to find sources that spoke freely about the history of silencing antiwar voices. The articles that do refer to the phenomenon generally opt for slithery language and none fail to add repeatedly that the government faces very tough decisions and always tries to do what is best for the country, even if her citizens neither understand nor agree. Upon looking at Antiwar’s website, my stomach dropped at the sight of a massive grid of headlines, organized by country, all detailing some horrific thing the US has done internationally. I grew up hearing about “the war in Afghanistan” and “the war in Iraq,” surrounded by backwater Christian conservatives and their indoctrinated children. My parents didn’t talk to me about the war, so my peers were my main source of wartime news, which was exactly as factual as one could expect from children. 

anti-Vietnam War protests by military personnel

I remember the distinct feeling that this must be a significant time to be alive, as I’d heard about the famous wars of yore and my grandfather had even fought in one. I figured there’d be a big parade or something when the troops came home, like my grandfather had described his return from Vietnam (It would be many years later that I found out that it was more of a public shaming than a celebration, due to the strong American antiwar sentiments regarding the Vietnam War). The war never seemed to end. I truthfully don’t think I know all the wars we’re currently fighting nor where because of the incessant, indecipherable drone of war-related news.

body bags of desecrated Ukrainian corpses in a ditch

Before this class, I hadn’t even thought about antiwar voices being silenced—school always made it out like Communist governments were the only ones who silenced opposition. Even in this class my friend whispered, “It’s giving Communism,” when Dr. Smith asked if the Fed punishing dissenters reminded us of anything. I think the whole Communist bit, the whole McCarthy thing, is simply a ploy to distract the public from the comparative flaws in our own system so that the government can keep doing what they’re doing and conflate it with moral issues. They do the same thing with the War on Terror—which I believe is supposedly what’s still going on in the Middle East—Ukraine, and Gaza. The government continues to remind us that Putin is committing war crimes in Ukraine and must be stopped, but this is merely an obvious way to justify involvement, given the US’s history of ignoring and committing war crimes or even buying the data that resulted from them, in Unit 731’s case. I’d always felt a strange sense of shame when I got mad about our country being so violent all the time, so I feel validated now, knowing that this feeling is not a product of bad character but rather of sound mind.

Bush greets troops for War on Terror

Dr. Smith’s words about how the US government makes reasons to be at war in order to give them more control rings true, especially now after doing some research and finding terrifying information and quotes from our leaders like Bush in 2001: “Our war on terror begins with al Qaeda, but it does not end there.  It will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped and defeated.” This statement is so disheartening because I know that there will always be “terrorist” groups with “global reach” and, if this statement is representative of future presidents’ views, this war will never be over.

I think it is so important that antiwar voices be heard because it goes back to the marketplace of ideas. If the government limits what ideas are permitted to appear it essentially monopolizes the idea space, which I’d consider a form of attempted brainwashing. To involve another First Amendment principle, the premise that states that we are more likely to become tolerant if we can see intolerance around us and, as a society, deem it unacceptable should be applicable here: if the government suppresses antiwar expression, isn’t it more likely to incite dissent? Repercussions may be a while down the line for the Fed, considering how good of a job they’re doing making sure people don’t get to hear these ideas, but I think, on our current course, a massive manifestation of public dissent is guaranteed.