"All of it began the first time that some of you who know better, and are old enough to know better, let young people think that they have the right to choose the laws that they can obey as long as they are doing it in the name of social protest."--Ronald Reagan, speaking about student unrest at a late 1960's press conference.
"If there is to be a bloodbath, let it be now"-Ronald Reagan, speaking on campus violence during an early 1970's campaign speech.
By now you have seen--on countless occasions, no doubt--the footage, photographs, and descriptions of the violence and chaos brought about by Leftists protesters whenever "controversial" (Read: "Anyone whom they disagree with and who contradicts their vision of a socialist utopia") speakers visit a college campus. We have seen their actions lead to the cancellations of speeches by Milo Yiannopolis, Richard Spencer, Charles Murray, Gavin McInnes, and others. Last week, they claimed perhaps their biggest scalp yet, when a speech by Ann Coulter at Berkeley was abandoned by it's sponsors, the Young Americans Foundation.
Are we to expect that this violent style of "protest" is only a temporary fad from the youthful Left? I doubt it, given even a cursory understanding of human psychology. When humans engage in behavior--even "bad" behavior--an an attempt to obtain something...and they end up being given what they want, do they stop the "bad" behavior? No...instead, the result reinforces that behavior, and they engage in more of it, because they have seen that they get what they want from it. It is a basic aspect of human conditioning (or, in a more concrete sense, it is something than the parent of any two-year-old can tell you). And it's not like there are not examples throughout history of this. Back during the Kennedy administration, JFK (who tried to stay away from discussions of Civil Rights as much as he could, despite what revisionist history written after his death would tell you) ultimately only intervened in the enrollment controversies at The University of Mississippi because he thought it might quell the rioting that had been taking place in the Black neighborhoods around the country. This, of course, did not work as we saw throughout the 1960's (and even onward to today and the "Black Lives Matter" movement) that the rioting and violence only ratcheted up. After all, if some violence resulted in some demands being met, then why wouldn't they think that more violence would result in the meeting of more demands?
Appeasement, quite clearly, does not work...in fact, history shows that it only makes the situation worse. So what is the best way to deal with these violent Snowflakes? I say you deal with them by calling their bluff. The next time Atifra, Black Lives Matter, or whatever other collection of youthful thugs and miscreants threaten to "demonstrate" at one of these speeches, the answer is not to become concerned about questions of security and cancel the event and to back down...instead, the answer is for President Trump to activate the National Guard to go in with the speakers.
And if the "protesters" start with the violence, then the National Guard and local police should start shooting.
And I don't mean with rubber bullets, either.
But wouldn't returning fire on the Snowflake "protesters" result in Americans finding sympathy for them and taking their side? Hardly. Look at the example of the Kent State "massacre" in 1970. While it's true that in modern times, historians have painted the incident at Kent State as sympathetic to the "protesters" of the time (and while many people today believe that the National Guard were in the wrong back then), the American People who were living at the time of Kent State didn't look at it the way we do. A Gallup poll at the time showed that 58% of Americans blamed the Kent State students for their own deaths, while only 11% were critical of the National Guard. And this "anti-protest" feeling continued permeating through society to the point that Richard Nixon won re-election in a landslide in 1972.
Ultimately, the modern Snowflake does not think we, as a nation, will respond to their violence and disruption in a meaningful way. So they hold our college campuses and our city streets hostage as a result. However, if we meet them with overwhelming force--and we certainly have the means to do so--the game will change. They will retreat to the holes from which they crawled out of, and will be far less of an issue going forward. And all of this can be done without the risk of endearing the Snowflakes to Mr. and Mrs. Joe Six-Pack in Middle America.
America is under assault from these groups...it's time we defend ourselves. Yes, part of that occurs on an individual, personal basis of course. But it also must happen as a society--to send in the National Guard and the Police--with all of the "militarized" equipment that Liberals complain about...and it's time to treat this as a war.
Because, ultimately, a war is exactly what this is.
Post a Comment