Joan Vennochi responds to the threat to the Hillary Clinton campaign posed by Bernie Sanders’ effective “America’’ ad by drawing parallels with the 1960s, which she describes as a divisive period of ultimately unresolved conflicts over civil rights, feminism, and America’s overseas interventions (“The chills of Sanders’ ‘America’ ad,’’ Opinion, Jan. 26). Vennochi warns that if progressives again fail to support a moderate establishment candidate such as Clinton, as they did in 1968 with Hubert Humphrey, then they risk ending up with a Richard Nixon, or in this case, Donald Trump or Ted Cruz.

But many progressives see the ’60s not as a wasted period of chaos and turmoil, but as a time of necessary conflict in which major progress was made, including landmark civil rights, Medicare and Medicaid legislation, the beginning of a dramatic broadening of opportunities for women, and the demonstration that sustained mass action can influence American national policy. This progress was forced by committed, passionate leaders, such as Martin Luther King Jr., Gloria Steinem, and Howard Zinn, who inspired with strong language and were not afraid of a fight.

The real chill that progressives now feel comes not from Sanders’ activism, but from Clinton’s embrace of an establishment that has worked relentlessly and successfully since the 1970s to reverse 50 years of gains in income equality.

Nicholas Newell

Reading