How Public Opinion Changed The Course of The Vietnam War

Introduction

The Vietnam War certainly left a distaste in the lives of many who were affected by it. Scholars have become increasingly interested in the interaction between war and public opinion. Numerous scholarly works have been published on the Vietnam War, but the issue that will be analyzed here is how public opinion changed the course of the war.

Race, Casualties, and Opinion in the Vietnam War

The first article by Scott Gartner and Gary Segura, titled "Race, Casualties, and Opinion in the Vietnam War," examined how the diverse races within America, in combination with the atrocities in the war, led to the formation of opinions that were similar in one race but differed in another (Gartner & Segura, 1997). Their study sought to determine whether race moderates the influence of casualties on opinion. Before arriving at a conclusion, they broke down the issue of war, race, ethnicity, and opinion into three sections. First, they offered a theory for why race and ethnicity play a role in the formation of opinion. Next, they tested the hypothesis, in which approval of the handling of the Vietnam War is the dependent variable, and then the conclusion was formed.

The conclusion found that African Americans were more likely to oppose the war in the beginning stages due to the disproportionate number of casualties for that race compared to whites. By the later stages, whites, African Americans, and Latinos were equally against the war. This racial perspective provides insight into how specific communities perceived the war's impact on their lives and society at large.

The Impact of Public Opinion, Antiwar Demonstrations, and War Costs on Senate Voting on Vietnam War Motions

The second article by Paul Burstein and William Freudenburg, titled "The Impact of Public Opinion, Antiwar Demonstrations, and War Costs on Senate Voting on Vietnam War Motions," takes a closer look at how, as the war became a prolonged affair, representatives from both the Senate and the House became more influenced by the angst from their constituents regarding the war (Burstein & Freudenburg, 1978). They argued that if antiwar demonstrations truly worked, they should have resulted in the reduction of war costs and antiwar legislative measures.

According to their study, public opinion and war costs were highly correlated, suggesting that demonstrations could have been a product of public dissatisfaction with war expenses. This relationship between public sentiment and legislative action highlights the dynamic between political decision-making and citizen activism.

Public Opinion and the War in Vietnam

The third article by Sidney Verba and Richard Brody, titled "Public Opinion and the War in Vietnam," takes a similar approach to the first article but asks how the informed differ from the less well-informed in their attitudes toward the Vietnam War (Verba & Brody, 1970). If demonstrations were credited with bringing about these changes, presumably an argument could be made that demonstrations converted public opinion, which in turn encouraged the administration to change its Vietnam policies.

It is important to consider how these opinion polls were conducted in the first place. Verba and Brody found that those surveys were inadequate, as the general question posed was whether a citizen approves or disapproves of the President’s handling of the situation in Vietnam. This was too general, as the surveys did not detail the complex background phenomenon occurring at the time. They supported Gartner and Segura's argument regarding the difference of opinion between whites and African Americans, along with the tendency of African Americans being ignored.

Anti-War Demonstrations and American Public Opinion on the War in Vietnam

The fourth and final article by E. M. Schreiber, titled "Anti-War Demonstrations and American Public Opinion on the War in Vietnam," focuses on whether demonstrations had an impact on changing American public views about the war (Schreiber, 1976). The study questions whether demonstrations were effective in altering public opinion or if they simply communicated existing sentiments to a broader audience.

Schreiber, along with Verba and Brody, concluded that the polls did not serve as an adequate metric for determining whether the war was truly out of touch with the majority. Schreiber referred to the demonstrations, noting that "many members of the public simply do not mentally join together." This could lead to two conclusions: either demonstrations had no effect in altering public opinion, or they had a significant impact in communicating with the public.

Conclusion

The conclusion offered in Schreiber’s study, as well as Burstein’s and Freudenburg’s, was generally the same: casualties in war alter the opinion of the public more so than anti-war mobilization campaigns. The researchers could not find empirical data to support demonstrations as being the cause of the drawdown of forces. The studies by Verba and Brody, along with Gartner and Segura, provided a profound racial and social breakdown of perception and perspective on the Vietnam War. Individuals of low social status and minority groups opposed the war partly because it did not improve their social mobility and also because it impeded the rights of the Vietnamese people.

References

• Burstein, P., & Freudenburg, W. (1978). The Impact of Public Opinion, Antiwar Demonstrations, and War Costs on Senate Voting on Vietnam War Motions. Social Forces, 56(3), 1235-1257.
• Gartner, S. S., & Segura, G. M. (1997). Race, Casualties, and Opinion in the Vietnam War. Journal of Politics, 59(3), 634-655.
• Schreiber, E. M. (1976). Anti-War Demonstrations and American Public Opinion on the War in Vietnam. British Journal of Political Science, 6(1), 75-85.
• Verba, S., & Brody, R. A. (1970). Public Opinion and the War in Vietnam. American Political Science Review, 64(2), 317-333.