Skip to main content

With Liberty & Justice for Some or for All?


The past is the present rolled out for understanding,
and the present is the past rolled up for action.
Will Durant



Kitty Genovese was stabbed to death outside of her apartment building in the early hours of March 13, 1964, right across the street from where she lived in Kew Gardens, Queens, in New York City. A week later, a story came out that 37 people, who were in their apartments at the time directly across the street, witnessed the attack, but none of them wanted to get too involved by picking up a phone and calling the police. Since the attacker then fled and returned later to finish the job, the two attacks occurred over the span of 30 minutes, the second ending Kitty’s life. If anyone had picked up the phone, she would have survived. But they didn't.

It would later turn out that the news story that reported this yarn to the public was in fact inaccurate, but it nevertheless became part of the lore of our society, one of fiction based on facts. That lore served as only one of the various different cryptic meanings symbolized in the room number in The Shining, of 237: as two danced with death in the pale moon light, and 37 watched as if they were fuzzy pictures on a wall. It turned out there were actually 38 people who witnessed the crime, but only two claimed to have called someone about it: one called a friend, and the other the police, an hour later.  

Today, a black man was murdered on TV, and 328 million Americans all saw it happen - a permutation of 2 callers out of 38 witnesses; how ironic. And the protests today, where much of the violence is instigated by people who are not acting on the part of the protests themselves, are nevertheless still more civilized than how white mobs reacted to far less crimes with far less evidence a century ago. 
 
One hundred years ago, for example, one of the worst episodes of racial violence in American history unfolded in Elaine, Ark., a small town on the Mississippi. Estimates run as high as 800 African Americans ended up dead, 67 indicted for inciting violence, and 12 black sharecroppers being sentenced to death. What was their crime? They tried to establish the Progressive Farmers and Household Union of America to fight for better pay and higher cotton prices. 

That massacre was not an isolated incidence, however. Similar such massacres occurred that same summer in Annapolis, Maryland, and Syracuse, New York, and in big cities like Washington and Chicago. Hundreds of African American men, women, and children were burned alive, shot, lynched, or beaten to death by white mobs. Thousands saw their homes and businesses burned to the ground and were driven out, many never to return. And this all occurred over the summer of 1919, which, because of the bloodshed, was eventually branded as "Red Summer." It was the worst white-on-black violence in U.S. history.

In 1921, it happened again, this time in Tulsa, Oklahoma.  Known today as the Black Wall Street Massacre, this race massacre took place over Memorial Weekend, ironically enough, from May 31 and June 1, 1921, when mobs of white residents attacked black residents and businesses of the Greenwood District in Tulsa, Oklahoma. It has been called "the single worst incident of racial violence in American history."

The attack came from land and sky, as the mob rented private aircraft to bomb buildings.  When it was all over, more than 35 square blocks of the district – at that time the wealthiest black community in the United States, known as "Black Wall Street" – had been completely destroyed. According to a 2001 state commission, overall estimates of deaths ranged from 75 to 300 – of both blacks and whites. About 10,000 black people were left homeless, and property damage amounted to more than $1.5 million in real estate and $750,000 in personal property (the equivalent to $32.25 million in 2019).

What was the crime that kicked off such white rage? A 19-year-old black shoeshiner named Dick Rowland, was accused of assaulting Sarah Page, the 17-year-old white elevator operator of the nearby Drexel Building. Rumors of plans to lynch Rowland spread like wildfire through the black community, because such a practice was common in those days and in those parts. In response, people rushed to the courthouse to stop it. Tensions were high, shots were eventually fired but we have no idea by whom, and the race war was on. Charles Manson would’ve been proud. Because all you need is one person in such a crowd to be crazy and angry enough to want to see blood in the streets to start such a ball rolling.  

As if becoming a national pastime, it happened yet again, this time on January 1, 1923, in the small predominantly black town of Rosewood in central Florida. The massacre was instigated by the rumor that a white woman, Fanny Taylor, had been sexually assaulted by a black man in her home in a nearby community.  It didn’t matter that it wasn’t true. A mob of white men – or what in today’s parlance we would calls “thugs”- marched out, not to determine if it was true, but to capture who they believed the alleged rapist to be: a recently escaped convict named Jesse Hunter. They then marched to people’s homes like Sam Carter and tortured him to reveal where Hunter was. When Carter failed to divulge Hunter's whereabouts under torture, because being black did not make Carter a GPS system for all other black people, including black people he had never met, they shot him. When the violence was over, the town was entirely destroyed, and the residents were driven out permanently.

In the 1960s, a kinder, gentler form of social massacre was instituted, this time by the rule of law, under the ruse of Nixon’s War on Drugs. With the help of Ronald Regan and Bill Clinton (Clinton later admitted it was a mistake and apologized to the black community for it), that system has been kneeling on the necks of poor black communities ever since, as people escape the pain of poverty through drugs are labeled as criminals while in more affluent neighborhoods, people hooked on opioids are treated like repeat customers suffering from a disease called "boredom." In fact, even Regan's top economic advisor, Milton Friedman, called the war on drugs "completely immoral," as has Thomas Sowell.  As former Nixon domestic policy chief John Ehrlichman confessed to Harper’s Dan Baum: 

"We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the (Vietnam) war or blacks, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin. And then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities, we could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did.


The only difference between the massacres of 100 years ago and today is that today the killing is carried out one at a time, on your television, in living color, while the massacres have been replaced with mass incarceration. And the brutality of the penitentiary is now pouring out into the public square, transforming the American flag into the effigy of a hangman's noose swinging from a tree, and the ghosts of a century ago now rise from the grave and walk among the living. And as officers morph into jackbooted storm-troopers hungry for blood, they beat and stomp on the innocent, as they chant for Chucky in a blood red tie:

one nationindivisible, with liberty and justice for all.” 


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Why Ben Shapiro is Wrong About BLM

If Ben Shapiro really wants answers to his condemnations of BLM, he should start by reading a few books, and then some. For example, he can find all of the answer's he's looking for in: Slavery By Another Name , by Douglas Blackmon, which shows how "thousands of African Americans were pulled back into forced labor with shocking force and brutality," right up until the 1970s, when I was still in grade school. The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness , by Civil Rights litigator and legal scholar, Michelle Alexander, which explains how "mass incarceration" under the ruse of a War on Drugs, has effectively created a caste system that is as pronounced in America today as it was in the Jim Crow south, if not more. Ghosts of Jim Crow , which was written by Constitutional Law Professor, F. Michael Higgenbotham, which explains in great detail how "the shadows of Jim Crow era laws and attitudes continue to perpetuate insidious, ...

Father Mike's Omniscience About Transgenderism

The major problems in the world are the result of the difference between how nature works and how people think. Gregory Batson I f my perception doesn't match up with reality, it's not reality that has to change, it's my perception.   Fr. Mi ke Schmitz Despite the ever growing mountain of evidence about the nature of transgenderism, Fr. Mike Schmitz simply refuses to change his perception. And that's because his "perception," is not only based on nothing but his "beliefs," but because selling those "beliefs" is his one and only job! The problem, if he were truly trying to follow in the footsteps of Christ, is he would stop trying to sell people what he "believes" is the truth, and he would try to actually start trying to FIND THE TRUTH instead.  NOT DOING SO, however, is simply an act of his own spiritual pride, and nothing else. WHY DO CHRISTIANS PREFER THEIR BELIEFS TO THE TRUTH?  Probably because th...

The Height of Arrogance of Christian Humility

 "To think that the ruler of the universe will run to my assistance and bend the laws of nature for me is the height of arrogance. That implies that everyone else (such as the opposing football team, driver, student, parent) is de -selected, unfavored by God, and that I am special, above it all." Dan Barker, Losing Faith in Faith: From Preacher to Atheist (Madison, WI: FFRF, 1992), p. 109. What could be more arrogant than to believe in miracles? To believe that the supreme ruler of the universe has not only bent the laws of nature by which everyone else is bound, but that such a ruler did so as a special favor to you, and also as a special message and invitation to you, which that ruler intentionally withholds from everyone else.  Even the person who believes they know something is a miracle believes that their knowledge of miracles is itself a special knowledge, amounting to a kind of miracle in and of itself, that the God who performed the miracle bestows to his chosen ...