Protest and anarchy in black and blue

"Protest and Anarchy in Black and Blue" (Carl F. Ellis, Jr.)

The military has no role in stopping the riots

To those who claim the military has no role in stopping anarchists and other criminals from tearing apart our cities: read a book.

The military has intervened to maintain public order since the Whiskey Rebellion. Here are a few recent examples.

— Tom Cotton (@SenTomCotton) June 2, 2020

In 1957, President Eisenhower ordered soldiers to enforce integration of Little Rock schools against a racist mob.

This was a dark episode in my state’s history, but Ike was right:

“Mob rule cannot be allowed to override the decisions of the courts.”https://t.co/WOo6Fyep9x

— Tom Cotton (@SenTomCotton) June 2, 2020

In 1967, President Johnson ordered the 82nd and 101st Airborne to stop deadly race riots in Detroit.

LBJ: “We will not tolerate lawlessness... This Nation will do whatever it is necessary to do to suppress and to punish those who engage in it.”https://t.co/ICyQ7JfbmH

— Tom Cotton (@SenTomCotton) June 2, 2020

The next year, 13,000 troops were called to protect Washington, D.C. from riots that erupted after the murder of Martin Luther King, Jr.

The city didn’t recover for decades, but federal troops staunched the bleeding.https://t.co/jw2L27DNmu

— Tom Cotton (@SenTomCotton) June 2, 2020

In 1992, President George H.W. Bush ordered the Army’s 7th Infantry and 1,500 Marines to quell the Rodney King riots burning down LA.

Bush 41 knew that King had been unjustly treated—“what I saw made me sick”—but he knew deadly riots would only multiply the victims.

— Tom Cotton (@SenTomCotton) June 2, 2020

The carnage caused by domestic terrorists and other criminals threatens all law-abiding citizens, including peaceful protestors.

We must do everything possible within the law to restore peace in the streets—that mission can and should include our troops.

— Tom Cotton (@SenTomCotton) June 2, 2020

Disarming the police

I believe Campaign Zero is an arm of Black Lives Matter. 

http://www.joincampaignzero.org/#vision

I agree with some of their proposals. We should have independent investigations of police shootings. A police department has a conflict of interest. We should end for-profit policing. Bodycams are a good idea, though that only works if storage of the footage is contracted out to an independent third-party. Up to a point, I oppose the militarization of the police force, which makes it an occupation force. I oppose stop-and-frisk on civil liberties grounds. 

That said, I'd like to focus on this objective:

We can live in an America where the police do not kill people. Police in England, Germany, Australia, Japan, and even cities like Buffalo, NY, and Richmond, CA, demonstrate that public safety can be ensured without killing civilians. By implementing the right policy changes, we can end police killings and other forms of police violence in the United States. 

http://www.joincampaignzero.org/problem/

i) It's hard to take that seriously. Is BLM really that Polyannaish? Maybe so. Radicals can be softheaded utopians.

Perhaps, though, there's an anarchist contingent in BLM. Maybe chaos is their goal. Anarchism is another form of utopianism. 

In addition, you have self-hating Americans who want to burn it down. A fifth column. 

There are political factions that profit from pandemonium. The white liberal establishment benefits by fomenting a free-for-all, as a pretext to crack down. That's a way to expand its grip on power. 

ii) Let's take an example of what happens when you disarm police. I don't necessarily mean literal disarmament. If police fear that they will be indicted if they do their job, then that's the functional equivalent of disarmament.

Take Muslim rape gangs in Europe. Their tactic is to form a phalanx around the victim. That both blocks the view of what's going on, as well as blocking police from rescuing the victim. 

The solution is for police to draw their guns, order the phalanx to disperse, and if they refuse, start shooting. Shoot their way through a crowd that's shielding the rapist. That's the only way to rescue women from Muslim rape-gangs who use that tactic.

But European police don't do that because they know the political establishment won't back them up. As a result, you have marauding Muslim rape gangs that act with impunity. 

Incidentally, that's also what happens when you disarm civilians. The consequences are only too predictable. For instance, Muslims attack Jews in Paris. If, however, Parisian Jews were armed, that would be a deterrent.  

Cell Groups Promote Relativism

http://www.graceonlinelibrary.org/featured/the-problem-with-cell-groups-reposted-from-the-reformed-baptist-blog/