Navigating Rank-and-file Opposition to Vietnam War: Case Study of the Vietnam War Debate, 1968

Abstract

How did the rank and file oppose the Vietnam war within the labor movement in 1968, and how was the rank-and-file opposition to war contested? How did the Vietnam War debate reflect the distinctive challenges of contesting the leadership’s pro-war position within the Cold War labor movement? To answer the research question, the study investigates the Vietnam war debate in the 1968 New York State American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) convention. Zooming in on the conversation between the anti-war rank and file and the pro-war labor unionists, the study identifies the reasons and strategies used by the anti-war rank and file and the pro-war labor unionists. On this basis, the study examines how the labor movement culture contributed to the difficulty of the anti-war labor arguments prevailing over the pro-war ones. The study identifies that the anti-war rank and file criticized the South Vietnamese government’s undemocratic behavior. The anti-war rank and file also criticized that the Vietnam war did not comply with the labor movement’s moral commitment to stand for the working people, arguing that the government funding for the Great Society programs decreased because of the war. A few anti-war rank and file directly showed their distaste for the drafting and claimed that no boys should go to war. On the other hand, the pro-war labor unionists argued that the anti-war rank-and-file arguments were driven by the false belief that they could make the Vietnam war decisions for the government. The pro-war labor unionists further argued that the labor opposition to war was an act of selfishness, cowardice, and disservice to the country. In addition, the pro-war labor unionists argued that fighting the Vietnam war was necessary because the war helped fight communism and defend democracy. Comparing both sides of the arguments, the study concludes that the pro-war and anti-war labor primarily conflicted over their interpretation of democracy; identifies that some of the anti-war arguments were set aside because of their contradiction with the institutional culture. The study concludes that the pro-war labor position prevailed without solving the real concerns over the war’s impacts on the workers’ everyday life. The study contributes to the research literature on the anti-Vietnam war social movement and the role of the Vietnam War in the development of the labor movement by studying how anti-war rank-and-file sentiments failed to translate into visible social actions. Re-examining the interaction between the labor movement and the Vietnam war, the study finds that the rank-and-file anti-war sentiments were suppressed from within through a set of cultural norms of democracy, loyalty, and valor and contradicted by the labor movement leadership’s strong alliance with the government. In this process, the study exposes the connection between the Vietnam War debate and the tension beneath the image of the labor movement’s solidarity in relation to job type, gender, and race.