Posted on 03/18/2016 7:14:12 AM PDT by Kaslin
Donald Trump has predicted there will be riots in the streets if he is not crowned victor at the Republican National Convention in Cleveland this summer. Given his exhortations to his supporters to "knock the crap out of" anyone disrupting his rallies and his promise to "pay for the legal fees," I'll take him at his word. Trump's comments are what sociologist Robert K. Merton called a self-fulfilling prophecy: "a false definition of the situation evoking a new behavior which makes the originally false conception come true." Trump likes to play the tough guy, and his rallies have become a gathering place for those attracted to his strongman image, including some who think you silence dissent with a sucker punch.
I have had my share of dealing with protesters, including some who threatened or engaged in violence. In 1991, I was punched by a male protester as I was leaving Hostos Community College in the Bronx. I think he was aiming at my jaw, but it landed on my shoulder, leaving a visible bruise. I had been scheduled to give a speech on my new book, "Out of the Barrio: Toward a New Politics of Hispanic Assimilation." But when I arrived at the venue, the school's administrator told me that he couldn't guarantee my safety or that of the students because a group of radical Puerto Rican demonstrators were armed "with eggs and who knows what else" if I "insisted" on taking the stage.
I considered my options. I'd never backed out of giving a speech before, even when faced with threats on my life. I regret that I caved in to the administrator's wishes -- which denied the students the opportunity to judge for themselves whether I was the racist, anti-Hispanic Hispanic that radical professors and protesters claimed I was. But at least I was the only one who got hurt.
Every other time I've faced protests, even threatening ones, I've held my ground. I reckon I've done this some two dozen times over the many years I've been in public life. The same year as the Bronx fiasco, I was invited to give the commencement speech at the University of Northern Colorado and then disinvited when Hispanic students occupied the college president's office. I gave the speech I had intended at my alma mater, the University of Colorado in Boulder, instead; but there, too, I was met with hecklers, and the university turned over the campus quadrangle to protesters, who launched an anti-Linda Chavez "speak-in."
At the University of Illinois, protesters armed with coconuts (brown on the outside, white on the inside, get it?) stood at the back of the auditorium menacingly and then smashed them on the stage after I spoke. I've had to hire off-duty police to accompany me on some campuses and register in hotels under false names, as well. But never once have I called on my supporters to silence the protesters, much less to mete out their own violence in response to threats against me.
Donald Trump, on the other hand, seems to believe that the way you deal with dissent is to crush it -- not with more compelling ideas or more reasoned speech, not with dignity in the face of foul threats but with punches that will see the protesters "carried out on a stretcher" as they were in the "old days." His models are Bull Connor, Deng Xiaoping, even Kim Jong Un, the latter two of whom he praised as strong leaders adept at dealing with problems.
We are facing dangerous times ahead, certainly the worst presidential election since 1968. Radicals on the right and left could well turn this summer into a bloody one. In 1968, the riots basically handed the election to Richard Nixon. It is impossible to know what will happen this year. But one thing is sure: If Donald Trump keeps predicting violence, he's likely to get it -- and the results for our country will be ugly.
Look at the whole Ferguson riot movement. Everyone was quick to judge and wanted the riots to continue and continue, but it just fizzled out.
Look at Baltimore and its riots. I mean you had a mayor saying let them riot to the police.
The Democratic party wants riots and has wanted riots for years.
There is an old saying and that is “Be careful for what you wish for, as you may get it.”
I think that the Democrats may soon get their wish of public disruption and riots. I also think that it will galvanize and motivate voters in ways that will be hard to fathom.
My fear is that there will be a lot of blood that will actually be spilled. It will be interesting to see what the public will define as domestic terrorism if people start getting killed. It is also interesting what the public will define as organized criminal activity if Democratic agitators are found to be conducting interstate activities that promote criminal violence.
Do I think that the Obama Administration will stop such activity? Nope. But I have faith that others would.
It could be a very interesting summer. A summer where public perception on firearms laws changes so that more people feel they should be armed. A summer where the Republican and Independent voter base becomes very energized to vote Republican. A summer where blood and criminal activity gets publicly traced to the Democratic Party insiders.
America learned some kind of lesson at Kent State.
I wonder what it was?
>>>Radicals on the right<<<
Well, there you go.
It’s amazing how HEARING IT IN CONTEXT can clear up misquoting!
True, but I followed that up that many of us are working people who have neither the time or inclination to engage in riots. But that doesn’t mean that some riots might not occur, though I think they would be small and not contain much violence if any. The press might still call them riots even if they prove to be non-violent yet angry protests.
Why should I listen to cultists?
It sure does.
Since it has been demonstrated that all of this negative press only pushes Trump numbers up; I had assumed you work for Trump since all you post is all Trump all the time.
You are probably his best recruiter on FR.
That I believe.
Agreed Gaffer. I’m amazed how the media has such talented writers who can create anything they want out of absolutely nothing.
Maybe they should focus on the cabal of lefties who are promising to riot, no matter what the election brings, that might serve people a bit better, so they can be somewhat prepared. But alas, the media is our enemy and some very sick people are going to regret their part in this disaster.
I think that canceling the booking in the face of what was about to happen was tactically smart. Why? Because it left the rioters bare-naked without an enemy to focus upon. Therefore, they took their wrath on everything else that was around them. It exposed them as being pawns for the anti-Trump forces that seem to have millions of dollars to fight Trump.
Yeah - let me know when that "media turns on him" thingee happens. /s
I will. You can count on it.
If everyone, as a political statement, were to coordinate withdrawing physical cash from the banking system, the liquidity shortfall would garner media exposure (no ATM). Choose an appropriate date to maximize attention of the chosen gibmedat voting block. And remember---location, location, location.
Like a flash mob; but a CASH mob, instead; right?
Yeah, right. All Republicans do is talk, and talk gets us nowhere. We need people of action, people willing to stand up for what is right. Trump is the only candidate showing that he is willing to stand up--and who has a history of effective action.
Good old La Raza Linda Chavez, one of the very early No Borders, Amnesty Republicans.
She was a role model for Jeb! and Marco.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.