The latest issue of the Wisconsin Magazine of History arrived recently with an article which is primarily about Women for a Peaceful Christmas, a Madison-based organization active until the end of the Viet Nam war.
It is interesting to find events of your high school and college years becoming the subject of articles in history magazines. I think there is some sort of phase transition involved there; once past the first half century of life you enter a new state of matter. How can Women for a Peaceful Christmas be history? How can any issue which remains pertinent to daily life and culturally unresolved be treated as history? The questions they raised about peace, environmental destruction, and excessive consumerism are completely relevant to the news of the day. Test me on this: at Reuters today I see these stories:
"The United States aims to get all new troops pledged by allies into Afghanistan in the first half of 2010 and wants the Netherlands and Canada to 'stay with us' despite withdrawal plans, a Pentagon official said on Monday."
"Cash-strapped Americans are spending less this year on holiday shopping, and are waiting until the very last minute to reap the maximum bargains -- wreaking havok upon retailers who desperately need a good Christmas season."
"Washington took a step on Monday toward curbing U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, aiding the first day of the biggest climate talks in history where 190 nations are seeking a deal to curb global warming."
Now, are the issues peace, consumption, and the environment? Are the issues still peace, consumption, environment? This isn't history; this is long-playing current events! At least, so it appears to those of us who have lived these same issues in actual reality for half a century and more.
That may be the point.
I am undecided whether to be comforted or frustrated. On the one hand, it is frustrating to realize that issues of war and peace, of exploitation and relationship, of waste and sustainability are so deeply unresolved after four decades of attention (although, in actual reality, it has been much longer). On the other hand, it is comforting to be sure that the we identified issues which are truly fundamental. We are aiming at the right target, at least in some sense, given that the same issues remain at the core of social controversy after 40 years.
We have, based on the turn of history, the right questions. It still seems to us that we have the same right answers. We can make the same plays in the actual reality game that we made 40 years ago and perhaps get the same results. But I am uneasy with mere repetition. In terms of playing this game, have we learned anything?