Blog #7

 Antiwar: Why do we never hear these opinions?

As we all know, we live in a power and money-hungry world.  Therefore, while I am disappointed that various opinions on certain topics, like antiwar, are not shown in the media as often- I am not surprised.  Issues that relate to going against the government are never really talked about on mainstream media, and I think that people who are anti-government in certain situations are silenced.  As I've learned in class, the government is not allowed to silence you prior to you expressing your thoughts or beliefs.  This is called Prior Restraint, and it is unconstitutional, because it is in violation of the First Amendment.  Obviously, there are exceptions, and the government can punish you for your speech, like in the case of libel or threatening speech.  However, I think the predominant reason that we don't see these antiwar opinions and other opinions on issues, which essentially attack the government and question our decisions for this country, is due to fear.  I think that these writers who voice these opinions are intimidated by the government and are forced to use obscure websites to just get their opinions out to people.

I believe that the government, specifically presidents, have created this stigma about going against authority.  We have seen it throughout American history, where presidents throw people into jail on phony charges or none at all, since these individuals have criticized the government.  An example of silencing citizens was in 1861 as President Lincoln threw people into jail as they criticized the start of the Civil War.  Another example is the creation of the Espionage Act of 1917, where government employees can be thrown in jail for expressing WWI antiwar views.  These are just a few instances in our history that have caused this stigma and created fear amongst the American people.  Simply, many do not want to be the next ones thrown in jail for having a difference of opinion in comparison to authority, so they choose to stay silent or post on websites that aren't very popular.  This is unfortunate, because these people have a lot to offer and just from my exploration of these two websites; ANTIWAR.COM and The American Conservative, I would say that they have a lot of credibility.  Aside from credible information that isn't talked about often in the media, they also have opinions that I would say many Americans would agree with.  Therefore, I think that the government sees them as a big threat, because they are worried that if Americans are exposed to this information and agree with these opinions, they will learn that they are not alone and they will want to spread the word even more.  This could lead to people gathering in protest of our country's role in international wars or people banding together to change how our government decides when we go into war and who specifically decides if we do so.  If the government wasn't allowed to promote war and follow through with assisting in battles overseas, this would lead to our country not looking as powerful.  We wouldn't be able to inflict our power amongst others, and our country doesn't exactly know how to run without getting involved in affairs that have nothing to do with us.  The government wants our country to be the dominant country that everyone else turns to for assistance, while internally we are struggling to push out these weapons and are going deeper and deeper into debt.  Without our involvement, not only can we not inflict our dominance, but we might not need to create as many weapons.  Which could result in less jobs, which could overall affect the economy in a sense.  Not as many people would have the ability to spend money on needs and wants and we would see the money that the U.S. generates start to deplete.  Therefore, the government does whatever it can to stop antiwar voices from exposing our internal issues.  Predominantly, they do this by having the stigma that I mentioned previously, and our government essentially runs on the power they have to keep people silenced based on the fear evoked from the government's actions in the past.

People speaking out against the government would make us less dominant, but it would also make us appear as something far worse: weak and vulnerable.  This is the last thing that the U.S. wants, because if we look weak and vulnerable, we will be viewed as a target.  Other foreign powers may believe that we have holes in the relationship between our government and the people, leading them to believe that they can exploit us.  This would cause extreme panic in the American people, most likely leading to even more frustration amongst the opposing voices.  It could also cause internal chaos between citizens who could blame these opposing voices for exposing our government.  

Another reason why the people who criticize the government's actions are more underground in relation to their media presence, as seen in many of these antiwar articles, is due to the threatening behavior of other Americans.  It would be nice at times if we all agreed, but we know realistically that that isn't possible hardly ever.  I know that I would be scared to publish my opinions, especially if I was aware of citizens who disagreed with them.  Not everyone has a peaceful way of demonstrating disagreement, so I would be worried how people would react to what I say, as I'm sure many antiwar voices are as well.  I feel that there is a negative connotation towards going against the government that branches out to being called "unamerican."  If you criticize our country, you are viewed a lot of times as not a true American and I feel that you are depicted by many as not being grateful for living in a country "that gives you so much".  In reality, I feel that these people with these opposing voices are just trying to show that we can make the country and ultimately the world better if we changed a few things and actually followed the Constitution which declares that the president can't bring us into war, but Congress can.  This means that the president can't call for war because he feels that it is needed.  Ultimately the U.S.'s job is supposed to be about implementing peace when foreign countries are in war.  This certainly does not mean sending millions of weapons and thousands of troops or volunteers over to Ukraine and the Middle East.  It's essential for antiwar voices to be heard because they would help solve many societal and economic issues, by showing others that this isn't normal behavior, and it simply isn't our place.  Though it is scary to speak out, it would help millions, because war would no longer be dragged out due to the U.S. continuously supplying countries with weapons, manpower, and supplies.

Ultimately, I appreciate that people are willing to publish and voice their opinions against the government, because if they didn't, many of us would go on not knowing the other side of the story.  They give voice to the millions of people who feel the same way, and they show that many Americans will not stand for the injustices that we see on our own soil.  Even though you can be casted as an outsider or experience even worse consequences from our government, I think that it is vital to speak out and show the government that we are aware of what is happening and that we will evoke change if we find it to be necessary.