|
Tony Rubolotta
When Liberty is the Minority View
May 28, 2009
We are faced with the ultimate nightmare of any democratic republic, and
that is the possibility of the tyranny of the majority voting liberty
out of existence. Constitutional safeguards are only as good as those
charged to safeguard them, and in this respect government officials in
every branch of government who take an oath to protect and defend the
Constitution have been the worst offenders. The integrity of our
political process has been compromised by rampant voter fraud, a tidal
wave of illegal campaign contributions and a complicit media. We won’t
know just how permanent and deep the damage is until 2010, if we have
that long and if it can be corrected at all. A change of the guard is no
guarantee the rule of law will be restored.
What have others done when faced with the dissolution of their liberty
by a majority bent on mob rule?
Marxist Salvador Allende was elected President of Chile in 1970 by a
plurality of just over 36%. Realistically, left leaning votes totaled
about 64%, a clear majority that favored socialist policies and agreed
to an Allende led coalition. Allende’s reforms were mostly in the form
of huge wage increases, but only for his supporters in favored unions.
These were funded largely by property seizures of foreign and locally
owned industries.
Once the economy had been plundered, the inevitable shortages socialism
produces began to appear, food being the most critical. Chaos followed
as Allende’s most strident supporters began taking over factories, shops
and farms, erected barricades and armed to defend the property they had
seized. Allende did nothing to stop the mobs or their illegal actions
and ignored pleas by the Chilean congress to either resign or establish
order. The army had remained politically neutral but Chile’s descent to
Marxist mob rule was the last straw. Augusto Pinochet led a coup in
September, 1973 to remove Allende and restore order.
The left wing version of these events can be found on Wikipedia. More
thorough and objective research reveals the extent to which the left has
gone to propagandize these events through exaggeration, omissions and
outright lies, particularly disregarding terrorist activities by the
communists prior to Pinochet’s takeover. The army and a sizeable
minority of people in Chile were not going to allow their liberty or
property be seized by a Marxist and his mobs, so they fought back and
won. This is why the left despised Pinochet and carried a vendetta
against him for the rest of his life. The reforms instituted by Pinochet
significantly reduced poverty and strengthened economic liberty, and the
left hates him all the more for that. Full civilian rule under a new
constitution was restored to Chile in 1990.
We saw very much the same drama play out in Haiti with the election of
Marxist Aristide in 1990 with 67% of the vote. A little less than 8
months later, Aristide was removed by an army led coup that had enough
of his Marxist policies and chaos. Clinton intervened on behalf of
Aristide to “restore democracy”, which was basically Marxist mob rule
and a tyrant. Haiti’s military leaders capitulated under threat of armed
intervention by Clinton. The bloodbath that followed Aristide’s return
as the mob exacted vengeance is seldom if ever mentioned in left wing
accounts of this period in Haiti’s history. Political opponents were
hacked to death by roaming mobs and the government ran a terror campaign
against opponents of Aristide.
Aristide dissolved the army and installed a civilian police force, his
enforcers to carry out his policies and terrorize or eliminate
opposition. Aristide was again thrown out of power in 2004 by a
rebellion after he had rigged the elections in 2000 and had an opponent
murdered in 2003. The regime that followed wasn’t particularly
democratic, but they had enough of Marxism, election tampering, mob rule
and authoritarian Aristide.
Marxists gaining power through the democratic process in Chile and Haiti
expected their opponents to roll over and die as they lost their voice,
their liberty and their property, but it didn’t happen. Those people had
to fight, and yes, they had to kill to remove the tyrants that thought
an electoral majority gave them the right to abuse the minority. The
left condemns these minority revolutions and the thousands of deaths
they claim followed. The left never condemns the millions of deaths that
precede and follow a Marxist revolution.
The Weather Underground matter-of-factly discussed the need to murder 25
million Americans if their revolution succeeded and imposed Marxism. How
many others they estimated would be placed in re-education or detention
camps we don’t know. You may be thinking these academic types that are
now teaching in universities would never actually kill that many people
and you are right because they would have someone else do it for them. I
have never heard that Pol Pot, Hitler or Stalin for that matter actually
killed anyone with their own hands. They had plenty of stooges and
obedient followers to do their dirty work. With Marxism it is always
kill them before they kill us, and better to kill too many than not
enough.
The only thing you should read into this story is that free people,
cognizant of the historical realities of Marxism and totalitarian
government, may fight back when the horror is thrust on them. How they
fight back depends on the means they have available when tyrants rule.
The minority that rejected Marxism in Chile and Haiti fought back and
won. The left condemns them for daring to defend their liberty against
tyrants emplaced by majority rule. I applaud their resistance to
tyranny. I hope it never comes to this here, but I have no intention of
rolling over and dying for a chanting mob of cultists claiming the right
to end my liberties because they are the majority. |
