Updated May 7 at 2:33 p.m.
Jerome Kaye grew up on the Lower East Side of New York in the 1920s and ‘30s and became radicalized by the economic injustice all around him. He was a member of the Communist Party in his younger years, and though he quit the party in the 1940s, the FBI continued to harass him for years thereafter.
His son, John, became one of my best friends when we were college freshmen in 1965. I remember John telling me how his father had become impatient and disapproving of some of the radical movements emerging in the late ‘60s. It seemed to him that the New Left, as it was called, consisted largely of spoiled middle-class kids acting out in what today is called “performative” protest. Nor was he so keen on the radicalism of the Black Panthers.
It was partly a generational difference. Jerome was of the Old Left, steeped in the workers’ movements of the 1930s, where working class people like himself were pushing for economic justice and active opposition to fascism. A friend of the Kaye family was one of the volunteers defending democracy in the Spanish Civil War of the 1930s.
A generational difference is also at work today. Today’s young protesters may become impatient with “children of the ‘60s” handing out advice based on experiences from half a century ago. Gaza is not Vietnam. Nor is Israel. Things are different — as they always are. But the dynamics of history sometimes repeat themselves in disturbing ways.
There has never been a shortage of causes for which active protest is appropriate. And there has never been a shortage of mistaken alliances and delusional thinking. The trick for any generation is to sift through the competing claims and to focus on one’s true aims.
Opposition to Stalinism, which was certainly justified, drove people, including many Americans, toward support of Nazi Germany. That was an obvious, historic, delusional mistake. Opposition to America’s role in Vietnam, also justified, produced a variety of useful protest actions and other actions that hurt the anti-war cause.
At my university, I saw controlled, dignified, focused protest marches and vigils that were meant to call attention to the anti-war cause. They didn’t end the war, but they got the message across that support for the war was not unanimous. Then in 1969 someone planted a bomb at the faculty club, which killed the custodian who found it. It was terrorism with no purpose and a murderous outcome.
We witnessed all kinds of protest during those years. I was part of a small band of demonstrators who confronted Vice President Hubert Humphrey at a political event in 1967, shouting in ways that let him know that Americans were angry about Vietnam, at least some of us. It was a worthwhile aim. I also saw demagogic speakers in Berkeley igniting a crowd that spread through downtown, breaking windows, and bringing on the tear gas. It was counterproductive and mindless.
The mayhem at the Democratic National Convention in 1968 was caused by what was called a police riot. But even if the police instigated much of the violence, Humphrey ended up losing in November by the narrowest margin to Richard Nixon. Violence at the convention may have made the difference.
It’s important to hold our political leaders to account when we believe they are wrong. In the present instance, it’s complicated. Students at the University of Vermont, Middlebury College, Sterling College and Dartmouth College are protesting the war in Gaza, but ideas about the war are varied.
Opposition to Israel’s over-the-top assault on Gaza is widely shared across the spectrum. Even President Biden has called Israel’s action over-the-top.
But turning that sentiment into support for Hamas, which has an actual and overtly expressed genocidal agenda, makes no sense. The Palestinian people, along with the Israelis, are among the most severely impacted victims of Hamas. In the same way, Israelis, along with the Palestinians, are among the victims of the uncompromising anti-democratic policies of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
U.S. support for Israel ties us to Netanyahu’s extreme and damaging policies, but our support is also our leverage. One hopes that is how Biden is using it as he pushes Israel and Hamas to halt their war.
The complexity of these issues is one reason it would have been interesting to hear from Linda Thomas-Greenfield, the Biden administration’s ambassador to the United Nations. She had been invited to speak at UVM commencement ceremonies this month, but her vetoes of Security Council resolutions calling for a cease-fire in Gaza have led to calls that the invitation be revoked, and her address was canceled.
Thomas-Greenfield is a career diplomat with a record of support for Israel. Then again, most Americans also have a record of support for Israel. That one of our close allies has now embarked on a barbarous mission of destruction in response to the barbarous assault by Hamas on Oct. 7 has put all friends of Israel in a bind.
One may recall the support that Great Britain gave to President George W. Bush’s invasion of Iraq. Prime Minister Tony Blair may have believed he was lending support to a friend, but a true friend would have found a way to restrain his friend’s foolish actions. Blair’s support for the Iraq War ultimately contributed to his electoral defeat.
One can’t quarrel with the desire for peace voiced by today’s college students. But when the crowds on campus begin to resemble the insurrectionists who stormed the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, taking the law into their own hands, succumbing to the prideful belief that they know more than anyone else, then they will take their cause down with them.
The Biden administration is feeling the pressure. The popular unrest has put it on notice that the American people are offended by the carnage in Gaza and want a solution. Let’s hope the young protesters keep that message clear and focused without getting co-opted by demagogues of any stripe.
Jerome Kaye lived through a turbulent time — the Depression, World War II, McCarthyism. His heart was always in the right place, searching for the way toward just solutions without being distracted by the demagogues. John Kaye and I navigated our way through a different era. The year after we graduated, huge, peaceful marches took place, but then riots in the community at the edge of campus led to the destruction by fire of our local bank. It fed into Nixon’s game plan, and the Vietnam War continued for five more years.
This year concern is already mounting about a possible nightmare scenario: that Biden will suffer the same fate as Humphrey, done in by the forces of chaos. The difference is that Donald Trump represents Richard Nixon’s worst qualities raised to the 10th power. Chaos to the 10th power would be the result if Biden loses. That is an outcome protesters everywhere should keep in mind.