DIY History | Transcribe | Campus Culture | University of Iowa anti-war protests, 1965-1967

Transcribe
Translate

University of Iowa anti-war protests, 1965-1967

31858064848116_010-02

of the workers - for the right to organize and to strike and for higher pay among others. But the government sees that yielding to the demands of the students would make the workers more insistent in their demands, and yielding to them would seriously impair the economic setup of the dictatorship. Thus the government is caught in a dilemma: Yielding to the demands of the workers weakens the position of the dictatorship and, on the structural side, its case for getting into the Common Market. On the other hand, repression and failure to yield will probably not only drive the workers and students to more radical positions but also endanger Spain's Common Market bid with the more democratic countries of Europe. 

Naturally there are differences among the workers and students themselves. Some wish to overthrow the regime; some warn against offending even the upper middle class for fear of a new civil war. But one can hear again one of the rallying calls of the time of the Spanish Republic, " All power to the commissions of workers" amid the demands for elementary political rights. In any case, something is happening in Spain, although one would never guess it from most American newspapers. As a prominent Madrid lawyer recently put it at a reception at the U.S. Embassy in Madrid, " It is fantastic! They [the Americans] are the only ones who do not realise that a revolutionary process has begun in this country." 

KENNEDY, THE WAR AND THE DEMOCRATS

It appears quite evident by now that the Democratic Party is on the verge of the greatest split in its ranks since the three-way schism of 1948, which gave rise not only to the leftist Progressive Party but also to the rightist Dixiecraft walkout. The evidence for such a split appears in recent columns by Walter Lippman. (See, for example, his " Accuses Johnson of Breaking Party Pledge on Vietnam" D.M. Register, March 10) The cause of the split is obviously Johnson's
in Vietnam.

come from Senator Kennedy; for Lippman, this is 
of Kennedy's appetite for power and his inherent
" Kennedy has been most reluctant to oppose the Pres
ong time to make the break." And Lippman goes on to 
point:
Democratic opposition to [the President's] 
in Vietnam has reached a point where a 
cian who aspires  to national leadership
align himself with such oppostion

of course go against the grain of those who, Like the Pres
Humphrey, and the national news media,insist or perpetu
e opposition to the war is limited to only a small, unnin
rred, Lippman shows that this myth is Johnson-inspired: he 
arely on Johnson for all the "semantic tricks", the "deviousness"
such a shambles of public debate" and the "persistent and delib
the waters of opinion."

be stressed here is that, while the oppos
a serious impact on national 
ll into hand of Ro
n should become
principle
y do

Saving...

of the workers - for the right to organize and to strike and for higher pay among others. But the government sees that yielding to the demands of the students would make the workers more insistent in their demands, and yielding to them would seriously impair the economic setup of the dictatorship. Thus the government is caught in a dilemma: Yielding to the demands of the workers weakens the position of the dictatorship and, on the structural side, its case for getting into the Common Market. On the other hand, repression and failure to yield will probably not only drive the workers and students to more radical positions but also endanger Spain's Common Market bid with the more democratic countries of Europe. Naturally there are differences among the workers and students themselves. Some wish to overthrow the regime; some warn against offending even the upper middle class for fear of a new civil war. But one can hear again one of the rallying calls of the time of the Spanish Republic, " All power to the commissions of workers" amid the demands for elementary political rights. In any case, something is happening in Spain, although one would never guess it from most American newspapers. As a prominent Madrid lawyer recently put it at a reception at the U.S. Embassy in Madrid, " It is fantastic! They [the Americans] are the only ones who do not realise that a revolutionary process has begun in this country." KENNEDY, THE WAR AND THE DEMOCRATS It appears quite evident by now that the Democratic Party is on the verge of the greatest split in its ranks since the three-way schism of 1948, which gave rise not only to the leftist Progressive Party but also to the rightist Dixiecraft walkout. The evidence for such a split appears in recent columns by Walter Lippman. (See, for example, his " Accuses Johnson of Breaking Party Pledge on Vietnam" D.M. Register, March 10) The cause of the split is obviously Johnson's in Vietnam. come from Senator Kennedy; for Lippman, this is of Kennedy's appetite for power and his inherent " Kennedy has been most reluctant to oppose the Pres ong time to make the break." And Lippman goes on to point: Democratic opposition to [the President's] in Vietnam has reached a point where a cian who aspires to national leadership align himself with such oppostion of course go against the grain of those who, Like the Pres Humphrey, and the national news media,insist or perpetu e opposition to the war is limited to only a small, unnin rred, Lippman shows that this myth is Johnson-inspired: he arely on Johnson for all the "semantic tricks", the "deviousness" such a shambles of public debate" and the "persistent and delib the waters of opinion." be stressed here is that, while the oppos a serious impact on national ll into hand of Ro n should become principle y do