Griffin says he is doubtful of today's movement's durability because the movement is mostly dominated by people who are philosophically opposed to war.

"There's little evidence that the anti-war movement will be able to sustain itself," he says.

"I don't think we as an American people are as strongly opposed to the war as we were then. It's not in the guts yet as it was during Vietnam. People in the movement right now have had a studied commitment to opposition," he adds.

"The movement in the '60s was supported by other movements--civil rights, free speech and music...I don't think you have any of that stuff going on," he says.

Today's Students "Tepid"

The swing in social values may also influence the intensity and breadth of the entire movement.

City Councillor and former campus Afro-Am activist Kenneth E. Reeves '72 criticizes the "tepidness" of today's students.

"I think students back then had a more critical view of U.S. power structure. People view themselves more as part of the system," he says.

"People 20 years ago had a tainted view of U.S. military and industrial complex. Today's generation appears to have more ownership and a desire to be part of it," Reeves adds.

But Pollock defends her generation, saying that today's anti-war movement is as genuine as yesterday's.

"We don't have to prove anything about our apathy," she says. "We find something that we don't agree with and see that a student movement empowers us to do something. We're learning from the protesters of the Vietnam era what happened in the past and what'll work," she says.

'I don't think we as an American people are as strongly opposed to the war as we were then. It's not in the guts yet as it was during Vietnam.'