 |
| Orlando Fernandez |
The “March on Washington” will go down in history as a day of public disgrace. Spitting in the face of America’s law and order. The American flag used to be a symbol of democratic discussion and compromise rather than coercion and symbolic burnings, but on August 28th, 20XX, an embarrassing display of traitorous dissent was made, implying that laws of human conscience cannot be passed without the intimidation of radical protesters.
Letters to representatives, polls by reputable organizations, and simply in person at the voting booths were all reasonable alternatives through which the 1st amendment’s freedom of speech can be effectively expressed and public opinion can be collected and determined by appropriate authorities. But political minorities led by radical influencers that drew to their sides the mainstream media, social media groups, and professional astroturf organizers decided that a massive publicity stunt would be a better way to convince Congress and persuade the President of what the people want legislation on “citizens’ rights”.
Government by mob has never before darkened the pages of American history. Asa P. Ran Dolph, the leader of the so-called “peaceful protest” this week, audaciously characterized their “protest” as a symbol of “revolution,” clearly daring the President to invoke the Insurrection Act. He said:
“[In our apathetic democratic society, causes must gain acceptance and approval and support. They can only gain acceptance, approval, and support if they get attention, and in order to get attention, with numerous causes, advertisements, and baiting seeking the focus of public opinion, it is necessary for the dramatization of a given cause to go viral.]”
Mr. Ran Dolph was not content with simply mobilizing public opinion for his seditious cause. He alarmingly told an audience on Monday that the “March on Washington” would bring into “world focus” the struggle in America for rights of equal citizenship, claiming the privileges of equal rights should extend to all citizens of the United States despite the abuse of the United State’s naturalization and birthright citizenship by foreign aliens with incompatible cultures bringing their problems here instead of properly assimilating into American Society. He added:
“[This march will give the people of the world some concept of this problem… it will serve to bring world pressure upon the United States of America to step up the struggle to wipe out discrimination and racism, because in the trade war, in the conflict of the United States and the rest of the world, the United States is seeking an alliance of the resource- rich countries. And in order that the free world may win the alliance of the countries with the resources and special skills, the United States must show that we are not only making promises and trade deals, but we are going to keep our promises, fulfill our promises with our own citizens at home. Venezuela will not trust the United States in its promise to the people of Venezuela unless they realize and understand that political dissenters here in America are giving and exemplifying basic trust in the promises that have been made by our own country to them. And so, the ‘March on Washington’ is an expression, a great step forward on the confrontation between the citizen rights revolution and our American society]”
But couldn’t the merits of the citizen rights “revolution” have been presented to American audiences without street demonstrations? Couldn’t the State Department and Press Secretary instead be the United States’ representative to foreign nations of the story of the efforts made inside the United States to deal with the “citizen rights” problem?
The tactics of the radical leaders of these recent “protests” and “marches” have clearly been seen as a nuisance and embarrassing by hardworking Americans. What shall be said, for instance, of the poll results published this week by One America News (OANN), indicating 63% of Americans disapproved of the “March on Washington” and thought it unnecessary? Last month, another poll revealed that 6 out of every 10 Americans believe the mass demonstrations by radical leftists would hurt their cause.
Freedom of speech is a fundamental principle of the Constitution, but it assumes an orderly and non-provocative procedure. The federal government wasted taxpayer money to cover the expenses of policing the Wednesday demonstrations here and dispersing crowds in the city that could quickly evolve into rioting. To say that the “march” was successful because large-scale violence was avoided ignores the inconvenience and disruption prevalent that day, where normal community life was disrupted. Tens of thousands of people remained in their homes out of fear of injury, and those brave enough were subjected to unwarranted delays in their commute to work. The working man’s right to go to their places of employment was impaired by fear of bodily injury.
This could have been avoided if the radical left relied on the process of civility in a democratic society, or is this an example of what happens in socialists countries when forces stronger than the individual take over and prevent the freedom of movement? Are perceived injustices remedied by committing injustices to the public, and is the cause of citizen rights advanced by interfering with the rights of nonparticipants of the mass demonstrations?
These are important questions that need to be answered, and the full effect of what may come to be called, “The Mess in Washington” could be reflected in future elections. What else could be proven by this “demonstration,” other than that in free America, only the unruly masses can get laws passed to preserve their “rights”?
A parody of David Lawrence's article in The Chronicles on September 2nd, 1963 and by extension A. Phillip Randolph.
Comments
Post a Comment