Contesting Patriotism: Culture, Power, and Strategy in the Peace Movement

Study War No More: Peace Sociology and Our Messages

Contesting Patriotism:
Culture, Power, and Strategy in the Peace Movement
Lynne M. Woerle, Patrick G. Coy, and Gregory M. Maney
Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2009, 244 pages, $24.95

Contesting Patriotism is a bombproof, peer-reviewed academic study on the ways the peace movement has responded to war and threats of war in its messaging. It gives examples of the strongest antiwar/pro-peace arguments from different approaches, explains reasoning for framing arguments, and categorizes arguments according to their characteristics.

While the findings are rarely surprising, the value in them is, as always, that one can now assert that “research shows.” Arguing with some outspoken conservatives often requires that we prove that the sun rises in the east.

Other findings are prima facie improbable—such as an Islamic-identified group risking dismissal by also negatively focusing on U.S. soldier conduct—until the researchers contextualize the period in question. (In this case, the breaking story of prisoner abuse and torture at Abu Ghraib and elsewhere made it mandatory for Islamic-identified groups to condemn such egregious acts.)

The authors combed through a great deal of peace group arguments and isolated the strongest persuasive writing, contextualized it, and compared contexts. For instance, looking at how the American Friends Service Committee argued against Gulf War I, the Iraq bombing of 1998, the Kosovo attack of 1999, September 11, 2001, and the invasion of Iraq shows that they finessed their arguments, bearing in mind the state of emotions and analysis in the American electorate at the moment. Learning about this longitudinal work and then looking at the snapshots of how various groups did their best work during each of these conflicts helps those who wish to learn how to write persuasively for peace.

How much fear has the regime created? How strong is a desire for revenge? What new information might be of interest to the public? What rhetorical weaknesses exist in the war promoters’ arguments? What metaphors might resonate with the electorate right now? Is our message to our constituency of supporters or to the general citizenry? Do we focus on societal issues or frame the message personally? Can we create a coalition among disparate identity groups to oppose war? In short, how can we remove the wedges that keep us separated from each other and instead create bridges and bonds for peace?

While the ranges of responses are organized remarkably well, there is no hint of how the messaging may have actually worked—the deeper knowledge we need about the transformative effects. Was the United States really exposed to that oppositional transformative knowledge, or was it just sent out in press releases that editors of mainstream media ignored? This leads the reader to hope for additional study in some practical directions, including:

What were the metrics (e.g., • size, identity) of the audiences reached by the peace movement in identifiable periods of public policy discourse and decisionmaking?
How did the peace movement organizations distribute their messages?
Which distribution methods reached which audiences?
Were there discernible shifts in public opinion as a result of peace movement outreach?
Were some groups more successful? Were some regions, states, or cities more organized with broader coalitions? If so, what variables might correlate?

This is a book for activists, particularly those constructing arguments and seeking to understand why certain arguments are more powerful under which conditions—timing, public sentiments and the zeitgeist, policy anticipation and effective amplification of the message, coalition-building strategies, and general message construction and deconstruction. However, Contesting Patriotism will have more value for organizers with graduate degrees or at least a degree in peace studies—this is a first-rate academic text.

While the authors discuss further research along the same lines, as an activist I’d love to see more examination and explanation of ways to get those great peace messages, so well constructed, into the op-ed pages and onto the screens (big and little, collective and personal) that the mainstream United States and global community consume. These peace sociologists are just the team to do it.

Tom H. Hastings (pcwtom [at] gmail.com (pcwtom [at] gmail.com)) is a founder of Whitefeather Peace House, core faculty in the Portland State University graduate program in conflict resolution, the director of PeaceVoice (a project of the Oregon Peace Institute), a two-time Plowshares prisoner (convicted felon), and a former member of the WRL National Committee.