By Paul da Silva

April 30 marks the 50th anniversary of the end of the Vietnam War. During a long period of protest before 1975, several local governments, including Berkeley and Oakland, passed resolutions opposing the war. These measures provoked fierce controversy then, and they merit remembering today.

While it is true that local governments should not neglect their local responsibilities, they also should avoid being myopic.

There are important connections among the different levels of government. Every spring, the governor’s May revision of the California budget is closely watched by local officials. They know that state and local governments are partners in funding many programs of vital importance to their constituents.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, funding from Federal American Rescue Act was key to maintaining many local services. Now, cutoffs of many federal funds are having impacts on state and local programs across the United States.

Crucially, many of the programs and services jointly provided by the three levels of government are in the areas of health, education, agriculture, environment and other areas vital to well-functioning societies, everywhere in the world.

There are also important connections between protesting war and building peace. Spending on war depletes funding for programs and services essential for building peace, something economists call the “guns vs. butter” antagonism. Countries that slide toward militarism risk collapsing from within by not providing sufficient services for their people.

The Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., called attention to this during the Vietnam War. Although a healthy defense is considered essential by most national governments, one of our most decorated U.S. generals, Dwight D. Eisenhower, counseled us to be wary of a “military-industrial complex.” He pointed out its dangers to future generations and to cities, states and the “very structure of our society.”

Unfortunately, it seems that the United States government, driven more by needs to generate profits than by genuine defense needs, has failed to heed his warning, regardless of which political party is in power. Similar to how the rise of more people with guns has made our society more dangerous, military buildups around the world have made our planet more dangerous.

The founding of the United Nations after World War II was an important step toward building world peace. It helped create an important alternative to warfare for settling disputes. The Nuclear Test Ban Treaty and the Strategic Arms Limitations Talks were important additional steps. The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, founded by Albert Einstein, invented the “doomsday clock” to show us how close humanity is to causing its own destruction. Actions that build peace set it back, while wars and other destructive actions advance it. The clock’s hands now stand at 89 seconds to midnight, compared with 12 minutes to midnight in 1963.

There was much talk of a “peace dividend” after the collapse of the Soviet Union and the supposed end of the Cold War in the 1990s. If worldwide disarmament had really produced this on a permanent basis globally, local governments everywhere would have had better chances of providing better programs and services to their respective populations. National governments would have been able to devote more resources to combating our most important global threats: biodiversity loss, climate change, pollution, hunger, displacement, violence and growing inequality.

Last year, I happened to pass San Francisco State University on the day of a student protest. While most of the protesters held placards denouncing the ongoing military actions in Gaza, the sign of one young woman caught my eye. It read “I’m Already Against the Next War.”

Perhaps if all of us had committed ourselves more strongly to protesting future war and building future peace in 1975, individually and as members of governmental bodies and nongovernmental organizations, we would have less war and more peace today, both locally and globally. If we strengthen our resolve to reduce war and build peace today, we may yet survive as a civilization and a species in 2075.

Paul da Silva, of Larkspur, is a member of the College of Marin Board of Trustees.