Im delighted to see you all here tonight and to welcome you to this wonderful event and its my distinct plesher to introduce our evening speaker. And i tell them most of them are there because it university is ininterested in them. I tell my students that value of history lies in its ability to see us in a the past in such way that we can reimagine the present and the future. And that perspective can allow us to create a better world than the one in which we now inhabit. And this is precisely the gift that i think our speaker, Michael Kazen brings us to tonight and has shared with the readers of many of his books, such as it biography of Williams Jennings bryan, his place of the political left in American History and most relevantly, his recent study of American Peace activists in world war i. Hes a professor of history. He writes frequently for it new york times. Has lectured wisely in the United States, europe and japan and we are very lucky to have him here with us this evening. Please join me in extending a warm welcome to professor michael cason. [ applause ] thanks for that lovely introduction. And also i was going to ask us all to aplaud andrew for putting together this incredibly inspiring conference. And i have to say the whole staff here, this is the most the best run museum ive ever been to and that inhadcludes historical museum. That includes it National Museum of American History in d. C. Thats a great institution. I often say for those of you which are scholars face the problem that americans dont care that much about world war i and we have to make them care. But anyone who comes to the museum and walks out not caring about it has their eyes closed or in their phones the whole time. So thanks aagain to this great museum. Andrew asked me to reflect on opposition to war today. But i also like to do a couple other things. Ill get to that. But knowing i was going to be speaking to a room full of people who study world war i and for a lot longer than i have, i want to pose an uninspiring question about not just the history of world war i, but the history of peace movements in general. I want to reflect on the legacy of the movement. That opposed preparedness and the great war decades that followed it and then ill get to the question of what the Antiwar Movement looks like in the present. My question is a troubling one. That is why are the voices of war opponents so muted . The title of this conference was very well chosen because they are muted for most americans at least, perhaps most europeans. Why do antimilitarists receive so little attention in popular narratives about Armed Conflicts . And i hate to say it, amung u. S. Historians more generally. Thats certainly true are for world war i. But think about it National Museum of American History. In washington. I dont know how many people have seen the exhibit and they have a small section devoted to world war i. And as far as i can see theres almost nothing on the movement ooppose that war. Images i got on the website are the kind of typical images that you see. Of course it famous flag poster. Song about woman work as a nurse, gas masks, etc. Photos of combat, photos of pro war figures and images generally. Hardly anything about the movement that was really so important in i think and most of us think in giving the americans an alternative way of thinking about the war. Doing a lot to stall those who wanted the yoours to get into the war and continuing under dangero dangerous circumstances after april 1917. A basic fact about the opposition to the war known to most of us today. Scholars of the conflict are pretty much unknown to even though who care about the war. Ow many people know you all do, im sure but people outside this room know there are 350,000 americans who resisted conscription and there are 3 million who never registered for the draft at all. How many know it was the Womens Movement that began the the mass Antiwar Movement, beginning with fatherly dave from the and how many know antiwar candidates increased including a remarkable run by the labor lawyer and socialist for the mayor of new york where he got almost 1 4 of the vote in the threeman race, on a very explicit antiwar, antidraft platform. How many people know about the origins of modern Civil Liberties jurisprudence are right there with the beginning of the aclu, which is originally Civil Liberties bureau. Got renamed aclu in 1820 and with the cases that come out of the war and other cases. In which can Oliver Wendell holmes made his descent. But theres also a good deal of ignorance and neglect about the most successful peace movement. That against the war into china. Take for example the 18hour pbs documenta documentary, which most of you have probably seen. Yes, 18 hours. Produced by ken and novak. Their treatment of the war itself is, in my opinion, quite splendid and appropriately negative. They made clear the u. S. Was doomed to lose that war and deserved to lose that war. But when and they often fall back on charactertures, calling them baby killers, spiting on them about most americans rooting for communist victory. To get people who were serving and had had served to oppose the mission they were called upon to serve. They neglect, not entirely, but for the most part the millions of americans who put almost are their emphasis on the politicians who were taking america to war, continuing the disastrous intervention as opposed to looking at their soldiers as ifomies, which hardly anybody ever did. But perhaps we shouldnt blame it film makers for their flaws. The United States has been at war for most of its history. Organized opposition to each major conflict from the war of 1812 to the wars against native americans to the present. Its relatively less well known than those of Labor Movement and for it grass roots left and right. Why . Thats it question i want to start my talk with. Some no doubt is due to the revance for the military which has always run deep in u. S. History. Afterall, 10 of the 40 elected u. S. President s were elected in part and some largely. Eisenhower because of their military exploits. The opponents of the other progressive movements include the lgbq rights are seen as greedy. But neither antiwar act haves nor the scholars want to view ordinary combat tants as the culprits behind war, even though no war can be fought without them. Its difficult to respect their service and explaining why and how americans that tried to stop them, their mission. To a certain degree muddies the waters for many people appreciating the scholarship. Another reason for the neglect of peace movements is theyre part of a history of war and deplo emacy thats been long dominated by scholars, mostly men, that focus on other matters. Understanding why men in and out of uniform made decisions to fight and negotiate an end to Armed Conflicts. Citizens seem marginal to that larger, greater history. The kind of social changes thatd they charge or accelerate play a role, i think. Womens suffrage as we know triumphed in part to the role women played in world war i, supporting it, not opposing it. The naacp if creased membership by a 1 thousand in world war ii. And figures like this guy you probablyurd had of, first black man to play Major League Baseball in the 20th century. Jacky robinson was part of the black Freedom Movement during the war. He was court marshalled during the war for refusing to get to the back of the bus. At the segregated state. He was found inhadsent of that because it was a federal base. It would have been found guilty if it wauz a safe bus. And so he was found innocent. And if he hadnt been found innocent, he would not be the first black man to play in the 20th century. Theres a book called the great leveller. Its a fascinating book. But a troubling one too. Because he argus it help hads to narrow the income gap between the rich and everyone else sometimes they destroy the property of everything, including the rich and the poor. But nevertheless, theres a way in which war has been responsible for a more galiantry policy. But i think Antiwar Movements played a part in this neglect as well. If you think about them are not like other collective attempts to change society. In contrast to those who seek rights and a measure of power for women or workers or people of color or gays and lesbians, peace organizers have no natural constituency unless its everybody. Just not it same thing. To enact laws to embody that new perspective the way the others do it. Black Freedom Movement, for example, one could argue began during slavery and still going on but had had big triumphs during construction and in the 1960s. A massive effort to stop ones country from going to war or to stop a war already raging had to grow up quickly or it will have little or no influence. Whats more that movement has to lure talented activists away from other more enduring political commitments. Every new war requires peace activists to create a new coalition that might be capable of ending it. There have always been pasfsts in the United States. Weve heard wonderful papers today and well hear more tomorrow about the peace churches. About secular pacifists. But they fought until the declaration of war almost three years later managed to surmount these obstacles. Their coalition was religiously broad. It was bipartisan or tripartisan because the socialist party was a large but minor party that time. It operated ificide and outside congress. Used a range of tactics, many quite creative, like a huge war against war exhibit in brooklyn and new york city that featured witty cartoons, a scale model of a paper musha model with it caption he went extinct because he had had armored plates but no brains. And unhads of thousands have visited that exhibit in 1916 in new york. Their first tactic was to yoich a referendum. They were so confident they would win that if it were eld had beutthey were unable to convince the president and congress to keep the nation at peace. Yet their legacy is not simply one of failure. They were incredibly about the consequences of American Intervention and transformed i think from traitors into something akin to prophets. William stone, a democrat from missouri who was one of the six senators to vote against the declaration of war. Said this in his speech. I wont vote for war because if were going to it, well never have the same old repubric. This can be read in many different ways. As a reactionary statement, a statement by somebody who wanted to continue on the kind of progress the old republic was already making. But it was clearly in many ways i think accurate whether the old one was a good one or not because you now realize they had made a mighty attempt on a political order that most unfortunately take for granted, even if some protest it, like most of us here. A state equipped to fight numerous wars abroad while keeping a close watch of the activities of its citizens at home. The surveillance state, call it what you will. Theio it of the nations if hadomies has changed often. But the Foreign Policy has nearly always remained the same. To create a world, as wilson said, made safe for democracy. Donald trump has abandoned that idiaalistic rhetoric, only to replace it with a different kind of kurdalled idealism and force eevery other country to surrender to its wims. And soon after it great war ended, and americans increasingly viewed peace advocates as more prufetic than loyal. One of the six to vote against the war was almost expelled from the senate. During the war itself was reelected, led by it Womens International league for peace and freedom. Gave for both the United States and abroad with radical platforms they called for complete pasfmp and james adams asked was not war the interest of democracy, a contradiction in terms . Whoever said it and however often it was repeated. Most americans, a few years would have agreed with erhad about that. 1931, as most of you know jane adam s won the nobel peace priz. The committee saluted her for in effect being right all along. The quote she held fast to the ideal of peace even when other interests obscured it and drove them into the conflict. Couldnt get much clearer statement about how she was right and wilson and all those that supported him were wrong. The new york times, which was not as liberal a paper as it often is today. And excuriated adams now hopes her wartime capacity might be coming true. That time most americans also look back on the conflict with retrospective regret. Number of war commemorations dwindled rapidly. Construction for two of the unknown soldiers was delayed for five years. Officials argued about whether it should symbolize war or peace. Sorry i missed a graphic. This was shown by somebody else earlier. This was a photo as many of you know showing the american delegation the womens conference for peace in the hague and 1y5i78s adams is there, first from your left. 1929, the enist approved one descenting vote. The grand, if unenforceable treaty to out law war and 60 nations signed it by years end. 1934, a special Senate Committee chaired by gerald nooi of North Carolina began to investigate the charge that emissions producers had had had dragged the nation into the great war. They never uncovered a conspiracy. But the well publicized hearings persuaded Many Americans that war and preparation is not a mat of national honor, National Defense but a mat of profit for the few and Popular History is written at the same time took a sharply negative view of u. S. Intervention as well. Even though they didnt always agree with the aanalysis of the war. Revisionist accounts to the great war. A Great American historian wrote one of them. The best selling of those books was walter millss the road to war. 19141917. High up in the best sellers for many months and popular opinion was both helping thooese books sell well and reflected by their point of view as well. 1937, the gala poll found 70 believed it was a mistake to fake the great war. 70 . Each of the previous Years Congress by overwhelming majorities have voted for neutrality akts which took the same acts as the Peace Coalition had had demanded 20 years ago. And loaning money to belidgerants. Of course the war hadnt begun yet. At least not a world war. 1937 law makers overwhelmingly again also slapped the ban on people at war. In other polls, large majority of americans supported ed ed a kaurngszitutional amendment that would require an amendment for the kroous to go to war. And a democrat of indiana. And president Franklin Roosevelt was so afraid this would pass. He was opposed to this kind of restriction on the war powers. That democrats, leaders in congress pushed by roosevelt made sure it never got to the floor of congress to be debated. Because then americans might support it and it might get enacted, at least passed by congress. Robert had written to his son in law as it First World War was ending. I might not live to see my own vindication but you will. He died and he didnt. 20 years after the war ended he seemed correct. However, another war happened and most scholars and pall tishzs that had made these antiwar argiums repudiated that opinion after the atack on pearl harbor, if they had hadnt after the soviet invasions of poland in 193 the holocaust, after it war, jane adams and her fellow antimilitarists seemed naive and not prophetic. Most believed u. S. And its allies did help rescue civilization and did destroy a threat to democratic government. I went to high school in the middle of the 1960s and my High School History ap textbook was written by Samuel Elliott morrison and two of the leading historians of that time. Little more than 50 years ago. This is how they wrote about wilsons decision to go to war. They compared it to abraham lincolns decision during 1861 to reinforce the garrison at fort sumpter. They said this is in my high school textbook. President wilson felt he must erect the peace which must eventually come. They concluded few would doubt now that he was right. Then came another war. The debacle into china. In justifying the intervention against an enemy force led by communists, president Linden Johnson sounded eerily like Woodrow Wilson calling for peace without victory. In his speech calling for declaration of war. In his speech he gave at Johns Hopkins university in april 1965, he said he want a peace without conquest in vietnam. Theres really no difference. We fight because we must fight said lbj. If were to live in a world where every country can shape its own destiny and only in such a world will our own frieedom b secure. But millions of tons of bombs fail to get a pezant army, those phrases sounded pretty hollow if not ludicrous. In response, leftists, feminist, p pacifi pacifists build another Antiwar Movement. Critical intellectuals betrayed wendell horn. Johnson and the leaders of south vietnam. Sorry. Rankin, fine. Its always good to look, even if a little clumsy in my sequences there. Nominant, now elderly men and women were still around during the vietnam war to reprise their youthful performances. Thomas, randolph delivered rousing speeches on the blood shed into china. Organized seminarians to bring their draft cards. At the age of 87, rankin, here she is 1932 opposing the war. Here she is at 87. Led a brigade of about 3,000 women in the 1968 march to the Capitol Building in d. C. And delivered a petition against the ruthless slaughter in vietnam to the speaker of the house. Who is the speaker of the house . John mccormick, a veteran of world war i. So it seemed close. In another echo of the war, the Antiwar Movement during it great war, there was a very popular 1970 soul record that shot to number one on the billboard chart by edwin star. It posed the rhetorical question, war, what is it good for . Jane adams and her sisters would have applauded the answer. It means destruction of innocent lives, with their sons go off to fight and lose their lives. War, what is it good for . Absolutely nothing. Thank you. Boy, what a treat. Anyway. Echoes of world war i could also beurd had in soldiers accounts of the war in vietnam. Several years after they left vietnam in defeat, pruto was struggling to fin ash memoir he wrote about the wrenching year he spent as a marine in that country. He said he quote fell under the spell of the great mar wars of world war i. Quote the form somehow felt right. It seemed to me vietnam, there were far less bloody and horrible conflict resembled the First World War and its pointlessness and the changes it brought in social and Cultural Values and we still live in the shadow of the vietnam war too. As americans lives in the shadow of world war i. One of the changes vet naurm brought about was reluctance on the part of most americans to hurl the most potent military machine into allegedly world saving wars. The population that did support invasion of afghanistan in 2001 and iraq in 2003. But most did so to avenge the terrorist atrausties in 2011, and prevent new ones, not because president bush asured troops that the hopes of an oppressed people depend on you. And long before it stretches into a decade, americans most of them have become cynical, while honoring the men and women still struggling to complete it. But the question again to bring it forward now is why is there no large or visible Antiwar Movement to oppose those involvements as there was briefly before the invasion of iraq 14 years ago and clearly during world war i and during the vietnam war. Why is that . And it took place about 2 1 2 years ago in washington d. C. Heres a photo from it. It was called the spring antiwar intervention. It attracted about 5en had demonstrators. Received no coverage at all on the Mainstream Media and not much mention in leftwing outlets. The most significant one, perhaps, is it nature of the enemies, United States has been fighting since the falloff 2001. For are of course many indications but nearly all americans regard each of these groups with loathing. So most antiwar activists instead and many in this room too have shifted the focus to focus on innocent victims of the interventions. How u. S. Military actions kill and maim large number s of civilians. Located about 10 miles from where i live in northern virginia. But compared to the vietnam war, this is also a different movement and some 206 hof the rs i want to suggest. It did not come out of nowhere, no Movement Ever does. Theres always reasons why people join a movement to have to do with who they are and what they care about before they join that movement. And many came from other movements on the left poverty, Civil Liberties. Feminism came to the late 60s. To define politics as a moral undertaking. There are slogans like do not volunteer committees, one, one vote. Muhammad alis famous statement i aint got no quarrel with vet kong, no vet kong ever called me n it was very tight, very close. Direct, yes. He applied the first unsuccessfully. So for both groups and white people supported the first one and got out to the second one. Even if it they didnt support it vietcong, i think a majority did not. Nevertheless, they saw a sense this pezant army was to be sympathized with. Quite different from saying well, lets not go to afghanistan and let the taliban win. And also its true object to the military budget. They were antiwar in principal. Prrs and the group theyre fighting are hardly groups that support gender equality. And progressive movements hold here. Black lives matter wants to cut down the military budget. But stopping going to iraq is not one of their priorities. So current activists face a very high obstacle. Few americans share our moral urgency to oppose current armed interventions abroad. And one reason perhaps is why few progressives are spending their time in the antiwar cause today is that the issue is not the property of progressives in the left aloan as for the most part the war against vietnam was. This guy, senator from kentucky, rand paul is in many ways a proponent as anybody on the left is. You probably know the website, antiwar. Com and it regularly publishes articles from the left, the right and the center. That can be a plus but also difficult to define what your community is. If youre in the Antiwar Movement i think 7 over reach, he speaks out against surveillance. And even donald trump, im not saying a good word for donald trump. Im putting him in context. Sometimes he echoes the views of people like rand paul. Afterall, if you say america first, that can be taken a different ways. But one of the ways is lets not worry about intervening in the rest of the world. Lets just worry about cultivating our own garden. Thats not of course how hes governing at all but thats the slogan. I think thats one of the ways he appealed to people. And one of the most eloquent foes of the war as most of you know. He gave the same exclamation for what he thought it could do. Late 1917 in the great essay diary, if america has lost its political isolation, its all the more obligated to obtain its spiritual integrity. This does not mean any smug retreat from the world with the belief the truth isnt us and can only be contaminated with context, it means the promise of American Life is not achieved and perhaps not seen and until it is, we have to spurn an intensive cultivation of our garden. So we have troops over and over again to venues, ball parks, airports, even though were dubious at best about the wars theyre fighting and oppose the idea of further conflicts of iran. Activists then struggle with the contradiction. It does not see it as a threat to any interest or ideal they hold dear and that is your and our task is to convince them that it does. To conclude with not my own words but the words of the philosopher William James who i began and end my book with and i got my title for the book war against war as many of you may knee from reading William James, it first line of his great complex essay which im going to assume youve all read. The war against war is no holiday excursion or camping party. He didnt know the half of it. Right before 1910 before he died, he could not foresee the horrors the next century would produce. But he saw how organized killing but james thought it was growing more difficult for quote civilized man to justify it. Pure mastery seem no longer morally alowable motives. Pretext must be found. No legitimate interest of any european nation would seem to justify the instruction d instruction a war would entail. Commonsense and reason, on how to find an agreement. This is a true progressive mind at work there. Theres nothing that honest men and heici should have added women, cant do if we come together and solve a problem and figure out how to work through it. Its a wonderful, if naive belief. I wish we could live like that and wish we did live like that. But it had little bearing on how nations then and now go to war or why the citizens take part in them. Most of the wars the United States has fought over the past two centuries have been no less optional than world war i. The conflict with mexico in the 1840s, mostly a land grab. The Korean Police action in the 1950s, Neither China in the 1970s and the recent invasions and acupations of afghanistan and iraq were all wars of choice. One could argue in the case of korea that the cho isto fight north korea did save half that nation from the fuch of tyranny and uhunger. Only the Second World War stands out as unavoidable conflict where americans are fighting for National Survival if stead of exercising the strategic for moral option. It thus gives americans what he says is a narrative of military triumph, without a cautionary navati narrative to leaven it. I think hed like the idea that one war, particularly the most destructive war has a honor on soldiering no other occupation enjoys. He bemoaned the fact that the romanticing minded everywhere and the professional military class refused to admit that it may be a transitory phenomenon. Isnt that wonderful . A transitory phenomenon in social evolution. Sadly it remains true that most people caninate consider that possibility. To reverse that, to we might learn more and i think tell our students and fellow citizens more about the movement that were focusing on at this conference. They were pacifists is socialists and white supremacists, black and white protestants, catholics, jews, eastern orthodox. They had no ilugds they could achieve their purpose. They were not isolationists. They made aliances in practice and sympathy with their counterparts in europe and elsewhere around the world. They argued compassionately and simply that it depended on forging a tolerant aggressive perhaps we should thank them for their service too. Sadly a moral equivalent of war seems more elusive now than it did when james explained why it was imperative to the grim judgment and the short judgment in the esza which keeps haunting me he wrote history is a bath of blood only when we recognize that and arm ourselves with alternatives both pragmatic and visionary and scholarly may be be a able some day to change it. Thank you. Again, ladies and gentlemen, i believe hes willing to take questions and answers. Youll notice there are lovely and well lit microphones. And thanks for the factual corrections. And we would love to get your comments, your questions on the microphones and ive heard some really delightful discussions today. So i know there might be wonderful questions at hand and the first will come from this side. Thank you for a very fine talk. Lots of good and useful stuff. Id like to im not sure they can hear you. Closer to the mic. Got it. Thank you for a fine talk. If you would consider adding to your list of impossible answers to the great question you started with. Why is there no Antiwar Movement now . Consider who ended the draft. Richard m. Nixon, and he did so sinically predicting and knowing the Antiwar Movement against his war would stop. Within months demonstrations disappeared and it wasnt just students. It was their parents, largely middle class, who had real clout with congress who stopped lobbying. So i think thats at least one of the things that could answer the question you posed. I mean its certainly true if there water draft today there would be more resistance. But the draft ended in 1973 and by that time all american combat troops were already out of vietnam and the pows were coming home, like john mccain. So given the fact theyre not there anymore fighting, the Antiwar Movement would have declined anyway and mcgovern lost and he was the antiwar candidate. So that an effect on dampening peoples enthusiasm. It would be impossible to have a draft now. Of course theres still service. But i think its probably a reason. But i think theres been for was resistance to the mexican war. There was no draft then. There was of course there was a lot of resistance to sending americans to the war in europe during the great war before there was a draft. So i think the draft is lack of a draft is certainly one element that has to be put if had to the equation so to speak but i think its only one. Im not sure how important it really is. Historians know this is a counterfactual questions. Were not supposed to ask counterfactual questions because once you change one thing, you change everything else. But it fact most americans are sort of sold on a hyperlibertarian way of approaching obligations to the state, which people like rand paul like. Some of us would like that like opposition to the draft but maybe not other things. But i think its an element. If i could just follow up. This morning we heard powerfully from some quakers that their opposition was to conscription per se and so i appreciate that as a value on it other hand many in this room are in favor of peace and justice as well. And without a draft, the warfare being conducted by the u. S. Is very unjustly handled by a small portion of the population. Of course. The volunteer army is volunteer because its a job. But at the same time, at least this is more true since 9 11. Ive arguments with antiwar activists about this i know, as many of you do o, people in the military today and a lot of people join for various reasons. Especially after 9 11, they wanted to save it from a mortal enemy. Theres no mistake that God Bless America came back. The world war ii song came back inthe to popularity. Its still sort of popular at many God Bless America song came back. Its popular at many events. Jerry lemky not here now but gave a great paper at one of the sessions i was at about soldiers not talking about their experiences. There are studies of why people go in the military. Theyre more mixed, not just people going because they have nothing else going on in their lives and want a steady job and g. I. Bill and healthcare. Our next question will come from the other side of the auditorium. Thank you, michael. What is your opinion . Is there some way to channel gandhi and ask all the people in the world on the first day of each month or each sunday to set aside time to ask themselves how they can be agents of change and take responsibility for Nuclear Weapons and militarism, environmental crisis, all those things in the form of maybe a sit down strike, but at least ask the peoples of the world to channel and Seek Solutions . Well, its a great thought. Politics, most people get active because of something that affects them, their lives, the lives of people they know. Thats why as i said in my talk wyanty war movements have to get going again with every war. Thats why the strongest movements in our history are people at the workplace, defined by their racial category that theyre placed into and be made slaves at least originally because of that category or women because of their gender, et cetera, forms of exploitation, forms of oppression, inequality, outrage they face everyday. Unfortunately what youre talking about you have to get people that already care about that issue. In some ways its not so different from Climate Change i hate to say it as someone that understands Climate Change is such a dire threat to the future of the world, as wars are, thats a very tough issue to get massive people behind. At least they can see the damage done by hurricanes and miami beach getting flooded and this kind of thing. Im all in david faber of gestures like that. Im not sure theyre going to be very successful. I dont think people should stop and start and stop and start depending on the crisis and the issue. I think people know Nuclear Weapons can eradicate all life, militarism steals from the hungry. I agree. Thank you. All i can do is analyze why theyre not. I cant i share your feelings. The First Political act i ever did was i went to a meeting in Madison Square garden in new york, ban the bomb rally and dr. Spock was popular and i was 7 years old and wore an id band at high school and my fellow students called me a tommy for doing it. Commie. So requiyoure analyzing why theres not so much of an Antiwar Movement presently. Im wondering whether you could comment whether the obama victory in 2008 in some fashion is a culmination of that Antiwar Movement . He came to prominence on the 2004 convention but he came to prominence as a no dumb wars. Antiwar spokesperson. I think he won the primaries i think primarily because of being he didnt vote but her vote in david faber, his vote opposed. So could we claim victory in fave for, her vote opposed. Could we claim victory and once we do how do we evaluate his presidency with regard to war and peace. Thats a great question and good point. John kerry ran on pulling out of iraq in 2004. Didnt win but got votes from people who agree with him. Im sorry . Yeah. He turned against it by 2004. If you just missed it, he voted for the war. O didnt have a chance to vote for the war, he wasnt in congress. Its a good point. I think the problem, of course, once he got elected, people said, okay, thats done and people stopped pushing. Of course, he did begin to pull troops out of afghanistan and iraq. It was positive but u. S. Support still went on and now we will have war troops in afghanistan. I think i think generally true in politics of most democratic nations you need an inside outside strategy. You cant depend on the democratic party, the Republican Party right now at least, to make peace, to move towards peace, you need an independent movement to push them, and at the same time you cant just have the independent movement because people in power have to make the decisions to go to war, pull the troops out, limit the military budget, if they will. Under obama, what people cared about was the great recession. What they cared about was whether the aca was going to pass or not. The wars were there and he gave speeches about them and were way down on the priorities of most people, even most progressives. Yes, youre right that was an Antiwar Movement. The fact american strength has gone down in these country is a success in a way. Theres no fundamental questioning, i think, of the strategy of why terrorism does start up around the world, why theres so many angry young people in these countries. Thats not the kind of question you have policymakers equipped to answer. If we care about peace in the world we have to be responding to. The other question was the second part of the question, i forget. He does. I answered some of that, i guess. I think obama, you know, we could have an argument about this. Im more favorable to his Foreign Policy than some people are not because its what i would have wanted, but i think given the pressures on him from the military, republicans, other issues, im not sure he deserves the Nobel Peace Prize a year or two into this is presidency or less than a year into his presidency. His opening cuba is a major act now trump is trying to take back. I think he attempted to put the relationship with iran on a more rational basis with the peace treaty. I think given what he inherited, given the military he inherited, given the fact he has to get reelected all of these things he probably did about as good as he could have especially given the fact americans didnt care what he was doing in afghanistan and iraq unless they were there and had family there and that is partly the result of a draft, i guess, the lack of a draft. I know there are more questions. I believe michael will be here tomorrow as well . No. Ive got a family id like to come but i have a family wedding i have to go back for. Dont miss your chance. Now, you have it. Please be sure to ask all of the rest of these followup questions, right now, please join me in thanking michael kazin. Thank you. [ applause ] this weekend on the cspan networks, saturday at 9 15 eastern on cspan former president ial speechwriters from president nixon to obama. And how your zip code impacts your health. Book tv, cspan2, saturday, 9 00 p. M. Eastern, Daily Caller News Foundation editorinchief, Christopher Bedford on his book the art of the donald lessons from americas philosopher in chief. Author Rebecca Frazier and her book the mayflower, the founding of america on American History tv on cspan3 saturday, 8 55 p. M. And sunday at 9 10 p. M. , the Ground Breaking ceremony, the dwight d. Eisenhower memorial. On the cspan networks. Cspan, where history unfolds daily. In 1979, cspan was created as a Public Service by americas Cable Television companies blow brought to you today by your cable or satellite provider. Up next on American History tv, author, Erica Coleman talks about women and peace movements during world war i and highlights the peace party in new york city and antiwar reporting in editorials and newsletters and talks about gender roles at the time and contrasts that with women serving today. This was part of a conference hosted by the National World war i museum in kansas city, missouri. Its just over an hour. Good morning. Im christie schneider. Four years ago, when i was president of the peace history society, i was delight to be contacted by members of the original Planning Committee for this conference. They were in the process of scheduling a symposium to be