In a previous commentary, I noted that most of the unconstitutional, illegal and violent protest in America has been produced by the political left – with the 2021 Capitol Hill riot as a notable exception.
My life spans the major outbreaks of civil protest. It was iconic in the 1960s, it reemerged of significant civil protest with the Tea Party Movement at the beginning of the 21st Century – and is again in full bloom today.
There were differences, for sure. The 1960s was the convergence of four social movements – anti-Vietnam War, civil rights, gay rights and the feminist movement. The latter two tended to be less violent, but still significant illegal actions.
The most notable in terms of violence were the anti-war and the civil rights movements. The war movement was fueled by the reality of thousands of American young men dying in Southeast Asia – and millions more fearing or dodging the draft.
The civil rights movement was the rising tide of opposition to black oppression in which millions of Black Americans were not only being denied their constitutional rights but were being summarily murdered by the Democrat racist regimes in the old Confederacy. Disobeying laws that themselves were Illegal and unconstitutional was more understandable and acceptable to most Americans.
The 1960s were appropriately dubbed as America’s “days of rage” – largely due to the left-wing anti-war movement. It was more than protest and free speech. The riots were characterized by violence – often deadly. It was an era marked by bombings and assassinations. It was the worst civil unrest since the Civil War – and not surpassed since.
The 21st Century demonstrations arose from the conservative side of the political continuum and were dubbed the Tea Party Movement. It was largely in opposition to the expansion of federal power, spending and taxing. In many ways, it showed the stark contrast in conservative protesting and left-wing protesting.
In the era of the Tea Party, there was no notable violence. There was no vandalism. No clashes with police. No arrests. Demonstrators did not illegally block roads or interfere with the mobility of the public. At the time, the press noted that the demonstrators cleaned up the sites afterward.
Since the Roe v. Wade decision in 1964, there have been perennial pro-life protests mostly by conservative women. Again, these right-wing demonstrations were carried legally and peacefully, out without violence, injury, vandalism or arrests.
The Tea Party and pro-life protests provide a stark contrast between right- and left-wing protests in terms of respecting law and the Constitution while exercising the right to assemble, speak and petition government.
Today, we see another left-wing uprising. While they say that are only exercising their constitutional rights, that is an obvious, absurd and audacious lie. A large number of the student protestors at Columbia, UNYC, Fordham, UCLA and other campuses are NOT exercising their constitutional rights. They are committing numerous crimes – some felonies – in VIOLATION of the Constitution. In fact, they are denying the constitutional rights of other Americans.
Left-wing public officials and their media cronies play down the rioting. Even in the face of obvious violence – vandalism, trespassing, blocking access, physical antisemitism (attacking Jewish students, spitting on them, barring them from classes and even calling for their deaths) leftwing Democrats and media remain silent or preposterously claim it is all “peaceful protest.”
As is typical, the left blames the more violent confrontations on the police. They should not have been called in to restore order. They should not be allowed to arrest the student lawbreakers. They are too rough on protestors. They should not be allowed to do what they are paid to do – enforce the law and protect the rights of the greater populace.
Those on the left assume that unless there are brutal physical confrontations – and some bloodshed – the protest is “peaceful.” As long as buildings are not be torched, it is peaceful.
That does not mean that the protests are “legal.” Virtually every person you have seen “protesting” on college campuses in recent days is a lawbreaker. But those on the left believe that breaking the law is okay as long as they agree with the cause. We see that philosophy played out in the difference between prosecutors’ treatment of left-wing rioters and everyone else.
In America, we have developed an unfortunate social tolerance and acceptance of left-wing thuggery and criminality. And that is the trademark of authoritarianism in which the law is used — or abused – based on the political interests of the party in power. We saw that in the authoritarian regimes in the old “solid Democrat southland.” We see it in the major American urban centers. We see it in such countries as Russia, China, North Korea, Iran and others.
When it comes to social protest, those on the left do not believe in a rule-of-law. They hope to achieve their objectives with violence and intimidation. In many cases, they even openly claim that breaking the law is justified.
If we were to adhere to a rule-of-law and constitutional rights, illegal protestors would be arrested, charged and tried. But where the left holds the power of law enforcement, we have the opposite. The lawbreakers are praised for their civic zeal – excused in the name of youthful exuberance — and face virtually no accountability for their crimes (yes, crimes) against the people.
That is not to suggest that we go to the opposite by applying excessive punishment far beyond the nature of the crime. Our criminal justice system naturally biases in favor of the defendant – as it should. But that does not mean the elimination of all accountability – especially when the crime happens to have political ramifications.
Of course, any person who was peacefully protesting should face no legal consequences. Those who broke laws, however, should be punished according to the level of the crime – and not just by the courts. Those illegally remaining on private property should be charged accordingly. Those refusing police orders to leave the premises should be charged with trespassing and resisting arrest. Those who attack police should be charged with assault and battery.
All those who broke into Hamilton Hall should be charged appropriately – breaking and entering, vandalism, etc. If they are students, they should be expelled. If they are faculty, they should be fired. If they are foreign students or non-citizens, they should be deported.
While the underlying antisemitism and pro-terrorist nature of the protest is repugnant and offensive, it should have no bearing on the equal application of the laws. The disturbing antisemitism that has surfaced is a different issue – and will be addressed in a subsequent commentary.
So, there ‘tis.