Can Public Opinion Change the Course of History?

Article by Victoria Hales. Edited by Rose Colville. Additional Research by Helen Midgley. 

Public opinion is supposed to be of the utmost importance in our political system of democracy. It is the public that elect the nation’s leaders and it is public opinion that these leaders are then supposed to represent. Governments around the world are interested in how the public view their administration and are known to consult public opinion polls on a number of important issues. Consequently when public opinion is openly demonstrated and the government become aware of it, it should have a substantial impact on government policy. 

Yet, when the ‘U.K.’s biggest ever demonstration’ took place on the 15th of February 2003, with ‘at least 750,000’ people protesting against the looming invasion of Iraq, public opinion appeared to have very little impact on government policy. Instead less than a month later the British Government, along with American troops, led a global military force into Iraq. The February demonstration against the war was a worldwide phenomenon, occurring in several countries over the same weekend. The extensive display of public opposition to the war in Canada has been cited as a key factor in the decision of the government to keep their troops out of the Iraq conflict. However, most of the countries that saw public demonstrations against the war continued in their plans. Thus it appears that in the twenty-first century public opinion has ceased to inform and shape government policy. 

Last century, in opposition to another similar war, the American public voiced their opposition to American involvement in Vietnam. They were attempting to end what they saw as an illegal, immoral war using an unfair draft system. By publicly demonstrating their opposition to the war, rather than unquestioningly supporting their government, they hoped that the American Government would realise the unpopularity of the war and change their policy in Vietnam. The anti-war movement of late 1960’s and early 1970’s America had a successful example to follow; the late 1950’s and early 1960’s had seen the emergence of the American Civil Rights Movement. The movement had won legal battles and pushed legislation through Congress in order to guarantee equality for African Americans; a thriving example of how public protest could influence governmental decisions. 

The marches of the Civil Rights Movement attracted the attention of the media and general public, ensuring that the government had to make changes. The media represented the Civil Rights Movement as a respectable movement with a legitimate goal and this was a contributing factor to its success. In contrast, the anti-war movement was negatively portrayed by the American media; interpreted as unpatriotic and at times even traitorous. This undoubtedly impacted upon the rest of the population’s view of the movement, some of the public support the anti-war movement had, it lost, as many did not want to be involved in what appeared to be radical movement. 

There is a consensus that the Civil Rights Movement changed government policy, however, the impact of the anti-war movement upon government policy is a source of contention. The anti-war movement is often seen as having failed in its main objective of changing the American Government’s policy in Vietnam from one of deep involvement to one of complete withdrawal. However, the anti-war movement did have a substantial impact upon the American public. Although the media coverage of the anti-war movement was negative, it was constant throughout the war and this ensured that the war, and opposition to it, was difficult to forget and remained on the public’s mind. As the war continued public sentiment moved against the war and the anti-war movement gained momentum in 1968, after the dramatic events of the Tet Offensive. Yet more than four years later the war continued in Vietnam suggesting that public opposition to the war was not having the desired effect on policy makers. Nevertheless, we are aware that both of the Vietnam era Presidents were very interested in public opinion. Both Johnson and Nixon paid close attention to, and appeared to be troubled by, the anti-war protests. During the Vietnam War public protest specifically over the draft emerged, which had a significant impact upon both American society and government policy. By 1969 there had been sufficient criticism of the inequity of the draft, that the system was reformed; revising the deferment categories and being replaced by a new lottery system. In addition to this domestic reform there were occasions where public opposition to the war inhibited further escalation of the war. The most important instance occurred in 1967. At this point General Westmoreland, who was in command of the American troops in Vietnam, requested 200,000 extra American troops however, President Johnson would only allow him 45,000 more due to fears that a substantial troop increase would prove to be further ammunition for the antiwar movement. 

Public opinion and protest have clearly had some effect upon the course of history. Not only do leaders want to appeal to the populace at large and therefore shape their policy around what they think the general public want, they also have to take into account public opinion on unpopular policies, and perhaps change them accordingly. Yet the public protests against both the Vietnam and Iraq Wars were not deemed significant enough by policy-makers to make them drastically change their actions. At this point, leaders of the countries involved, not the people affected by the events, shaped the course of history. Ultimately, leaders who have the ability to ignore the opinion of the public if their ideological, military, or economic pursuits are of more importance to them, determine the course of history.

← Back to Volume 1

← Back to Issue 6