I grew up believing in liberty. Going to school, I learned how Columbus discovered the new world.
Then the pilgrims landed on Plymouth Rock and made friends with the Indians. After we got tired of the British bossing us around, we threw them into the Atlantic Ocean and declared our independence from England. There we were, we had our own country. This is what I learned when I was growing up, as the Chicago Board of Education indoctrinated me.
Education is power. Totalitarian regimes, as soon as they gain control, expand provisions for education and put all its forms under strict centralized control. Mussolini, after the march on Rome, worked to control education. Hitler followed his example. Communists fully understand the power of education in shaping thought and action and in laying the groundwork for their goal of world domination… Red China also recognizes the power of education in shaping the goals and advancing the capability of its people. Is making use of education to the limit of its resources. (Critical Issues in American Public Education: Horace Mann Lecture)
The system did a good job. I still can remember saying the Pledge of Allegiance every morning before class, with my right hand on my heart and facing the flag;
I pledge allegiance to the flag for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
This diary will focus on the investigation, and self-determined research demonstrated through three cases of how the federal government handled questions of liberty, freedom, and law enforcement.
To what extent does disinformation motivate learners to explore and research on their own? How does natural curiosity help one question authority?
What can be found through the research and investigation?
I remember learning about our Founding Fathers. George Washington, our first president, chopped down a cherry tree, and when asked what had happened, he said, I can not tell a lie, I did it.
The father of the United States of America said that he doesn't lie; I was impressed.
I remember watching a lot of television when I was little. I liked to watch cartoons after I came home from school at 2:30. Looney Tunes was on, with Bugs Bunny, who was always fighting the bad guy. The bad guy was Elmer Fudd, a Martian or some other crazy character that wanted to do away with poor innocent Bugs, but Bugs always triumphed over evil. Then Woody Woodpecker was always invited to be on peoples' dinner menus, but again good conquered bad.
After the cartoons were over, shows like "The Brady Bunch" and "Leave it to Beaver" came on; they showed how wholesome and innocent life was. I learned through these shows about truth, justice, and the American way. Was this the truth, or was I being desensitized to reality and my surroundings?
When I got older, I started learning more details about the United States of America, especially the laws. We had to memorize the Declaration of Independence:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.
Then I had to learn the Constitution and all its Amendments. The one that I remember is the 5th Amendment,
No person shall be...deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.
The law and the government have always interested me.
As I grew older, I became more and more curious.
I began to go to the library, look up information and do a lot of reading. I started to wonder what happened to all the Indians because I remembered that there were a lot of them back when we did our readings in grade school.
I didn't see any around. I began to read and remember all those Westerns I watched on the TV about how they used to attack the settlers, steal horses, and scalp people. When I began to investigate, I found out that American Indians only made up 0.8% of the total population. How could that be? Before Columbus came, they made up 100% of the population.
I found out through reading and talking to people that the government killed Indians because they stood in the way of progress.
I could not believe that the American government could be responsible for the removal of the Indians.
I became more curious over the years, did more research, did more reading, and talked to lots more people. I started to learn definitions:
Abuse - to use wrongly or improperly.
Protect - to keep from harm, attack or injury: guard.
Freedom - not bound or constrained, not under obligation; political independence.
Violate - to break the law.
Law - a rule established by authority, society, or custom; code of ethics or behavior.
Liberty - condition of being free from restriction or control
(American Heritage Dictionary, 1983)
Having a basic knowledge and understanding of some terms, an examination of the role of Federal Law Enforcement agencies in regard to the protection of liberty, freedom can begin.
CASE 1
The first case is the Federal raid on Ruby Ridge, Idaho.
Ruby Ridge is located on a remote mountain top in northern Idaho. Randy Weaver built a cabin on this mountain for his family, Vicki, his wife, and Sammy, his son. I do not think that Randy Weaver ever believed that this mountain top is where his wife and son would be shot and killed.
The story starts with Randy Weaver selling two sawed-off shotguns to an Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF) informant in October 1989.
Once the ball started rolling boy did it start growing. By the time the authorities got up to the Weaver's cabin, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), ATF, and the US Marshals were involved with this case.
The authorities had lots of manpower, weapons, an armored personnel carrier (APC), and even a helicopter. They had an operations plan, which "contained no negotiation option," but did contain a "shoot on sight Rules of Engagement." Naturally, when Randy Weaver saw a bunch of people in army fatigues coming up the mountainside, he got worried, ran into his cabin, and armed himself.
Who started the shooting? No one to this day knows.
The result of the shooting was that Vicki, Sammy, and U.S. Marshall William Degan were all dead at the end of the day. The deaths were the direct result of the Rules of Engagement. The Subcommittee investigating this raid called the Rules "unconstitutional."
What the Rules set up was a situation where if the agents saw Randy Weaver and they thought that he looked dangerous, they could shoot him or anybody else on the property because he was deemed as "high-risk, life-threatening" and there was no plan for a negotiated surrender in the field agents operations plan.
The conclusion of the Subcommittee was that "the chain of mistakes that lead to those three deaths involve substantial failures by the very agencies of the United States government whose basic mission should be to save lives and enforce the laws." They go on to write that Randy started "…on this road…" of events and that "…no one is above the law."
Randy did violate the law by selling the two shotguns. The ethical problem is, does the government have the right to use any means necessary to bring to justice someone who is only accused of having committed a crime?
The philosopher John Stuart Mill writes in his book On Liberty and Utilitarianism, to achieve the greatest happiness for the greatest amount of people some actions are going to need to be taken against individuals who are in the way of this happiness or the pursuit of the goals of the majority.
"Actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness..." for the majority.
I do believe that we cannot let anyone do anything they want, or otherwise, we would have chaos in our country.
The FBI set an example to other individuals who think that they could sell illegal weapons and get away with it. Jose Ortega y Gasset writes in The Revolt of the Masses, the state, meaning the government has the job "...of public order and administration..."
The problem with this incident is that the government killed Randy Weaver's wife and child over two pieces of metal. The Federal government also uses force not only against individuals as they did with the Weaver family but also against groups of people.
CASE 2
The second case of the government using force is the events that occurred in Waco, Texas, against the Branch Davidians. The Branch Davidians were a group of people that believed that Christ would one day walk the Earth again and that the world would come to an end when this happened. David Koresh was the Davidians' self-proclaimed leader, and he sometimes thought of himself as the Messiah. The Davidians under Koresh's leadership sold all their belongings, severed their family ties, and moved to the Mt Carmel compound located in Waco. Local officials labeled the group as a cult. The Davidians did not like outsiders coming around their compound. They were waiting for the end of the world, and they prepared themselves for this event.
They had stockpiles of food, water, weapons, and ammunition for the day when the world would come to an end. They were fully self-sufficient.
The Davidians wanted to do their thing and be left alone, but the government had different ideas. The government had all kinds of excuses for wanting to search the compound. One was the war on drugs. The government was saying that there might be a methamphetamine lab on the compound, there were allegations of child abuse and exploitation, and last, there were allegations that some of the weapons that Koresh bought legally in town were being converted to weapons that were Federally outlawed. The ATF on March 1, 1993, tried to enter the compound to execute a search warrant. The Davidians who were waiting for the end of the world thought that the day had arrived.
They naturally fought back.
Again, it is unknown who fired the first shot and that will probably remain unanswered for eternity. A 51-day standoff ensued. The ATF recruited the help of a host of government agencies: the Joint Task Force-Six (JTF-6), the National Guard of Texas and Alabama, the FBI, the British Army Special Service (SAS), and the Department of Defense.
The standoff ended on April 19, 1993, when the ATF decided to force the Davidians to come out by pumping a tear gas called CS gas into the buildings of the compound. A fire started shortly thereafter. The compound burned to the ground, including with it 72 Deviationist of which 17 were children.
The biggest concern about this case is the "militarization of law enforcement."
The Representatives on the Committee also thought this was a concern. The report goes on to say that the Federal government thinks "...they can do anything and not be held accountable for it." This is scary if the people who make the laws in this country are saying this.
I think that it is very dangerous to start involving the military against ordinary citizens like the Davidians.
If the ATF wants to prevent other groups who are seeking religious freedom and escape from everyday life, then the operation was a success. The thought of getting burned alive would definitely deter anyone, especially when there is no concern for women or children. "External reinforcers are administered by the environment or by some social agent."
One of the reasons for going into the compound was to save the children from possible abuse. They do not have to worry about being abused anymore.
Patrick Henry said it best in a speech back in 1775, "Almighty God. I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty or give me death."
If ATF had been around back then maybe Henry would have phrased his words differently.
CASE 3
The Federal Government sometimes does not use any force to accomplish its goals.
The third case I will present is one in which the lack of action by the Federal government let the abuse of power go unpunished. The raid on the Black Panthers by the Chicago Police, in which several people lost their lives, shows how the government can accomplish its goals by inaction. The Panthers were an organization of young blacks that was rising to power in the late '60s. Young black males disillusioned with the American dream, witnesses to the systematic assassination and persecution of black activists, formed the Black Panther party to fight the wrongs of the government.
The Chicago Police conducted a raid at 4:45 A.M. on Panther headquarters at 2337 West Monroe Street in which three people lost their lives, including Fred Hampton the Illinois chapter leader.
Hampton was murdered; there is no question about it.
At the time of the raid, he was in bed, sleeping or maybe even drugged, and the bullets that entered his body came through the bedroom wall from another room. The police even knew what side of the bed he was sleeping on.
There is no mistake they wanted "…that man dead."
The Commission found that the Chicago police violated the Panthers' Civil Right against unreasonable searches and seizures. The federal grand jury did not return an indictment against anyone involved with the planning or execution of the raid. They failed to prosecute the people responsible for depriving the Panthers' rights to due process. The Commission also found that the Chicago Police Department imposed a summary punishment on the Panthers.
In simple language this means they executed the three Panthers without a trial. The Commission goes on to say "...the preservation of the lives of all persons…" is an essential role of government. "Summary execution is not tolerable; arbitrary punishment cannot be condoned."
Did not the federal government approve of this action, by not prosecuting the perpetrators of these violations of human rights?
Hampton was a threat to the establishment because he was providing an alternative view on the way government should treat young blacks. By assassinating Hampton the government disrupted the social awareness and black empowerment movements, which the Black Panther Party tried to accomplish. Again the government was successful in its goals.
In a series of articles and essays by many authors, under the title The Fight Against Fascism in the USA it is stated, "... the capitalist class aims at completely crushing, atomizing, and demoralizing..." any movement against it.
Getting shot through a wall while you are asleep is pretty demoralizing in my opinion. The police didn't even give Fred a chance to die like a man.
DISCUSSION
The idea that the federal government's function is to protect personal freedom and liberty is wrong. The government is set up to control people to conform to the majority. James Madison in The Federalist No. 10 discusses factions and the fact that the cause of factions can never be eliminated, but a "…well-constructed union…" has to be able to break and control these factions.
The government is protecting the rights of the majority. If someone does not like a law, he/she should not break the law but change it. They can also promote their views to the majority and once accepted, they will no longer be in opposition. Was the government wrong in the deaths at Ruby Ridge, Waco, or West Monroe Street? According to the definitions of government and the actual duties of government, NO.
The cases presented clearly show the federal government losing its power over the people. Nietzche in On the Genealogy of Morals writes:
As the power increases, a community no longer takes the misdemeanors of the individual so seriously, because they no longer seem to pose the same revolutionary threat to the existence of the whole as they did previously: the evil doer is no longer … outlawed … and expelled, universal fury is no longer given the same permission to vent itself on him without restraint.
Even Amnesty International reports that the United States of America is violating peoples' Human Rights.
Somebody in Washington must really be worried if women and children need to be murdered as was the case in Waco Texas and Ruby Ridge Idaho.
Throughout history, many philosophers agree that people need to be controlled or influenced so as to make proper choices in life.
I disagree. People need to learn on their own,
... we should rededicate ourselves to pursuing programmatic research agendas of an applied nature in order to further develop our knowledge base and to validate practices that will be maximally effective.
This is the best way that they will learn what is right and what is wrong. Moral and character education is best learned from "…activities in which…" students "…are quite imbedded.
CONCLUSION
When I started my search and began to find answers, I became worried confused, and even angry. Learning is a complex and dynamic process. “…
We stress the importance of the development of knowledge and understanding as being central to education, we are acutely aware that the cognitive and affective aspects of such development are intimately connected.
I was lucky to have someone tell me that if I turn just 50% of my negative energy into positive and constructive use I will have no difficulties that cannot be overcome.
On the one hand stands the ethical and liberal view of education, which holds that the learner seeks human values which must be described and understood preeminently in terms of a single person, no matter how intensely one seeks these values by setting political philosophy, history, drama, and other experiences of a person in society. And in opposition stands the theory that education is a social technique, deriving its evidence and its principles from a collective conception of men as preeminently important not themselves, but because organized, however loosely, in groups or masses. Education as a social technique is thus occupied with group behavior. It seeks not human values up political or economic or institutional ones, applicable to men because they are collected together.
It is based on the sentimental belief that the individual can best be served by neglect of his character and by attention to the circumstances would surround him. By contrast, the ethical and liberal theory of education holds they can best be served by intensive study of the nature of men and the characters persons, undertaken before a direct study of social problems, which, while of immense importance, is an advance and less central study than the great the humane one. (Liberal and General Education, 1958)
I turned my fear and confusion into curiosity and knowledge.
… A man should be a good cheer about his own soul if during life he is ignored pledges of the body and its ornamentation as of no concern to him and/or him more harm than good, but has seriously concern himself with the pleasures of learning, and adorned his soul not with alien but with his own ornaments, namely, moderation, righteousness, courage, freedom and truth … (Socrates)
Know the enemy and know yourserlf,
In a hundred battles you will never be in peril.
When you are ignorant of the enemy but know yourself,
Your chances of winning or losing are equal.
If ignorant both of your enemy and of yourself,
You are certain in every battle to be in peril.
--Sun Tzu
References
-------------------------
Postman, Neil and Weingartner, "Crap Detecting," in Teaching as a Subversive Activity, (Delacorte: New York, 1969), 1.
Norton, John K, Critical Issues in American Public Education: Horace Mann Lecture, (University of Pittsburg Press), 18-19.
The case went up for appeals and the ban was lifted pending appeals. Kravets, David, “ ‘Under God’ Unconstitutional,” Chicago-SunTimes, 27 July 2002, 6.
Morison, Samuel E. and Commager, Henry, The Growth of the American Republic, (New York: Oxford UP, 1942), 212.
Mullin, Charles R. and Linz, Daniel, "Desensitization and Resensitization to Violence Against Women: Effects of Exposure to Sexually Violent Films on Judgments of Domestic Violence Victims," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 69:449-459, reproduced in EBSCOhost via CHICAGO STATE UNIV account [database PsyscARTICLES on-line] September 1995,accessed 3 July 2002, ID: psp693449, p.3 of 24.
Burns, James MacGregor, et al. eds. Government by the People: Brief Edition, (New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1997), 96.
Erickson, Eric H., Identity: Youth and Crisis, (Norton: New York, 1968), 130.
United States Bureau of the Census, Racial and Ethnic Categories in the United States, 1990, 1993
The Indian Removal Act in 1830 provided for federal enforcement of that process. McDuffie, Jerome, Ph.D., Piggrem, Gary, Ph.D. and Woodworth, Steven E., Ph.D., Advanced Placement Examination in United States History, (Research & Education Association: New Jersey, 1995), 54.
American Heritage Dictionary. (1983), s.v. "abuse, protect, freedom, violate, law, liberty."
United States Congress. Senate. Subcommittee on Terrorism, Technology, and Government Information of the Committee on the Judiciary. The Federal Raid on Ruby Ridge, ID. Washington: US GPO, 1997, 978.
Mill, John Stuart, On Liberty and Utilitarianism, (New York: Bantam, 1993), 144.
Gasset, Jose Ortega y, The Revolt of the Masses, 25th anniversary ed. (New York: Norton, 1957), 118.
Weaver Awarded $3.1 Million from US Government. While admitting no wrong, the US Government settled suits filed by the Weaver family over the killing of his 14 year old son and his wife by federal law enforcement officials at Ruby Ridge in Northern Idaho. The payment settles claims filed by Weaver and his two daughters. The original claims totaled $200 million. The Justice Department released a statement on the day they agreed to the settlement that said in part: "The settlement reflects the loss to the Weaver children of their mother and brother. By entering into a settlement, the United States hopes to take a substantial step toward healing the wounds the incident inflicted. "html screens © 1995 Gary and Susan Shade, and Shade's Landing.
United States Congress. House. Committee on Government Reform and Oversight. Investigation into the Activities of Federal Law Enforcement Agencies Toward the Branch Davidians: thirteenth report.
Washington: US GPO,1996.
The World Almanac. New Jersey: World Almanac, 1993, 51.
OPPOSITE OF ORIGINAL FINDINGS.The Committee's 13-month investigation of Waco was unnecessary, expensive, and fruitless. Although the majority report spans 100 pages and includes nearly 1,400 pages of documentary exhibits, it contributes virtually nothing to the public's understanding of Waco. Many of the report's findings duplicate those of the Special Counsel, former Senator John C. Danforth. In his report, Sen. Danforth determined, among other things, that government agents did not cause or contribute to the fire that consumed the Branch Davidian compound on April 19, 1993, did not direct gunfire at the Branch Davidians on April 19, and did not unlawfully employ US armed forces at any time during the standoff. To the extent the majority report deviates from Sen. Danforth's findings, it consists largely of unsupported allegations of wrongdoing by the Attorney General and Justice Department officials. B-286114 GAO/NSIAD-00-240R Branch Davidian Incident Page 4 (702093).
Geitwitz, P. James, Non-Freuedian Personality Theories, (Brookes/Cole: Belmont, Calif., 1969), 72-74.
Bartlett, John, Familiar Quotations, 7th ed.< (Boston: Little Brown, 1992), 339.
Wilkins, Roy and Ramsey Clark, chairmen. Search and Destroy: A Report by the Commission of Inquiry into the Black Panthers and the Police. New York: Metropolitan Applied Research Center, 1973.
DRI, "Kill the Words," Trash Zone, Music recording. (Enigma Records: Culver City, 1989).
Cannon, James P., et al. The Fight Against Fascism in the USA: Forty Years of Struggle Described by Participants. (New York: Pathfinder, 1976), 32.
Fairfield, Roy P., ed, The Federalist Papers, (New York: Doubleday, 1966), 16.
Nietzsche, Fredrich, On the Genealogy of Morals, Trans., Douglas Smith, (New York: Oxford UP, 1996), 53.
Amnesty International, "Violation of the Right s of Foreign Nationals under Sentence of Death," News Service," (Nov. 1998): Online. Internet, (15 November 1998).
Walker, Hill, M., "Investigating, School-Related Behavior Disorders: Lessons Learned from a Thirty-Year Research Career," Exceptional Children 66, n. 2, (Winter 2000), 160.
Reetz, Linda, J. and Jacobs, Geralyn, M., "Faculty Focus On Moral and Character Education," Education, 120, n.2, (Winter 1999), 211.
Lago-Delello, Ellie, "Classroom Dynamics and the Development of Seriuos Emotional Disturbance," Exceptional Children, 64, n. 4, (Summer 1998), 490
Hirst, P.H. and Peters, R.S., "Education," in The Logic of Education, (Humanities Press: New York, 1970), 39.
Power, Edward J., "Liberal and General Education," in Education for American Democracy, (McGraw-Hill: New York, 1958), 361-362.
Grube, G.M.A., Plato Phaedo, quote of Socrates, (Hackett: Indianapolis, 1977), 64.