Nixon, students and the wild beast - a nightly debate at Lincoln Memorial

Near the end of his reign one night Nixon went alone to visit the Lincoln Memorial. Demonstrators against the Vietnam war and Nixon's presidency were asleep camping on the steps of the memorial.

Nixon walked among them on his way to the memorial. Before long several of the demonstrators, mostly students, had woken up and a small crowd had gathered around the president. They engaged in debate about the war. Nixon tried his usual rhetoric but the students wouldn't buy it.

At some point one girl remarked, "It's the system, isn't it? You couldn't stop the war even if you wanted to." To which Nixon replied, "I think i can tame the system enough so that i can do some good". Girl: "You're talking about it as though it is a wild beast."

By that time Nixon's minders had arrived at the scene and led him to a waiting car. On the way Nixon said, "That 19 year old girl knows what took me 25 years to figure out; about the CIA, Wallstreet, the Mafia. A wild beast she calls it."



(paraphrased of the top of my head from Oliver Stone's "Nixon")
By no means does the movie assert the Nixon was somehow a good guy, or a victim of the "wild beast". It does show Nixon was to some extent caught up in the system even though there was significant overlap between his personal rather megalomaniacal agenda and the agenda of "the system". As an aside, it was Kissinger more then anyone else who encouraged Nixon in his more extreme positions such as the bombing of Cambodia and the option to nuke Hanoi.

the "wild beast" is only an illusion, it still controls behavior. Everyone plays their 'role' - as they lead us right toward military annihilation.

Like in Zimbardo's prison experiment: He assigned some Stanford undergrads to be prisoners and other to be guards. They all fell so deeply into their 'roles' that none of them realized how far they had gone, how trapped they were. At one point, Zimbardo (psychology professor who served as the 'prison warden' in the study) became so concerned about a rumored 'prison breakout' that he went to the Stanford County prison to ask if he could have his 'prisoners' transferred to their facility. When the Stanford County prison told him to go back to the psychology building, Zimbardo was incensed that there was not 'better co-operation between prisons'.

The prison Zimbardo created was not in the basement of the Psychology building - it was in the minds of the prisoners, the guards, and the warden.

It's the very structure of power in a prison system that creates the abuse..I hadn't heard it lined up like that before..

It's the barrel, not the apples..
War's a barrel too.

a political party is a barrel...

I find it a very helpful concept.

:)

to note that both Nixon and LBJ were haunted by what they were doing. It's also interesting to note that these two were the only presidents who are known to have had well documented psychiatric "break downs." From what is recorded, it seems that Nixon had sympathy for the middle class kids who were rebelling against the order of the greater society. (Few examples illustrate the uncomfortable, rigid aspects of society more than Nixon.)Yet Nixon was strongly opposed to the radical youth, being convinced that their leadership was influenced by foreign powers.

LBJ, on the other hand, expressed some sympathy for the radical left. There was a famous saying, reported by Life at the end of the decade of the '60s, where he said that protest was the life-breathe of democracy, and needed to be respected -- even when it blew hard. Older DUers will recall LBJ was a beatnik (however briefly) as a young man, and then grew his hair after he retired. Still, LBJ supported Nixon, in his own curious way. He seems to have made sure to do his best to be sure Nixon -- who he knew would carry on his Vietnam policy -- would beat HHH, who was more likely to make significant changes.

Neither Nixon, who had a lot of insight on foreign policy before becoming president, and LBJ, who didn't, lacked the insight or backbone to change course in Vietnam. But both were horrified by the war. Way different than the amoral creeps in the White House today.

Wasn't he kinda old to have been part of that trend?

I've heard several variations of the Nixon/Monument scenario. The story I best remember hearing was this occured in 1971...during the massive march on the Pentagon by nearly 1,000,000 protestors. This was long before Watergate. Also, that Nixon didn't just stumble out...he drove in a motorcade at 5am to the memorial and that's where the encounters took place. Except for Stone's "interpretation" of that event, I've never heard what was discussed other than the freak out of seeing Nixon and an entorage of Secret Service agents on the mall at that hour. Several of the reports I read also said that Nixon reeked of his favorite bourbon that morning...probably piling them on all night.

Given the topic that was discussed it is understandable not much publicity was given to it.
Where i come from there's a saying that says there are two kinds of people who speak the truth: children and drunks.


NIXON (1995)
Sources
http://www.lehigh.edu/~ineng/mac6/mac6-source.html

Oliver Stone's Nixon is not based on one major book or source; as one critic appropriately described it, the film is a "$43 million term paper." For a comprehensive bibliography any student, scholar, or viewer should consult Nixon: An Oliver Stone Film, edited by Eric Hamburg, and containing the screenplay by Stone, Stephen J. Rivele, and Christopher Wilkinson (see Filmic Context). The annotated screenplay (it does not match final versions of the film) contains numerous footnotes either citing the source of material consulted or referencing alternate versions or extra information for numerous scenes. In an interview transcripted in the book, Stone is asked, "How much of the film is based on identifiable historical record, and how much of it is indeed conjecture or dramatic license?" Stone's reply defends his use of artistic license with the historical record:

Every historically based film in the history of medium has utilized dramatic license and speculation, including documentaries....That's the nature of art. A painting is the artist's rendering of the reality that he perceives, which he transforms into something more personal. Much of the script can -- and will -- be annotated with historical sources. Of course there's license and speculation, but they are based on reasonable assumptions, which we've discussed with highly reliable technical advisers who lived through the history we're recounting in the film. (Hamburg xix)

The bibliography lists 88 books, 10 articles, 8 Videos, 1 CD, and 14 government documents as the sources for the film, several of which are discussed in the Filmic Context or Historical Context sections of this project and are indicated with an *.
http://www.lehigh.edu/%7Eineng/mac6/mac6-filmcontext.html
http://www.lehigh.edu/%7Eineng/mac6/mac6-histcontext.html

Bush Family Evil Empire makes nice shorthand...



Tricky Dick and Prescott Bush, a pair of war turds.

Some smart people here, too:

http://www.masters-of-war.net

One of the fatal flaws that Johnson, Nixon and Clinton all had -- and that is sometimes said to be both the strength and curse of great politicians in any democratic system -- is the desperate, almost pathological need to be liked.

Nixon was not liked, and that frustrated desire is what turned him into a monster. His visit to the Lincoln Memorial is sometimes said to be a desperate act to reach out to the people who disliked him most, and through conversation, get them to like him.

Johnson's greatest accomplishments were domestic, but were driven by his desire to be a beloved president, on the order of FDR, even though he lacked the charisma and polish of the patrician Roosevelt.

And we all know about Bubba. Even his sexual excapades are a desperate cry to be desired.

Bush on the other hand, is a megalomania and narcissist who has no need to be liked, only feared. The famous cryptic quote to the effect that, it's a funny thing bein' prezdent; I don't need to explain anything, or some such, says it all.

That is a scary personality for a politician in a democracy, because it will breed in him contempt for the public.

The others did care, in their own unique way, * really does not care at all.

Though i think there's another factor. I think 'they' have learned from the past. So they have picked a better front man this time, one does as they tell him to, one who doesn't go his own way. I think this presidency is more carefully choreographed then any before.

had it been watergate he would have been too paranoid to do this. This took place in 1971 and Nixon resigned in 1974.

Thanks for the correction. I just saw the movie once on TV this weekend. It has prompted me to order the DVD, but as of yet i have no way to review it.

:kick:

W's a chicken shit, chicken hawk and would never face people that don't support him.

Because for the rest Nixon was a manipulative lying SOB, who didn't even understood people knew that he was, and that it was the reason why he was so despised by the people.