Tuesday, February 13, 2024

Professional Left Podcast Episode #778: No Fair Remembering The 1965 Watts Uprising

“At a street corner meeting in Watts when the riots were over, an unemployed youth of about twenty said to me, "We won." I asked him: "How have you won? Homes have been destroyed, Negroes are lying dead in the streets, the stores from which you buy food and clothes are destroyed, and people are bringing you relief." His reply was significant: "We won because we made the whole world pay attention to us. The police chief never came here before; the mayor always stayed uptown. We made them come." Clearly it was no accident that the riots proceeded along an almost direct path to City Hall.... This is hardly a description of a Negro community that has run amok. The largest number of arrests were for looting—not for arson or shooting. Most of the people involved were not habitual thieves; they were members of a deprived group who seized a chance to possess things that all the dinning affluence of Los Angeles had never given them.”
-- Bayard Rustin, Down the Line: The Collected Writings of Bayard Rustin


Links:  

The Professional Left is brought to you by our wholly imaginary "sponsors" and real listeners like you!







2 comments:

Robt said...

I was about 13 years old when riots broke out in Watts. I lived in the S.F> Bay area but it was dominant in the news. So much so, many of us kids brought news clips from the paper on the subject to present in school for what they called, Current events. Where us kids with news clipping in hand stood in front of the class and gave the news story and our own opinion of it. We did this for grades.

There was unrest going on in a portion of Oakland but it did not rise to Watts coverage.

In more recent display of racial discourse, One that hit me very hard and actually made me angry. The George Floyd murder. In broad da daylight, smack in front of citizens.
Many Citizens that attempted to express to the police they were across the line. Where the police on the scene used authority to threaten the onlooking concerned citizens. Murder it was. Blunt and in our face.

Fast forward years later. I am in the natal Guard and called out for the Rodney King verdict, Called but wasn't deployed. I can tell you back then, You could not find myself single Guard member called out and in standby in case of unrest that was willing to face off with fellow Americans in this situation. We did not feel it appropriate for us to be brought in to be riot police for the unjust trespasses institutionalized against a section of Americans categorized as minority as a justification
to force them to endure the unfairness that has been institutionalized.
There were similar problems as Watts, like Oakland. They had different outcomes.
As called put and put in standby for the O.J. Simpson verdict. I can honestly say there were a few Guardsmen that were gung Ho to patrol the streets and use authority on citizens. Yes, because I spoke with a few, they had racist desires to be , "The Man".
Our ranking officers became aware of this and identified them and had plans to post them behind any front line action where they would be unable to do harm.
Not sure how it is now. But military confronting citizens is not a easy or comfortable position. Stopping violence is one thing, punishing people with pre conceived judgements is another.

This sentiment is alive as when Trump went all Birther on Obama. Knowing his two young girls had to experience such vile and his wife having to explain to his two young daughters. That their is hate that is after your soul.

Trump did this with crime and violence in "cities" ignoring rural violence. His dehumanizing of immigrants.

Why do you think every place Trump objected to and accused of voter fraud as cities with high numbers of African American citizens.
.

Fritz Strand said...

Your comments about visiting your once rural home once again has me questioning the on going comments in our media about 'the rural vote/voters'. What rural vote? What are they talking about?

I recall Reagan's 'farm aid' era when small farmer/small town America was taken apart. My best guess is that 'the rural vote' is a semantic distraction to cover for gerrymandering.