The “peaceful protests” now pasting screens with unforgettable images are spreading across the States. In doing so, the events and the motives and reasons for them seem to be creating still more divisions. And fears.
Nobody will deny that The Donald’s propensity is to be “in your face” on virtually everything he does. Obviously, the Trumpistas love that about him. For the rest of us, it is a reminder that he is not really a likeable or particularly moral man. Or yet another reason to hate him with incredible venom.
It is definitely a trait that is shared by many present Democratic politicians and office-holders. Gavin Newsom’s rhetoric is ramping up, also. Again, as with The Donald, this is hardly new.
After the first five or six days of the LA border-jumper-hunt by the Feds and the nicely-orchestrated riots (excuse us, “mostly peaceful protests”) we recently heard a spokesman for the border-jumpers now in Los Angeles in a radio-recording. We have been unable to get a name, but his remarks are curious.
He first announced that “we” have been “here” for thousands of years. We assume he refers to border-jumpers (“undocumented immigrants”) and not himself personally: he did not sound like a Methuselah. Does “here” mean Los Angeles? Maybe its vicinity?
Here is some history: the settlement of LA begin in AD 1781 with (legal) immigrants from other parts of New Spain. The first permanent “non-native” presence was just a few years before that, in 1769.
Archeologists tell us that from about 3000 BC to probably AD 1200, Hokan-speaking people occupied the LA area. Possibly because of the great drought (AD 1100-1300) in the Great Basin, they were pushed out by the Tongva. (Who called the area “Yas.” Neat!) By modern boundaries, neither the Hokan nor the Tongva people were “undocumented.” Neither were the New Spanish migrants. When the Nova-Spaniards came in 1781, about 5,000 Tongva lived in the 4,000 square miles of the LA Basin. (By the way, they practiced slavery, used recreational/religious drugs, and practiced cremation.)
They intermarried with the Nova-Spanish migrants (who soon became “Mexicans” but still not “undocumented” immigrants). It should be noted that many of these migrants had both AmerInd and African ancestry. These early Californios were part of the short-lived California Republic in 1846-1848. When Mexico was forced to sell California to the United States and California was admitted to the Union, it appears that most of these people if not all were recognized as citizens, if not all treated equally (or well). Although those of AmerInd descent who still practiced tribal customs were supposedly considered “non-persons.” But as recently as 2006, there were at least 2,000 Tongva still in the homelands they had invaded and conquered 800 or so years earlier. And definitely not “undocumented.”
Enough history for now. The conclusion? The modern border-jumpers or undocumented persons or illegal immigrants (those who have migrated to Los Angeles from areas outside the jurisdiction of the United States since, say 1975, the last 50 years) have not been here for “thousands of years.” Unless “here” refers to Planet Earth. Lies.
But let us look at yet another piece of information this supporter of violent protests gave to the interviewer. He stated that he was opposed to capitalism and was working towards socialism and communism, at least in California (again, define “here”). So she asked him what form of these he supported, and which would work. What was his model to emulate? He was very specific in his answer.
He stated that the communism practiced in Soviet Russia for the first four years was the kind of communism or socialism that worked, and would work “here.”
Facinating. Is he talking about the period immediately after the Lenin-led October Revolution? With the Communists in power? History tells us about 1917-1921: many refer to it as “war communism” because it was during the Russian Civil War (the Reds against the Whites (anti-communists)). By 1922, many of communism’s tenets were temporarily set aside: some entrepreneurship and a tiny bit of free market was allowed by Lenin.
But what is notable about that period so praised by this unidentified protester? Somewhere between 7 and 12 million people were killed during that period. In 1921, a famine triggered by the war and government edicts killed an estimated 5 million lives. In 1917, it was estimated that Russia had 170 million people: so about 1/10th of the Russian people died in that four year period. Literally decimated.
Killing continued through the 1920s: the purges of kulaks and others added another million or so to the death toll. The Soviet Union did not have the 1917 population of 170 million until 1939.
By comparison, at that time the USA had 105 million people: a similar death toll in 1917-1921 would have been “just” 10 million. Today, with 320 million Americans (or more), that would be a staggering 32 million dead. Of course, maybe “here” is just California, with 40 million. So only 4 million Californians would be buried, burned, or left to rot and be eaten by rates. Only.
And perhaps this is why the Woke want that particular brand of Communism: of International Progressivism or Regressivism. We know that many Tranzis (we admit, not all) think that mankind is a plague upon the planet, and that populations need to be reduced. To them, the death toll of “war communism” and the famines and purges was a positive benefit.
If California were to secede, we might see such a death toll: despite Woke domination of the State and its huge urban areas (LA, San Diego, San Francisco Bay, and Sacramento), there are millions of people who would resist the full implementation of socialism or Lenin’s first four years of communism. Perhaps, instead, those who promote and instigate such a cataclysm should instead be expelled. Exiled to Coventry?
Just a bit of history and current events to think about. Your thoughts, dear readers?
Yes, some of the protesters are just as stupid and evil as the ICE thugs.
Others aren’t.
I’m not one of those people who’s dumb enough to assume that the enemy of my enemy is necessarily my friend.
But when picking my enemies, I’ll put more energy into opposing the side that’s closer to, and better equipped to achieve, its goal of imposing a totalitarian police state. ICE is just as dangerous to property and, and more dangerous to people than, the protesters. I’ll be part of the latter group later this morning.
LikeLike
A strong point: but history shows that often the protesters – the mob – are just a tool of those who have the tools and goal to impose their rule. Do you not think that may be the case even today?
LikeLike
There’s always that possibility.
Not sure what it looks like around the country, but the crowd at the protest I visited today was clearly in large part an activity of one wing of the already-ruling political class (the wing that’s supposedly “out of power” at the moment), mixed with a smaller component of the “usual protest suspects” who know they’ll never “win,” but never miss an opportunity to beat on some drums and register their complaints.
Years ago, I predicted that the US as we know it (the third or fourth republic — depending on who you ask — which commenced around the time of the New Deal) will cease to exist by 2050. Even if the name is kept, the political system won’t be something that someone who died in, say, 1960, would recognize as “America.” I think my prediction may have given the existing system more time than it actually has, and I’m not optimistic that it will be replaced by anything “better.””
LikeLike
Tom, we presume who you saw at the protest was no surprise to you. Is it not a clear piece of evidence that a lot of this is just theatre and intended to sustain the “powers that be” and not really change anything?
As you know, we here at TPOL figure that the republic really ended over a century ago – pre-WW1. The thing we’ve had in DC since then does not deserve to be called a republic, whatever all the various flavors it has sprinkled on it. Many pretend that it is a “democracy” but as the famous saying goes, “If voting changed things, it would be illegal.” Could not the same thing be said about protests? Do you think any of the people at the protests changed their opinion about anything, or changed anyone else’s opinion?
LikeLike
Well, SOME of it is definitely “powers that be” coordinated. There was a pretty heavy official or semi-official Democratic Party presence at the event (more than one booth).
As for the actual participants, I don’t doubt that a good portion were delivered organizationally by the Democratic Party organization and other “progressive” organizations that are definitely part of “the establishment” and that have spent a lot of time building lists of people who will go to Point A if they get a text message telling them to go to Point A.
There were definitely quite a few of us anti-establishment freaks there as well, of many stripes, including libertarian. With signage, there was seemingly more emphasis on actual liberties (free speech, open borders, due process, etc.) than on establishment-coopted causes (although there was plenty of “don’t touch my Medicare/Medicaid/University Research Money/Food Stamps” stuff too).
I’d say it’s the usual story — there’s always a revolution trying to be born, and there’s always an establishment hoping to be there for the delivery and smother it in the crib.
I was comfortable being at an “anti-Trump” event, because I am definitely anti-Trump. There were a lot of people there who were ALSO pro-things-I’m-not-pro-about, but they weren’t dogs I was lying down with, they were animals at a zoo I decided to visit.
LikeLike