What do you think?
Rate this book
We Who Dared to Say No to War: American Antiwar Writing from 1812 to Now
We Who Dared to Say No to War uncovers some of the forgotten but compelling body of work from the American antiwar tradition -- speeches, articles, poetry, book excerpts, political cartoons, and more -- from people throughout our history who have opposed war. Beginning with the War of 1812, these selections cover every major American war up to the present and come from both the left and the right, from religious and secular viewpoints. There are many surprises, including a forgotten letter from a Christian theologian urging Confederate President Jefferson Davis to exempt Christians from the draft and a speech by Abraham Lincoln opposing the 1848 Mexican War. Among others, Daniel Webster, Mark Twain, Andrew Carnegie, Grover Cleveland, Eugene Debs, Robert Taft, Paul Craig Roberts, Patrick Buchanan, and Country Joe and the Fish make an appearance. This first-ever anthology of American antiwar writing offers the full range of the subject's richness and variety.
368 pages, Paperback
First published August 19, 2008
13 people are currently reading
323 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 21 of 21 reviews
November 28, 2009
This is an excellent collection of American anti-war writings. I enjoyed reading the "other side" of history, so to speak. American wars have largely been praised and condoned by history, but the writings of those that opposed those wars exposed the ugly underbelly of each conflict, demonstrating its ulterior motives of its organizers and commanders.
The American history we're taught is one version, and this book is part of the other version. It was a very worthwhile read and one that should be taught in our schools.
The American history we're taught is one version, and this book is part of the other version. It was a very worthwhile read and one that should be taught in our schools.
Read
April 17, 2021H.L. Mencken - “The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.”
James Madison - “Of all the enemies of true liberty, war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes; and armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few. . . . No nation can preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare.”
James Madison - “Of all the enemies of true liberty, war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes; and armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few. . . . No nation can preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare.”
September 8, 2015
This collection is interesting because the entries represent a wide variety of points of view, from left to right (e.g. Eugene V. Debs to Patrick Buchanan), concerning America's involvement in war. I like that.
December 30, 2012
Great compilation of America antiwar writing/speeches from 1812 to now.
November 11, 2015
The image of anti-war protesters in America is of the left, especially the student left, haranguing the government for overseas debacles, bloodbaths like Vietnam and Iraq that seem to rival the Trojan War in their length. As We Who Dared Say No to War demonstrates, however, bipartisan public outcry against government bellicosity has been around since the creation of the Republic. The joint work of a progressive and a libertarian, this anthology of anti-war literature demonstrates that war is the enemy of us all, destroying lives and turning governments into monsters.
I'd planned to buy this work years ago purely on the face of it, especially given its unlikely neighbors: Howard Zinn and Russell Kirk, both of whom are represented here. Aside from some more famous names, like President Eisenhower , most of the contributors are nigh-anonymous, largely forgotten by history. Their motivations for opposing war are diverse, but of this collection there are two predominant objections, moral and constitutional. Arguments opposing the war from the perspective of Christian pacifism pepper the work, from an early piece written to the Confederate president maintaining that Christians cannot be forced to fight a war against God's commands, to the Berrigan brothers (both Catholic priests) who raised a righteous ruckus during Vietnam, at one point sneaking into a courthouse to burn draft documentation. Another well-represented motive is Constitutional corruption; both authors decrying the fact that the president has forced the country into war despite the fact that this is Congress's purview, and those warning that wars are the lethal enemy of democracy and republican government, reliably leading to a worship of the State and the severe curtailing of liberties both civil and political. Political objections to war run the gamut, from conservatives like Robert Taft denouncing it a menace to public health, to conservatives in the person of Eugene Debs pointing out that wars are invariably fought by a subject class who gain nothing from it but families destroyed and survivors haunted by the horrors of the battlefield.
The book covers every conflict from 1812 'til the present day, if not by name then by association: The War of 1812, the invasion of Mexico, the Civil War, the Spanish-American war, the world wars, the "Cold War", Vietnam, and the War on Terror, which includes Iraq and Afghanistan. Early on, a fair bit of the moral objection is patriotic: authors see in the United States an unstained and free republic, one which has never raised the sword except in its own defense. Do not reduce us, they plead, to the level of the old world, constantly invading and advancing the flag of conquest. May the stars and stripes, they pray, remain free of the imperial eagle. Alas for them, between Mexico, Cuba, and the Philippines, under the swagger stick of executives like McKinley and Roosevelt, the great experiment deferred to the familiar path of empire -- and even after a momentary retreat during the Depression, it came back for a vengeance after World War 2, and remains with us today. Of all the wars covered here, World War 2 is addressed most lightly; one author maintains he's sitting this one out because history seems to indicate the futility of it. How many resources were poured into Europe to defeat the Kaiser in an alleged crusade to make the world safe for democracy, only to release a fouler creature? We traded Hohenzollern for Hitler; dispatch him, and what fresh hell do we risk? There is slight drift from idealism to resignation within the book; the authors are not oblivious to the fact that they were preceded in their arguments by other generations, and eventually one wonders if we're not damned to the same mistake over and over again. Our enemy, one author writes, is not fascism, or even materialism, but the beast within man. Til it be tamed with reason -- til, as Plato mused, the love of wisdom commands cities -- we will defeat one enemy only to create another.
This is a work brimming with quotability, with utterly delicious surprises. We find, for instance, Abraham Lincoln denouncing a war started on suspicious grounds only a decade before he becomes the author of a similar conflict. Later on, a Democratic presidential candidate, George McGovern, hails the virtue of paleo-conservative arguments against war and chastises Congressional republicans by quoting Edmund Burke and declaring that the legislative chamber stinks of blood. Though most of the material is primary sources -- essays, poems, and songs -- Woods and Polner also provide some narrative introduction to each chapter that provides some cohesion and historical analysis -- decrying, for instance, the rise of liberals eager to wage war in other countries for Wilsonian ends, and the rise of neo-conservatives who abandoning contempt for interventionism and profligate spending to play war across the globe.
Although the subject here is American anti-war writing, the book commends itself to general reading. The motives and consequences of war affect other nations no less than the United States, a fact born out by the fact that many of the contributors here point to examples in history. The role of war in centralizing power, in corrupting a nation - enriching defense contractors with the right connections, forcing a disconnect between the morality of home and the desire of the state -- in turning perfectly friendly people into frenzied madmen -- is a universal human problem, particularly so in that there is no easy fix. Fighting is second nature to us, though at the level of state versus state it is virtually indefensible. Beyond war, We Who Dared Say No communicates important values; moral authority and a state that is kept within its limits by the people. Unfortunately, it is a work that will never lose relevance...at least, not this side of a coronal mass ejection. While we can never stop the state's wars, we can refuse to participate, awaken others to its obscenities, and sap ever so slightly its power. This is invigorating and encouraging, demonstrating that parties that disagree on other subjects can come together to resist and overcome the beast that is war, and the beast it makes of those who surrender themselves to it.
Related:
Weapons of Satire, Mark Twain. A collection of Twain's rebuke of American imperalism in the wake of the Spanish-American war.
Voices of a People's History, ed. Howard Zinn. An anthology of first-hand accounts railing against imperialism among other subjects.
I'd planned to buy this work years ago purely on the face of it, especially given its unlikely neighbors: Howard Zinn and Russell Kirk, both of whom are represented here. Aside from some more famous names, like President Eisenhower , most of the contributors are nigh-anonymous, largely forgotten by history. Their motivations for opposing war are diverse, but of this collection there are two predominant objections, moral and constitutional. Arguments opposing the war from the perspective of Christian pacifism pepper the work, from an early piece written to the Confederate president maintaining that Christians cannot be forced to fight a war against God's commands, to the Berrigan brothers (both Catholic priests) who raised a righteous ruckus during Vietnam, at one point sneaking into a courthouse to burn draft documentation. Another well-represented motive is Constitutional corruption; both authors decrying the fact that the president has forced the country into war despite the fact that this is Congress's purview, and those warning that wars are the lethal enemy of democracy and republican government, reliably leading to a worship of the State and the severe curtailing of liberties both civil and political. Political objections to war run the gamut, from conservatives like Robert Taft denouncing it a menace to public health, to conservatives in the person of Eugene Debs pointing out that wars are invariably fought by a subject class who gain nothing from it but families destroyed and survivors haunted by the horrors of the battlefield.
The book covers every conflict from 1812 'til the present day, if not by name then by association: The War of 1812, the invasion of Mexico, the Civil War, the Spanish-American war, the world wars, the "Cold War", Vietnam, and the War on Terror, which includes Iraq and Afghanistan. Early on, a fair bit of the moral objection is patriotic: authors see in the United States an unstained and free republic, one which has never raised the sword except in its own defense. Do not reduce us, they plead, to the level of the old world, constantly invading and advancing the flag of conquest. May the stars and stripes, they pray, remain free of the imperial eagle. Alas for them, between Mexico, Cuba, and the Philippines, under the swagger stick of executives like McKinley and Roosevelt, the great experiment deferred to the familiar path of empire -- and even after a momentary retreat during the Depression, it came back for a vengeance after World War 2, and remains with us today. Of all the wars covered here, World War 2 is addressed most lightly; one author maintains he's sitting this one out because history seems to indicate the futility of it. How many resources were poured into Europe to defeat the Kaiser in an alleged crusade to make the world safe for democracy, only to release a fouler creature? We traded Hohenzollern for Hitler; dispatch him, and what fresh hell do we risk? There is slight drift from idealism to resignation within the book; the authors are not oblivious to the fact that they were preceded in their arguments by other generations, and eventually one wonders if we're not damned to the same mistake over and over again. Our enemy, one author writes, is not fascism, or even materialism, but the beast within man. Til it be tamed with reason -- til, as Plato mused, the love of wisdom commands cities -- we will defeat one enemy only to create another.
This is a work brimming with quotability, with utterly delicious surprises. We find, for instance, Abraham Lincoln denouncing a war started on suspicious grounds only a decade before he becomes the author of a similar conflict. Later on, a Democratic presidential candidate, George McGovern, hails the virtue of paleo-conservative arguments against war and chastises Congressional republicans by quoting Edmund Burke and declaring that the legislative chamber stinks of blood. Though most of the material is primary sources -- essays, poems, and songs -- Woods and Polner also provide some narrative introduction to each chapter that provides some cohesion and historical analysis -- decrying, for instance, the rise of liberals eager to wage war in other countries for Wilsonian ends, and the rise of neo-conservatives who abandoning contempt for interventionism and profligate spending to play war across the globe.
Although the subject here is American anti-war writing, the book commends itself to general reading. The motives and consequences of war affect other nations no less than the United States, a fact born out by the fact that many of the contributors here point to examples in history. The role of war in centralizing power, in corrupting a nation - enriching defense contractors with the right connections, forcing a disconnect between the morality of home and the desire of the state -- in turning perfectly friendly people into frenzied madmen -- is a universal human problem, particularly so in that there is no easy fix. Fighting is second nature to us, though at the level of state versus state it is virtually indefensible. Beyond war, We Who Dared Say No communicates important values; moral authority and a state that is kept within its limits by the people. Unfortunately, it is a work that will never lose relevance...at least, not this side of a coronal mass ejection. While we can never stop the state's wars, we can refuse to participate, awaken others to its obscenities, and sap ever so slightly its power. This is invigorating and encouraging, demonstrating that parties that disagree on other subjects can come together to resist and overcome the beast that is war, and the beast it makes of those who surrender themselves to it.
Related:
Weapons of Satire, Mark Twain. A collection of Twain's rebuke of American imperalism in the wake of the Spanish-American war.
Voices of a People's History, ed. Howard Zinn. An anthology of first-hand accounts railing against imperialism among other subjects.
January 18, 2019
This is a topic I am passionate about and I loved the book. The wide range of time and perspectives these essays came from was fascinating. In many ways, little has changed when it comes to the government getting involved in unjust wars. Many of the writings from the past resonated with what is going on today. A powerful and illuminating book!
April 13, 2020
One of my favorite books on history that I have ever read. As a libertarian and a pacifist it hit every right note. From the War of 1812 to present there has been so much written on peace and the terrors of war it is a wonder that more people do not realize how wrong it is. Everyone needs to read this book to understand that governments wage war but the people always lose war.
Want to read
March 30, 2023O lover's body with its man's grave beauty,
O lover's eyes in which I launched my soul!
I shall be hands and feet to him, and eyes!
And he can never see me if I falter;
No, and he cannot see me. God forgive me
O lover's eyes in which I launched my soul!
I shall be hands and feet to him, and eyes!
And he can never see me if I falter;
No, and he cannot see me. God forgive me
November 22, 2023
I'd like to write a full and proper review for this when I have time, but this is a truly excellent collection. Recommended.
January 27, 2017
Great for anti-war primary sources.
April 23, 2014
Many times history repeats itself, either in a positive or a negative way. Some may remember that when the Bush administration was beating the drum for war in 2002 it was claimed that Iraq would be a “cakewalk” and all we had to do was march in and the Iraqis would welcome us with open arms as their great liberators.
What is most striking, and almost startling, is the “hawks” and the “doves” have made the same arguments over two centuries of our nation’s existence. This comes out in a 2008 book by Murray Polner and Thomas E. Woods Jr. We Who Dared To Say No To War The book contains a speech by Congressman Samuel Taggart of Massachusetts in opposition to James Madison’s conquest of Canada. Protesting a closed-door debate in the House, Taggart refused to give this speech on the House floor and instead published it in the Alexandria Gazette on June 24th, 1812. What Taggart says in this speech makes for an interesting, and I believe, sad historical parallel. He states: “The conquest of Canada has been represented to be so easy as to be little more than a party of pleasure. We have, it has been said, nothing to do but to march an army into the country and display the standard of the United States, and the Canadians will immediately flock to it and place themselves under our protection. They have been represented as ripe for revolt, panting for emancipation from a tyrannical Government, and longing to enjoy the sweets of liberty under the fostering hand of the United States.” Does it sound like you've heard this argument before? Well, if you were listening during the build up for the Iraq War you likely have!
What is perhaps more tragic than war itself is the fact that lessons of the past have not often been learned. James Madison’s conquest of Canada ended in a failure, and so has just about every other similar military adventure our nation has been involved in. What do both the Iraqi invasion and the attempted conquest of Canada have in common? Both were represented as “cakewalks.”
One important revelation that comes from reading Taggart’s speech in 1812 is that there are war-hawks in every generation who expect the public to put on their rose-colored glasses and act as if they hadn't heard the false promise of quick victory before.
What is most striking, and almost startling, is the “hawks” and the “doves” have made the same arguments over two centuries of our nation’s existence. This comes out in a 2008 book by Murray Polner and Thomas E. Woods Jr. We Who Dared To Say No To War The book contains a speech by Congressman Samuel Taggart of Massachusetts in opposition to James Madison’s conquest of Canada. Protesting a closed-door debate in the House, Taggart refused to give this speech on the House floor and instead published it in the Alexandria Gazette on June 24th, 1812. What Taggart says in this speech makes for an interesting, and I believe, sad historical parallel. He states: “The conquest of Canada has been represented to be so easy as to be little more than a party of pleasure. We have, it has been said, nothing to do but to march an army into the country and display the standard of the United States, and the Canadians will immediately flock to it and place themselves under our protection. They have been represented as ripe for revolt, panting for emancipation from a tyrannical Government, and longing to enjoy the sweets of liberty under the fostering hand of the United States.” Does it sound like you've heard this argument before? Well, if you were listening during the build up for the Iraq War you likely have!
What is perhaps more tragic than war itself is the fact that lessons of the past have not often been learned. James Madison’s conquest of Canada ended in a failure, and so has just about every other similar military adventure our nation has been involved in. What do both the Iraqi invasion and the attempted conquest of Canada have in common? Both were represented as “cakewalks.”
One important revelation that comes from reading Taggart’s speech in 1812 is that there are war-hawks in every generation who expect the public to put on their rose-colored glasses and act as if they hadn't heard the false promise of quick victory before.
February 21, 2017
Great collection of writing!
Want to read
July 28, 2011Also see the recent article by the author:
"Left and Right Against War"
by Murray Polner
http://www.lewrockwell.com/polner/pol...
"We intended to portray a broad American antiwar tradition often absent from classrooms, films, television and the new media. Tom is a libertarian and conservative and I a left-liberal and believer in nonviolent activism. We differ on some things but not on our opposition to our nation’s reliance on war and conquest (as well as our mutual support for civil liberties). We have no illusions that our book can deter contemporary warmakers or outwit the fabrications and manipulations of governments and propagandists past and present. We were (and are) instead motivated by the hope that arguments for war might be critically examined, as the men and women of different political persuasions we include in the book did in their time. What we learned in writing this book was that lies, deliberate manipulation of patriotic feelings, scare tactics, a compliant, often indifferent media, and bribery of legislators kept and keeps the war machine oiled and too many decision makers in clover."
byline: Murray Polner was editor of Present Tense, published by the American Jewish Committee from 1973–90. He wrote Rabbi: The American Experience; co-edited (with Stefan Merken) Peace Justice Jews: Reclaiming Our Tradition, as well as No Victory Parades: The Return of the Vietnam Veteran and, with Jim O’Grady, Disarmed & Dangerous, a biography of Daniel and Philip Berrigan.
"Left and Right Against War"
by Murray Polner
http://www.lewrockwell.com/polner/pol...
"We intended to portray a broad American antiwar tradition often absent from classrooms, films, television and the new media. Tom is a libertarian and conservative and I a left-liberal and believer in nonviolent activism. We differ on some things but not on our opposition to our nation’s reliance on war and conquest (as well as our mutual support for civil liberties). We have no illusions that our book can deter contemporary warmakers or outwit the fabrications and manipulations of governments and propagandists past and present. We were (and are) instead motivated by the hope that arguments for war might be critically examined, as the men and women of different political persuasions we include in the book did in their time. What we learned in writing this book was that lies, deliberate manipulation of patriotic feelings, scare tactics, a compliant, often indifferent media, and bribery of legislators kept and keeps the war machine oiled and too many decision makers in clover."
byline: Murray Polner was editor of Present Tense, published by the American Jewish Committee from 1973–90. He wrote Rabbi: The American Experience; co-edited (with Stefan Merken) Peace Justice Jews: Reclaiming Our Tradition, as well as No Victory Parades: The Return of the Vietnam Veteran and, with Jim O’Grady, Disarmed & Dangerous, a biography of Daniel and Philip Berrigan.
March 7, 2012
Reading through this collection of anti-war writings was one of the most self-developing, introspective things I've done in awhile.
The book is also very entertaining; it is lively, gripping, and emotional. Some of the writers are very vivid with their dialect and I believe the writings bring a bold sense of individuality, urgency, and determination for what is "just", that I haven't felt in awhile.
Both authors present a wide assortment of writings from different political views: socialists, anarchists, libertarians, conservatives, leftists, Christians, poets, and musicians. With all one thing in common, contempt for mass slaughter, irresponsible nationalism, and government lies.
One can learn a great deal about history by foraging through this book. e.g. I learned about Madison's War of 1812, that Lincoln opposed the Mexican war, that Andrew Carnegie was an anti-imperialist and offered to buy the Philippines from the U.S., so the Filipinos could have their independence, saving many from death by war. There's a lot of history in here.
The writers and speakers presented in the book range from historians, congress(wo)men, critics, political pundits, mothers, foreign policy experts, etc. Helen Keller has an essay in this book.
A very compelling read.
The book is also very entertaining; it is lively, gripping, and emotional. Some of the writers are very vivid with their dialect and I believe the writings bring a bold sense of individuality, urgency, and determination for what is "just", that I haven't felt in awhile.
Both authors present a wide assortment of writings from different political views: socialists, anarchists, libertarians, conservatives, leftists, Christians, poets, and musicians. With all one thing in common, contempt for mass slaughter, irresponsible nationalism, and government lies.
One can learn a great deal about history by foraging through this book. e.g. I learned about Madison's War of 1812, that Lincoln opposed the Mexican war, that Andrew Carnegie was an anti-imperialist and offered to buy the Philippines from the U.S., so the Filipinos could have their independence, saving many from death by war. There's a lot of history in here.
The writers and speakers presented in the book range from historians, congress(wo)men, critics, political pundits, mothers, foreign policy experts, etc. Helen Keller has an essay in this book.
A very compelling read.
July 11, 2014
This book is a gathering of anti war ( & anti slavery ) writings compiled by Murray Polner and Thomas Woods in 2008. Extending from the War of 1812 to the present day conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan it is an exceptional collection and very much worth the time. Highly recommended, though the one thing that is discouraging is that whether we are talking about Madison's abuses in 1812 or George W. Bush's abuses in 2007 you realize that little has changed.
I bought my copy off the internet directly from Thomas Woods, and asked him to sign it, which he did. A very nice thing to do.
I bought my copy off the internet directly from Thomas Woods, and asked him to sign it, which he did. A very nice thing to do.
March 21, 2009
I enjoyed this book because it offers a variety of individuals' (very different) reasons for coming to the same conclusion. The people whose works appear in this book have chosen pacifism for reasons ranging from religion to economics to social justice to freedom from government. I would highly recommend it as a good introduction to various pacifist standpoints for anyone interested in how a person could "actually believe all that."
February 14, 2012
This book was selected by http://freedombookclub.com as it's Book of the Month for October 2011.
Initially I read the article by Robert LeFevre, which was written during the cold war. This article was far more less radical, and right leaning than I had thought possible from my limited understanding of Mr. LeFevre. However, there are other more left radical offerings in this book, which I found to be worthy of reading.
Initially I read the article by Robert LeFevre, which was written during the cold war. This article was far more less radical, and right leaning than I had thought possible from my limited understanding of Mr. LeFevre. However, there are other more left radical offerings in this book, which I found to be worthy of reading.
Read
September 23, 2010We Who Dared to Say No to War: American Antiwar Writing from 1812 to Now by Murray Polner (2008)
Read
December 20, 2010Thoughtful and useful for wisdom
June 29, 2012
Interesting collection of essays by prominent Americans.
April 24, 2017
This collection of essays and speeches and excerpts from books is an excellent reference to describe the many reasons why war is evil. Coming from both liberal and conservative perspectives, having religious and economic and philosophical and even patriotic themes, this book is a fascinating collection that should be read by anybody who loves our country.
Displaying 1 - 21 of 21 reviews