40,000 protestors stormed the Capitol in 1932 (before social media existed)

By Rubashov

Some have suggested that what happened at the Capitol last week was an unparalleled act of “insurrection” not seen since the American Civil War.  This view passes over a lot of history. 
 
For the moment, let’s place to one side the Black Lives Matter riots of last year, which the insurance industry reports caused “the highest recorded damage from civil disorder in U.S. history.”  And that’s just for the damage resulting from the riots between May 26 and June 8, 2020.
 
Wikipedia, which refers to the BLM riots as “the George Floyd protests” reports them to be on-going to this day.  Wikipedia doesn’t discuss the links between words and violence that we hear so much about today, insisting that…

While the majority of protests have been peaceful,[20] demonstrations in some cities escalated into riots, looting,[21][22] and street skirmishes with police and counter-protesters… At least 200 cities in the U.S. had imposed curfews by early June, while more than 30 states and Washington, D.C. activated over 96,000 National Guard, State Guard, 82nd Airborne, and 3rd Infantry Regiment service members.[26][27][28][29] The deployment constitutes the largest military operation other than war in U.S. history.[30] By the end of June, at least 14,000 people had been arrested.” [3][31][32]

Wikipedia continues:

“…arson, vandalism, and looting between May 26 and June 8 were tabulated to have caused $1–2 billion in insured damages nationally—the highest recorded damage from civil disorder in U.S. history.” [5][35]

According to Wikipedia, as of June 8, 2020, there were at least 19 violent deaths associated with the riots. A fuller accounting of the loss of life associated with the BLM riots will no doubt be available at some point in the future.

To our knowledge, the Twitter and Facebook accounts of the Black Lives Matter movement have not been suspended. We are not suggested that they should be, only stating a fact. Just as it is a fact that political bodies – like the New Jersey Legislature – adopted resolutions in support of and in solidarity with the Black Lives Matter movement itself.

Interestingly, no less a figure than Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell noted the "historically high unemployment" prevalent in the period leading up to the BLM riots. While this was not the Establishment line, and certainly not the message promoted by the establishment media, at least somebody remembered the historic link between economic distress and revolutions.

Now back to what happened in 1932…

When the American Army that had fought in the trenches of World War I came home, they were promised a pension or “bonus”. The World War Adjusted Compensation Act of 1924 awarded these veterans “bonuses” in the form of certificates they could not redeem until 1945. Each certificate issued to a qualified veteran had a face value equal to the soldier's promised payment with compound interest.

But then the economic Crash of 1929 happened, and by 1932, many veterans were without employment, literally starving, watching their families starve before their eyes.

UNIVERSAL EMPATHY WARNING: Most of these starving veterans and their starving families, most having light-colored skin, would today be considered “privileged”. This means they carry the original sin of “whiteness” and are not worthy of our empathy. (Editor’s Note)

By 1932, there were calls from various veterans’ groups demanding an early cash redemption of their service certificates. At first Congress ignored them. But on June 15, 1932, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the Wright Patman Bonus Bill (by a vote of 211-176) to move forward the date for veterans to receive their cash bonus. To push the Senate into doing what they believed to be “the right thing,” 43,000 demonstrators (mainly veterans and their families) massed at the U.S. Capitol on June 17 as the U.S. Senate voted on the Bonus Bill. The bill was defeated by a vote of 62–18. So, the demonstrators decided to take over the Capitol grounds, set-up a shack city and tents, and not leave until they got their way. At this point, the media – which had been referring to the demonstrators as the “Bonus Army” or “Bonus Marchers” – began to call them “Communists”, “revolutionaries”, “criminals”, and a “weed growing on the lawn of our Capitol”.

On July 28, 1932, the United States Attorney General ordered the veterans removed from all government property. Police met with resistance, shot at the protestors, and two veterans died (both were subsequently buried at Arlington National Cemetery). President Herbert Hoover ordered the Army in. General Douglas MacArthur commanded the contingent of infantry and cavalry, supported by tanks. Future Generals Dwight Eisenhower and George S. Patton were present and played roles in the drama. The Bonus Army marchers with their wives and children were driven out, and their shelters and belongings burned.

In 1991, it emerged that the federal government’s response was informed, in part, by an Army intelligence report which claimed that the demonstrators intended to occupy the Capitol permanently, as a signal for Communist uprisings in all major cities. The report, by the Army (please note) pointed an accusatory finger at the United States Marine Corps, suggesting that “at least part of the Marine Corps garrison in Washington would side with the revolutionaries”. And it did turn out that Marine Corps units, a mere eight blocks from the Capitol, were kept in their barracks.

In 1936, Congress overrode a veto by President Franklin Delano Roosevelt and paid the veterans their bonus nine years early. Three years later, World War II broke out, America entered the war at the end of 1941, and the second world war ended in 1945 – the year when the bonuses were originally to have been paid.

Shockingly, to modern minds anyway, all of this happened at a time when there was no Facebook or Twitter or social media of any kind. Computers weren’t around yet – or television – and two-thirds of Americans didn’t own a telephone.

So, what was responsible for inciting the insurrection that was the Bonus March on The Capitol? Our world, so obsessed with blaming words, needs an answer.

Of course… it’s the economy, stupid.

Economic distress gives rise to real-world conditions of social unrest. It always has. It is a traditional excuse for war. The rise of candidates like Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump, both outsiders in their political party of choice, are symptoms of this distress. Demonstrations by groups hijacked by agitators – like the BLM riots and the recent riot at the Capitol – are symptoms. Neither address the problem directly, in the way that the Bonus March did. When we see mass demonstrations demanding a return to employment, so that people can pay their health insurance premiums (or, demanding the passage of health care for all), then we will have gone beyond symptoms.

Pulitzer Prize winning journalist and author Chris Hedges saw this coming. In 2018, Hedges said: “They (the corporate/political establishment) know what’s coming. And I’ve covered uprisings all over the world, you know when the tinder is there. You never know what’s going to trigger it. You never know when it’s going to come. You never know how it’s going to express itself. But you know it’s there, and it’s definitely here.”

And Hedges offers us this reminder… “Totalitarian societies by their nature are hyper-masculine cultures and seek to banish empathy. They not only ignore the vulnerable and the weak, but they ridicule them and persecute them. They celebrate supposed values of force… empathy is seen as weakness.”

“In a free-market society, all of those companies like Goldman Sachs would have gone into bankruptcy, but we don’t live in a so-called free market, we live in a kind-of bizarre species of corporate socialism. So, in the end process of decayed states you have forces in essence cannibalizing the state itself, which is where we are.”

Chris Hedges

N.B. We welcome a conversation on this and all topics raised on this website. Jersey Conservative is entirely open to your ideas and opinions. To submit a column for publication, please contact Marianna at Marianna@JerseyConservative.org.

Speaker Prieto: Suspend the Bill of Rights

Speaker Vinnie Prieto stepped away from the podium yesterday to suggest that the Bill of Rights be suspended if it will save one life.  Later, Assemblyman Lou "man hair" Greenwald said much the same thing.  This phrase has become a kind of last refuge when they run out of logic:  "It is worth it, if it saves just one life."

Good thing President Franklin Delano Roosevelt didn't think so, otherwise he would have surrendered to the Japanese Empire and the Nazis.  Quite a few "just one" lives would have been saved.  Of course our freedom would have been screwed and our country would have looked something like out of the video below, but hey, "if it saves just one life..."

Of course, Speaker Prieto ignores the thousands of lives sacrificed to an undefended border that allows violent criminals into America illegally.  When fellow Hudson County Democrat Senator Robert Menendez wrote a book in which he took leaves of his senses -- suggesting that the United States change its emphasis from patrolling our southern border with Mexico to focusing on our northern border with Canada -- Speaker Prieto sat in silent agreement.  But there the words remain, as a testament to the madness of political correctness:

“Good fences don’t make good neighbors with this wall.  The existence of the southern-border fence is bad enough, and its estimated four-billion-dollar price tag is mind-boggling.  Meanwhile, Americans appear to fret little about those lightly patrolled 3,987 miles on the Canadian border from Atlantic to Pacific.  Our border with Canada is twice as long as the border with Mexico.”  (Page 147)

“Solidifying the porous northern border should be a priority for the Department of Homeland Security.  And yet, as of 2007, far fewer than ten percent of the fourteen thousand U.S. agents were patrolling the Canadian border.  How is it possible that we haven’t been focusing on the danger of terrorists crossing the U.S. – Canadian frontier?  Instead, we have been listening to hot air from Lou Dobbs and his allies, complaining about people who would cross that border in search of jobs as gardeners, busboys, hotel workers, and maids.”  (Pages 148 and 149)

Speaker Prieto's hold on reality was just as tenuous when he supported allowing the United Nations to continue to vet refugee applications from Islamic war zones for placement of those refugees within the borders of the United States.  Speaker Prieto did this only days after the terrorist attacks in Paris -- in which at least one terrorist used Syrian refugee status to gain entry into Europe -- and just days before America suffered a similar terrorist attack in California.

While Speaker Prieto and the Democrats he leads in the New Jersey Assembly trust the United Nations -- with its employees from member states like Yemen, Russia, China, Pakistan, Iran, and Vietnam -- to vet refugees that include combatants from Islamic zones of conflict, many Americans are concerned that we may be importing Islamic terrorism into the American homeland.  And while Speaker Prieto and his fellow Democrats call for disarming law-abiding American citizens every time terrorists attack a military base, a recruiting office, or a Christmas party, many ordinary Americans question why they should be made defenseless in the face of the importation of terror into the United States.

So much of our illegal immigration comes from countries with violent crime rates many times higher than in the United States and we have no way of safely vetting refugee applications from Islamic war zones.  Speaker Prieto and the Assembly Democrats are adding to our hazards, while trying to take away our ability to defend ourselves.  They should be held responsible for every violent young man who slips into the United Sates and commits an act of violence here.  They should be held responsible for every act of terror nurtured by their words and actions.