One event that stands out in my mind was the Jackson State killings
The Jackson State killings occurred on Friday May 15, 1970, at Jackson State College (now Jackson State University) in Jackson, Mississippi. On May 14, 1970, a group of student protesters against the Vietnam War, specifically the United States invasion of Cambodia, were confronted by city and state police. Shortly after midnight, the police opened fire, killing two students and injuring twelve. The event happened only 11 days after National Guardsmen killed four students in similar protests at Kent State University in Ohio, which had first captured national attention.
The first question I have is whether or not you remember this. If you don't do you remember Kent State?
The aftermath is interesting:
The President's Commission on Campus Unrest investigated this event and also held public hearings at Kent State, in Los Angeles, and Washington, D.C. There were no arrests in connection with the deaths at Jackson State, although the Commission concluded "that the 28-second fusillade from police officers was an unreasonable, unjustified overreaction...A broad barrage of gunfire in response to reported and unconfirmed sniper fire is never warranted."
The University has memorialized the tragic occurrence by naming the area of the shootings Gibbs-Green Plaza. The Plaza is a large, multi-level brick and concrete patio and mall on the eastern side of the JSU campus that borders J. R. Lynch Street and links Alexander Hall to the University Green. A large stone monument in front of Alexander Hall near the plaza also honors the two victims. Damage to the façade of Alexander Hall caused by the rounds fired by the police is still visible.
The difference in public response to this as compared with Kent State is remarkable. Read on below and we will explore this further in relation to what we have experienced over the last week.
If we go back in our history, skipping the obvious murders of Native Americans and Slaves, there is a lot that we have probably forgotten. Labor history, for example has so much for us to remember. The Ludlow Massacre is one:
was an attack by the Colorado National Guard and Colorado Fuel & Iron Company camp guards on a tent colony of 1,200 striking coal miners and their families at Ludlow, Colorado, on April 20, 1914. Some two dozen people, including women and children, were killed. The chief owner of the mine, John D. Rockefeller, Jr., was widely criticized for the incident.
The massacre, the culmination of a bloody widespread strike against Colorado coal mines, resulted in the violent deaths of between 19 and 26 people; reported death tolls vary but include two women and eleven children, asphyxiated and burned to death under a single tent. The deaths occurred after a daylong fight between militia and camp guards against striking workers. Ludlow was the deadliest single incident in the southern Colorado Coal Strike, lasting from September 1913 through December 1914. The strike was organized by the United Mine Workers of America (UMWA) against coal mining companies in Colorado. The three largest companies involved were the Rockefeller family-owned Colorado Fuel & Iron Company (CF&I), the Rocky Mountain Fuel Company (RMF), and the Victor-American Fuel Company (VAF).
In retaliation for Ludlow, the miners armed themselves and attacked dozens of mines over the next ten days, destroying property and engaging in several skirmishes with the Colorado National Guard along a 40-mile front from Trinidad to Walsenburg. The entire strike would cost between 69 and 199 lives. Thomas G. Andrews described it as the "deadliest strike in the history of the United States".
The Ludlow Massacre was a watershed moment in American labor relations. Historian Howard Zinn described the Ludlow Massacre as "the culminating act of perhaps the most violent struggle between corporate power and laboring men in American history". Congress responded to public outcry by directing the House Committee on Mines and Mining to investigate the incident. Its report, published in 1915, was influential in promoting child labor laws and an eight-hour work day.
Another example was
The Haymarket Massacre
The Haymarket affair is generally considered significant as the origin of international May Day observances for workers. The site of the incident was designated a Chicago Landmark in 1992, and a public sculpture was dedicated there in 2004. In addition, the Haymarket Martyrs' Monument at the defendants' burial site in nearby Forest Park was designated a National Historic Landmark in 1997.
"No single event has influenced the history of labor in Illinois, the United States, and even the world, more than the Chicago Haymarket Affair. It began with a rally on May 4, 1886, but the consequences are still being felt today. Although the rally is included in American history textbooks, very few present the event accurately or point out its significance," according to labor studies professor William J. Adelman.
So we are in the midst of still another turmoil over violence against the people by our government at one level or another. It is difficult to avoid getting hardened and cynical about all this. We are a plutocracy/oligarchy, not a democracy. The democracy myth is used to keep us under control so that the shootings do not have to occur too often.
At this moment in history the situation has evolved to a new level. The weapons are worse than ever. The stability of the system is precarious for a growing number of reasons. It is hard to imagine that the powers that be don't feel at least a little more insecure today than ever before. That they should want to create fear in the minds of the public is not hard to imagine.
During the movement in the 1960s we learned that one measure of how effect we were being was the amount of naked force they would willingly use. They prefer to control us using the election system but never be naive enough to think they will give up power that way. It is hard to gauge the level of real reasoned unrest in the country. It appears to be on the rise. Given that it is very fragmented it can not be that big a threat. Yet it seems we are being shown their willingness to use force more frequently.
There is a sad reversion to the days of lynching. Now African Americans are more sophisticated yet because of the deep seated racism in the country they are still a safer way to intimidate people. This is a complex scenario with the divide and conquer element a big part of the mix. Times are not pleasant. The November election looms ahead. They hope to accomplish their ends that way but what if they fail? Anyone want to predict that they will give in to the will of the people?