Decade talking about their books. You can watch our series at 4 00 p. M. Eastern here on American History tv on cspan3. Announcer 2 three College Professors discuss the ways they teach about u. S. Involvement in the vietnam war. Panelists talk about their personal participation in peace and Antiwar Movements and how those experiences translate into their classrooms. This discussion was part of a conference in washington, dc posted in conjunction with the waging peace in vietnam traveling exhibit. And with that, i want to begin with two things. First, there are so many people here to credit. There are so many people who helped create exhibit which is now on the second floor in the atria. If you havent seen it, we invite you to go down during lunch, take a look at it. You have heard a lot about the book waging peace in vietnam. Com, what you havent heard about the publisher which is new village press, distributed by nyu. We are fortunate to have the director of the press Lynn Elizabeth in the back of the room. [applause] me last december, having heard about the exhibit and said she wanted to turn that into a companion book. And that if i could get her polished manuscript by march 1, from december 3 to march 1, she would put it in her fall catalog. It would be available for this in september. Ting we did, and it was, and i acknowledged earlier David Cortright is here today, but not at this very moment. Other editor Barbara Doherty is here. [applause] the fierce timekeeper. And i am here. And so are many of the folks who appear in the book, including cora weiss. Including paul cox and susan and phil short who took 17 of the photographs that appear in this book. When you go back and buy your copy, any one of them would be willing to sign your book. That, let me say it is a real pleasure for me to who is a linda yaar Research Professor here at gw largelywu and who is responsible for this week long set of events. Much iant tell you how am a fan of hers, how in our iem, how in awe i am, what a good job she has done putting this together. Scientist,litical specialist in Southeast Asia and has for decades fostered academic engagement think of that, engagement in international affairs, teaching, research with china, vietnam, myanmar and other countries in asia. Is an extraordinary person. Linda yaar. [applause] linda thank you. You are too kind. The genesis of so many ideas that brought this week to life, i owe to you. I appreciate your involving me in this effort. We are gathered for this panel to take a look at some of the ways that we can teach about the war in vietnam. Shortly after the war in bytnam, if we measure it 1975, there was a real effort to forget. Maybe not forgive but certainly to forget. Proposed a course 1985, i proposed a course. One of the assignments i gave to students was to do an oral history. To go and interview someone who had been in the Peace Movement, who had fought in the war, who had been in the home front so to speak. In the class itself i was able whoring in a green beret spoke of his experiences. I had sam brown who happened to the time,in denver at leader of the Peace Movement, and someone who had recently migrated from vietnam with a number of refugees following the war. One student came up to me and said, you know at break, i went home and was telling my parents i had this awful test i had to do an oral history into no food interview. And her mother said, why dont you talk to your father . [laughter] linda that shows how there was this conscious kind of holding back and trying to erase in some ways what was happening. So now as we heard the tremendous opportunity that scholars now have two draw on local sources, the sources from the former soviet union and so forth, and we heard the extent of scholarship that really needs to help us in part to students today. Heream very glad to have scholars who have not only, researching work that is relevant to these topics but are heavily engaged in teaching the new generation. To my immediate left is carolyn eisenberg, professor of u. S. History and American Foreignpolicy at hofstra university. She has the author of a prizewinning book, drawing the lines, the american decision to divide germany. Never lose,ing book nixon, kissinger and the illusion of international security, and she was a contributor to the book. Waging peace. Her is Michael Kazen next to her is michael kazin. We always say the other george. He is a scholar who is an expert of u. S. Politics and social movements. His most recent book is the war against war, the american fight 19 14 to 1918. It was the war to end all wars. His previous book was american dreamers, how the left changed a nation and it was named best book for the new republic newsweek, daily beast and the progressive. He is also an editor of the review defense. I have to apologize to all of you and to Peter Kuznick for the technical difficulties that will introduce then to film we would have benefited from. Professor professor kuznick is a professor of history and founder and director of the Nuclear Studies institute at american university. He has authored several he was books on active in the civil war and entech vietnam war movements antivietnam war movements. His current projects include a book on scientists in the vietnam war. So i think we will have a rich discussion. And let me turn it over to professor eisenberg. With are people ok i was asking about just sitting comfortably and in formally at this table rather than speaking does it work for everybody . Ok. I was thinking about this panel a Little Something a little sadistic about this panel but the idea you were going to have a panel of people who have been teaching vietnam for decades and that say 10 minutes, what are they thinking . Zoom through the decades. Taught know, and i have i have taught about the vietnam war since 1971. And things change. How we teach about the war, how it alters obviously over time. It depends on what the political context is, what institution you are in and also what materials are available. There is a lot of things, how should we say, secret and kept classified. Our base of knowledge has altered. I was thinking about this panel, i was thinking i was teaching about vietnam at dartmouth college, and the war was going on. We had very engaged students at that time and we had some returning vets in the community who were very vocal and present on campus. In then nixon decided spring of 1972 to start bombing that pointining, at it was a very big event on the campus. He was responding to the spring offensive and the fact they fought they thought South Vietnam would lose. Our faculty went into emergency deliberations. When we Cancel School forever for a day . The most idiotic comment ever made, one of my colleagues said when the british were being bombed, they felt it was important to keep working. It was like dead silent. Voted not to cancel. But a lot of faculty and staff format we were doing nothing. So we decided that we should in a nearby town. It sounds impressive that we did taxi. Ut it was omars it was really it was enough to get us in jail. And we missed our classes and students thought that was great and other students thought we should be fired but that they were paying money to get the wisdom we were depriving them of. But to teach vietnam at that time and that context was really different. It was very real. As a teacher i felt it was my job to create a lot of space for kids who have different opinions. I didnt want to ram things down their throats. Real people were out fighting, people dying and making decisions. The whole thing was different. I will not go through every decade though you would find it fascinating. Speaking of teaching it over the years, so at hofstra university, a different demographic. But a lot of the students had teachers parents in the war and that was why they came in. Maybe mythem said, father will talk to me. My uncle never talks. It we could have communication. The whole experience was framed by the fact people had relatives and some dads came in. Present, what is to be done now . I think we dont have a mass movement. It was a very different situation. It was very different because our students now have lived the war the whole lives. It was like that weather. To have them tune into it is a challenge. Teaching about the war in vietnam there are certain things that really are still relevant now, and not forcing it anyway. What are things you can learn . Things, they learn that the leaders live. Lie. A lot of students still believe in what people say. It is like an important thing. How much lying when dawn . Second thing you learn is that although the United States government describes what we are doing as a defense of freedom, in the situation it wasnt. It was defense of a dictatorship. Least, havingdents at the thought that the u. S. Government might not be supporting freedom and that is something to worry about is a new revelation. Fromis where i differ historiography, that it is not just the president s that make decisions. So much of the discussion is driven by Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon. These people were not acting alone. They were acting in a constitutional framework they had accepted. Tr nixon and kissinger, a big hing for them is the military. The military, in, they do different things. Nixon and kissinger are conformists. They learned to hate the joint chiefs of staff. They are not just coming out of their own heads. There is a whole structure they are dealing with. That is very important. It is important to see the congress and media are contested areas back then. They still are today. They can be a force for good. They can be a force for past 70. They can be a force for not good. There was a lot of fake news about vietnam. Most relevant to what we are doing here today a there was a Peace Movement, Peace Movement within the civilian sector of society, and dissent among the military. Everybody knows a little bit, there were some hippie protesters and whatever, but students often have no idea about it. Think this book is important, is to understand this protest ultimately affected policy. That is really an important thing. I am conscious about that for the next period nixon period. I agreed with the speaker that said 1967 was also relevant. It is not like, bam, it is 1969 and the Peace Movement is effective. It has been growing. At the record, you can make reasonable conclusions about what is effective. I know there are some people of my age in the audience. Maybe two. [laughter] how many of you at some point or another went to jail or turn your life upside down and say to somebody, did it do any good . To some extent, we weaken we can have answers for that. I endorse what other people were saying, that the Antiwar Movement was constantly on the mind of nixon and kissinger. It did shape decisionmaking. I wanted to mention one example, which back then, we paid no attention to, and that is nixon s decision to start withdrawing troops, which he was doing as of the summer of 1969. He kept doing it. My memory at the time every time he announced withdrawal, we thought it was a trick. It is a trick to take our minds off laos, off cambodia. Was very way, but it significant. It was very contested. This is something the military did not want to happen. Whatever we thought was clear in hanoi was the United States was leaving the war. It was a question of when. Everybody i knew in our antiwar bubble did not appreciate that by the november election in 1972, there are no combat troops left in vietnam. Maybe there were some people still shooting, but the combat been removed. Who paid any attention to that . A second thing that happened in 1972 is Something Else not paid much attention to. While mcgovern has this terrible defeat, more antiwar senators got elected in that election. It was clear that when the new congress convened in january 1973, at that point they were going to cut off the money. There was a come to jesus moment when goldwater visits nixon after election day. This is it. Come january, there will be no money for this. We do not have the votes, so please tell henry to get it done. Nixon referred to his relationship to congress as he would say im one step ahead of the share. Of the sheriff. Even though congress did not pass a resolution until after the u. S. Troops were gone, congress was a powerful factor. It really was the thing that hung over nixons head. It made it essential that he keep troops coming out. There are a whole bunch of areas that are different. There is immense tragedy that surrounds vietnam. Millions of people died. Villages, states, whole provinces decimated. We cant say, wasnt that great . No, it wasnt great. People teach this, when are willing to take some of the amazing risks people in this room talk, it actually can make things better. That is still relevant, even this morning, so thank you. [applause] Linda Michael kazin . Michael thanks for inviting me to take part in this conference. Sorry i have not been able to go to anything before this. If i repeat something that was said, excuse me. Last night, i was speaking at a panel for the council for Foreign Relations on populism. Most of the people i were speaking to were millionaire donors. I had to defend students today. A couple people said old professors are turning them into socialist. [laughter] it is a little different crowd here today. I want to spend my 10 minutes relating some of what i say to students when i teach the movement against the war. E am done research on hav done research on that. Works. On other peoples tiny bit of personal background the war turned me into a radical in college. My 1967, i couldnt be a democrat anymore. Courses on thely 1960s, vietnam, and the global 1960s. A lot of research about the Antiwar Movement is there was an Antiwar Movement all around the world. It was an important element in the building of a new left in west germany, in france, in japan, in other parts of the world. Ad grad students that write about that. The war in vietnam is an international movement. An observation about Antiwar Movements this will be sobering and not so celebratory. Likear movements are not collective attempts to change society. In contrast to those who seek to win rights for women or workers or people of color, peace organizers have no natural constituency. Neither can the Movement Grow slowly, taking decades to convince people to at least think differently and enact laws. A massive effort to stop ones country from going to war, or stop a war that is already waging, has to grow quickly. It has to lure activates from other activists from other enduring movements. A lot of people in vietnam had already organized other things, the black Freedom Movement especially. Some people had been organizing against nuclear war. Saul a linsky used to say we organized organizers. Every new war requires peace activists to create a new movement. Peacehave always been activists in American History. E,ring periods of peac lowlevel conflicts most americans dont care about, endure one activists the margins, which is unfortunately true now of the Peace Movement as well. The Antiwar Movement in the vietnam era we can debate how much impact it had, how much it was dependent on the vietnamese winning military victories against the United States. There was a complicated relationship there. After the war ended, the movement pretty quickly it does not go as high, but it was much less prevalent in american life. Most demonstrations were in the spring of 1971 here in washington. s withdrawal of u. S. Ground troops after he signed the peace accords, pows cunningham, that pows coming home, that had an impact too. Because the Antiwar Movement had been so closely aligned with the large new left, white new left, black new left, asianamerican new left as well, it would decline as the new left in general declined. The Movements Group together and generated enthusiasm grew together and generated enthusiasm for one another. As the war wound down, the new left wound down for the same reason and others as well. This might be controversial. I think social movements in u. S. History have only had enduring influence when they become aligned with a Major Political party. The abolitionists did that with the Republican Party before and during the civil war. The right to Life Movement has done that with the Republican Party. Organized labor did that with the democrats in the new deal. Although it is now weaker, it is essential to democratic countries across the country. Feminists and lgbt activists found legislative success by winning democrats to their d emands. The Antiwar Movement did influence democrats who opposed to quit military subsequent military interventions abroad. Making it very hard for nixon and ford to keep up support for the South Vietnamese government after the peace treaty was signed in paris. The movement against the wars in Central America in the 1980s was influenced by people like some of us and the generally. People generally. Reagan had to get around the byntrys the contras setting up a deal with iran. People thought he was going to leave office anyway, unlike what is happening right now. A congressman from california said, when he helped to pass the amendment,