Perhaps. There seems to be arguments on both sides of the issue of whether MacArthur was directed to use any and all means to clear the demonstration or whether he was simply Hoovers scapegoat for the resulting violence.
The point of my OP with regard to the present situation is to demonstrate that persons in authority have in the past and should be expected in the future to use unreasonable force on U.S. citizens who exercise their right to assemble and voice their opinions.
It appears we hold different opinions on MacArthurs professional aptitude and reputation. He did in fact have a substantial number of military accomplishments, some of which were attained via the adroit use of politics.
In my view however, the historical record indicates his role in WWII and most specifically, his role during the Korean War was much less than what we could have expected from one with his credentials. Ask any USMC veteran of the Korean War whether MacArthur kicked ass in that conflict.
The reason MacArthur is vilified by Marxists/Progressives is because he was a conservative/Republican general and a out spoken one at that. After the Chinese entered Korea things did not go well for MacArthur. Several creatable historians strongly suspect that after Inchon Chinese/Russian infiltrated the command structure in DC and were privy to his strategic plans. They point to the fact that when things were happening to fast for the chain of command to operate MacArthur's battle plans did quite well.
It is also worth noting that after Truman fires MacArthur the USA never really won another war/occupation. MacArthur fought to win, he fought Washington as hard as he fought the enemy in Korea, so he was fired and hence forth US commanders were gelled and silenced.