Antiwar protests are not inherently acts of disloyalty; rather, they often reflect a citizen's right to express dissent and advocate for peace. Such protests can be viewed as a form of civic engagement, where individuals voice their concerns about governmental policies and the human costs of war. In democratic societies, dissent is a crucial part of the political process and can prompt important discussions about national priorities and ethics. Ultimately, the interpretation of these protests as disloyalty depends on one's perspective on patriotism and the role of dissent in a democracy.
opposition to the war was no longer radical ;) Apex
opposition to the war was no longer radical ;) Apex
opposition to the war was no longer radical ;) Apex
Alien and sedition acts.
Conscription. No draft=No protests (other than the usual minor ones).
national guardsmen shot and killed four students
Opposition to the war was no longer radical. (Apex)
Kent State University protests.
With riot control.AnswerThe question asked how the public responded, not how the government responded. The public was divided into hawks (those who supported the war) and doves (those who opposed the war).AnswerDue to the violent nature of some of the protests, there was a backlash in public sentiment that denounced the protesters. Essentially, it was felt that the protests "were 'acts of disloyalty' against our soldiers in Vietnam."Student Antiwar Protests and the Backlashhttp://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/twodays/peopleevents/e_antiwar.html
gandhi march
The protesters weren't actually hippies in the beginning. Student protests started before hippies were even invented. While Civil Rights protests were beginning in the South, antiwar demonstrations began and spread on university campuses.
the workers showed disloyalty to the king. Who showed them Disloyalty?