Monday, November 28, 2022

Correction

I know, I know. 

An earlier version of the prior post said the Boston Massacre was in 1970, not 1770. It was a typo. 

We have made heroes out of the people in the Boston crowd, but from the point of view of the British they were a dangerous mob. The British fired into them.

The event helps make my point about the difficulty of government controlling mass protests. When there are enough people involved, it doesn’t come across as a police issue dealing with a one-off criminal. It pits “the people” against “the government.” Shooting the half dozen people in the crowd quelled the disturbance momentarily, but it did not succeed in intimidating Bostonians into quiet acceptance of British rule. It led to greater unrest. That led to the Tea Party. Militia groups formed and began storing arms. Then the British effort to find those arms in Lexington and Concord. Paul Revere rode his horse to warn them. George Washington came to the Cambridge Common to take command of the militia. Then open armed rebellion.

I have been critical of Portland’s effort to quell the violence that took place under the cover and distraction of peaceful Black Lives Matter protests in Portland in 2020. Oregon officials didn’t do enough, in my opinion, to stop vandalism and arson. There is a reason for that. It isn’t easy and it can backfire.










1 comment:

Michael Trigoboff said...

Not controlling violent “protesters“ can also backfire. The chaotic wasteland that downtown Portland has turned into is a case in point.