Violence For We but Not for Thee: The Selective Use of Political Violence by America Against Its Citizens and Foreign Nations, But Not Its Ruling Class
Violence for We but Not for Thee:
The Selective Use of Political Violence by America Against Its Citizens and Foreign Nations, but Not Its Ruling Class
Last night, President Biden delivered a speech condemning political violence in all its forms. He emphasized that such violence is a threat to democracy and must be unequivocally rejected. Biden’s address emphasized the urgent need for unity and respect for the rule of law, calling on all Americans to engage in peaceful dialogue and democratic processes to resolve their differences. This declaration comes at a critical time, as the nation grapples with the deep-seated issues of systemic violence and inequality that have long plagued its history. While the President’s call for an end to political violence may seem timely and necessary, it also highlights the stark contradictions in America’s historical and ongoing use of political violence, both domestically and internationally.
America, a nation often celebrated for its democratic ideals and commitment to freedom, has a complex and troubling history when it comes to the use of political violence. This violence has been selectively employed, targeting its own citizens, foreign nations, and governments, while largely sparing its ruling class and political elite. This essay explores the historical and contemporary manifestations of this selective violence, examining the underlying motivations and implications for justice and democracy.
The use of political violence against American citizens has deep roots in the nation’s history. From the brutal repression of labor strikes in the late 19th and early 20th centuries to the surveillance and harassment of civil rights activists in the 1960s, the American state has consistently wielded violence to suppress dissent and maintain social order. One of the earliest examples is the Haymarket Affair of 1886, where a peaceful rally in support of workers striking for an eight-hour workday turned violent after a bomb was thrown at police. The police responded with gunfire, resulting in multiple deaths. The aftermath saw labor leaders arrested and executed on dubious charges, reflecting the state’s harsh stance against labor activism. Similarly, the Ludlow Massacre of 1914 highlighted the extreme measures taken against striking miners in Colorado. The Colorado National Guard and private security agents attacked a tent colony of striking miners and their families, resulting in the deaths of 21 people, including women and children. These events underscored the willingness of the state to use lethal force to protect corporate interests over workers’ rights.
During the Civil Rights Movement, the FBI’s COINTELPRO (Counter Intelligence Program) targeted Black leaders and organizations, most notoriously the Black Panther Party. The FBI sought to “neutralize” these leaders through tactics such as surveillance, infiltration, and direct violence. The assassination of Fred Hampton, a prominent Black Panther leader, in 1969, orchestrated by the FBI and Chicago police, remains a stark example of state-sponsored political violence. The 1965 Selma to Montgomery marches, part of the voting rights movement, also faced brutal repression. “Bloody Sunday,” the first march, saw state troopers and local police attack peaceful demonstrators with clubs and tear gas, leaving many injured. The violent response to peaceful protests starkly illustrated the state’s commitment to maintaining racial segregation and disenfranchisement through force.
In recent years, the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement has faced significant state violence. Protests following the deaths of African Americans like Michael Brown, Eric Garner, and George Floyd at the hands of police were met with militarized police responses. Tear gas, rubber bullets, and mass arrests were common, highlighting the continuity of state violence against movements challenging systemic racism and police brutality. In contrast, the response to the January 6, 2021, Capitol insurrection, where a predominantly white mob attempted to overturn the 2020 presidential election results, was notably less aggressive. Despite the clear threat to democratic institutions, law enforcement’s response was criticized for its relative restraint compared to the force used against BLM protesters. This disparity underscores the selective application of state violence based on the perceived threat to the status quo.
On the global stage, America’s use of political violence is equally pervasive. The country has a long history of intervening in the affairs of foreign nations, often under the guise of promoting democracy and human rights. The 1953 coup in Iran, orchestrated by the CIA and British intelligence, is a prime example. The democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh sought to nationalize Iran’s oil industry, threatening Western economic interests. In response, the CIA facilitated a coup that installed Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, whose regime was marked by repression and human rights abuses. Similarly, in Guatemala, the CIA orchestrated a coup in 1954 to overthrow President Jacobo Árbenz, who had enacted land reforms unfavorable to the United Fruit Company, a major American corporation. The coup led to decades of civil war and repression, with significant human rights violations.
The Vietnam War epitomizes America’s extensive use of political violence abroad. Under the pretext of containing communism, the U.S. engaged in a protracted conflict that resulted in millions of Vietnamese deaths, widespread destruction, and lasting environmental damage. The use of napalm and Agent Orange, a chemical defoliant, caused severe health problems and environmental devastation. The war also had profound domestic implications, sparking widespread protests and leading to a violent state response. The 1970 Kent State shootings, where National Guard troops opened fire on unarmed student protesters, killing four, highlighted the domestic consequences of America’s foreign political violence.
In the post-9/11 era, the War on Terror has further exemplified America’s selective use of political violence. The invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, justified by the need to combat terrorism and promote democracy, led to significant civilian casualties and prolonged instability. The use of drone strikes, often resulting in civilian deaths, has been a contentious aspect of this policy. The Guantanamo Bay detention camp and the use of torture in facilities like Abu Ghraib prison have drawn international condemnation. These practices highlight the extent to which America is willing to violate human rights in pursuit of its geopolitical objectives.
Several scholars and writers have critically examined America’s use of political violence. Their works provide important insights into the mechanisms and motivations behind this selective application of force. Howard Zinn’s “A People’s History of the United States” offers a comprehensive critique of American history, highlighting the consistent use of violence against marginalized groups. Zinn’s analysis of labor movements, civil rights struggles, and anti-war protests underscores the state’s reliance on coercive measures to maintain control and suppress dissent.
Noam Chomsky, a prominent critic of U.S. foreign policy, has extensively documented America’s use of political violence abroad. In works like “Hegemony or Survival: America’s Quest for Global Dominance” and “Manufacturing Consent,” Chomsky argues that the U.S. employs violence to maintain its global hegemony and protect corporate interests. He critiques the media’s role in shaping public perception and justifying state violence. Angela Davis, an activist and scholar, has written extensively on state violence and racial oppression. In “Are Prisons Obsolete?” and other works, Davis examines the prison-industrial complex and the criminalization of Black and Brown communities. She highlights the continuity of state violence from slavery to mass incarceration and police brutality.
Michelle Alexander’s “The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness” explores how the U.S. criminal justice system perpetuates racial inequality through mass incarceration. Alexander argues that the war on drugs and punitive policies have created a racial caste system, where state violence disproportionately targets African Americans and other minorities. Frantz Fanon’s works, particularly “The Wretched of the Earth,” provide a broader theoretical framework for understanding colonial and post-colonial violence. Although not solely focused on America, Fanon’s analysis of the dehumanizing effects of colonial violence and the role of revolutionary violence in liberation struggles offers valuable insights into the dynamics of state violence.
The selective use of political violence has profound implications for the health of American democracy and the pursuit of justice. It undermines the principles of equality and accountability that are supposed to be the bedrock of democratic governance. When violence is used to suppress dissent and protect the interests of the powerful, it erodes public trust in institutions. The perception that the state selectively applies violence based on race, class, and political alignment fuels cynicism and disillusionment. This erosion of trust can lead to increased social unrest and a weakened democratic fabric.
The selective use of political violence perpetuates cycles of oppression and inequality. Marginalized communities, already facing systemic disadvantages, are further disenfranchised by the state’s coercive measures. The criminalization of protest and dissent disproportionately affects these groups, limiting their ability to advocate for their rights and interests. America’s use of political violence abroad has significant international repercussions. It fosters anti-American sentiment, fuels terrorism, and contributes to global instability. The hypocrisy of promoting democracy while violating human rights undermines America’s moral authority and credibility on the global stage. The insulation of the ruling class from political violence reinforces existing power structures. The lack of accountability for financial elites and political figures implicated in corruption scandals perpetuates a cycle of impunity. This dynamic undermines the rule of law and the principles of justice.
Addressing the issue of political violence requires a multifaceted approach that includes greater accountability, demilitarization, education, support for grassroots movements, and reparative justice. By confronting and rectifying these injustices, America can move towards a more just and equitable society, aligned with its democratic ideals. Accountability for state actors who engage in or authorize violence against citizens and foreign nations is crucial. This includes prosecuting those responsible for abuses and ensuring transparent investigations into incidents of state violence. Addressing the root causes of dissent and unrest, such as economic inequality, racial injustice, and lack of political representation, can reduce the need for coercive measures and foster a more inclusive and equitable society.
Demilitarizing law enforcement and reducing the use of military force in foreign policy are essential steps. Shifting from a paradigm of suppression and domination to one of dialogue and cooperation can help build trust and stability both domestically and internationally. Education plays a crucial role in addressing the issue of political violence. Increasing public awareness about the history and consequences of state violence can empower citizens to hold their government accountable. Integrating critical perspectives on history, race, and foreign policy into educational curricula can foster a more informed and engaged populace. Supporting grassroots movements and civil society organizations that advocate for social justice and human rights is essential. These groups often work on the front lines to address the impacts of political violence and provide support to affected communities. Strengthening their capacity and ensuring their protection from state repression can amplify their impact and contribute to systemic change.
On the international stage, America must engage in multilateral efforts to promote human rights and justice. This involves adhering to international law, cooperating with international bodies like the United Nations, and holding allies accountable for human rights violations. By leading by example, the U.S. can help foster a global environment where political violence is less tolerated. Addressing past injustices through reparative justice measures is also crucial. This includes acknowledging and compensating communities and nations that have suffered from state violence. For instance, reparations for African Americans for the legacy of slavery and systemic racism, as well as compensation to nations affected by American interventions, can be steps towards healing and reconciliation.
Several contemporary writers and activists provide valuable insights and proposals for addressing the issue of political violence. Cornel West, a prominent philosopher and activist, advocates for a radical democracy rooted in love and justice. In works like “Democracy Matters” and “Race Matters,” West emphasizes the importance of addressing economic and racial inequalities as a means of reducing state violence. He calls for a moral and spiritual awakening that challenges the materialism and militarism underlying American society. Ta-Nehisi Coates, in his acclaimed book “Between the World and Me,” explores the ongoing impact of systemic racism and state violence on Black Americans. Coates’ work underscores the need for a reckoning with America’s history of racial oppression and the implementation of policies that address the structural roots of inequality. Roxane Dunbar-Ortiz’s “An Indigenous Peoples’ History of the United States” provides a critical perspective on the violent colonization and ongoing oppression of Indigenous peoples. Her work highlights the importance of acknowledging and addressing historical injustices as part of a broader effort to dismantle systemic violence and inequality. Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor, a scholar and activist, examines the intersections of race, class, and state violence in her works, including “From #BlackLivesMatter to Black Liberation.” Taylor advocates for a transformative approach that addresses the root causes of inequality and empowers marginalized communities to lead the struggle for justice.
America’s selective use of political violence against its citizens and foreign nations, while sparing its ruling class, reveals deep-seated contradictions in its professed commitment to democracy and human rights. Addressing this issue requires a multifaceted approach that includes greater accountability, demilitarization, education, support for grassroots movements, and reparative justice. By confronting and rectifying these injustices, America can move towards a more just and equitable society, aligned with its democratic ideals. Only through sustained efforts to address the root causes of inequality and violence can the nation hope to break the cycle of oppression and build a future where justice and peace are accessible to all. This journey requires the collective will and commitment of citizens, policymakers, and leaders dedicated to transforming America into a true beacon of democracy and human rights for all.
Justin F. Miles
~ Freedom is a long walk and liberation is ever present.