The Futility of Violence in the Quest for Change

It has been a hell of a time, with so many shootings that you couldn't keep up with them. Sometimes we forget-- in the immediacy of the present- the extent of past American political violence. Our current times are almost subdued in comparison. I guess we have to admit that the American people have long-term memory issues Let us look back 150 years ago in the era of the Civil War, which even if you did know some of these true stories, you never some of the details or they have receded as you were bombarded with so much current information.

Let's start with the conflicts between politicians in congress: In 1856, Texas congressman Philemon T. Herbert (his first name means "loving" or "affection") was upset when a waiter refused to serve him at a Washington, D.C. restaurant because the congressman had arrived after the established time for breakfast. In response to this misdemeanor in wait staff conduct, Congressman Herbert shot the waiter dead. The shooter was not crazy. He was just a southern bigot. The unfortunate waiter, an immigrant from Ireland, was a deplorable to nativist Texans. After this cold-blooded execution, Northern newspapers strongly denounced Congressman Herbert for this murder. Southern newspapers reported that the Irish waiter had gotten what he deserved. Tried for manslaughter, a Washington D.C. jury acquitted Herbert. Even then, injustice was emanating from Washington DC.

Violence today is nothing new, despite the frantic claims of today's newscasters that the political situation in America has never been so bad. Yet, American democracy is not at presently in any greater danger nor threat than it has ever been. In fact, the functioning of American republican government shone has continued during the most difficult of times, even during the time of the American Civil War, which is exactly what our Founding Fathers designed our unique form of republican democracy to do.

Law-breaking always begets further law breaking, if unchecked, and the same is true for violence. It does not matter whether the form of government is democracy, monarchy, socialism, or communism, taking the law into one's own hands tears at the very fabric of society. Individual violence is usually of little lasting consequence beyond the people involved, but a few instances of political assassination (Lincoln, the Kennedys, MLK, Charlie Kirk) or assassination attempts (Donald Trump) can completely alter the course of history in unforeseeable ways. The events of the past year have already demonstrated how chance plays a large role: If that assassin's bullet had killed President Trump, imagine how different today would be.

Let's turn to the most famous example of political violence in the United States Congress, admittedly committed a few years before South Carolina fired on Fort Henry to ignite the Civil War: In 1856, Northern abolitionist Senator Charles Sumner mocked a South Carolina Senator, implying that this particular Senator and other leaders of the South were engaging with sexual relations with female slaves. Today, forensics have proved the Thomas Jefferson engaged himself in such distasteful actions. Hearing this accusation at this much more strait-laced time, a northern Senator who had watched this exchange on the Senate floor stated: "That damn fool is going to get himself killed by some other damn fool", which almost turned out to be a true prediction. Southern leaders had always claimed they descended from European Royalty making them elite. Under The Code of Chivalry, their honor allowed them to follow their own rules, without interference by the lower classes. They did not care about anyone else's freedom. If insulted, Southern leaders resorted to dueling to obtain satisfaction, even if it was technically illegal.

Believing that Senator Sumner's accusations were so obviously grounds for violence, but that Sumner was not worthy of the honor of being challenged to a duel, an irate Southern congressman charged into the Senate two days later and repeatedly smashed Sumner with a heavy, hardwood, gold-knobbed cane, leaving him lying on the Senate floor covered in blood and permanently disabled. The blows were so violent that the cane had splintered and broken during this vicious assault. No one had dared to interfere or to stop the assaulting Congressman from leaving the Senate afterwards. Another Senator, confirming the violent attitudes of their elected officials, later commented that the only members of Congress who did not carry a knife and a loaded revolver were those who carried two revolvers. (One hopes that our current Congress need not be so motivated nor so well-armed to protect themselves from the other members).

Overnight, both politicians involved in this incident became heroes for their respective political sides. Supporters gave the assaulting congressman gifts of several new canes including one inscribed "Hit Him Again", rewarding his defense of Southern honor and for his actions to discourage any more Abolitionist speeches which might risk triggering a slave revolt.

The assaulting congressman was eventually arrested, convicted and fined for his actions. Although he resigned from office due to his conviction, the voters in his district soon returned him to Congress anyway. Two years later, Senator Sumner also returned to his position in the Senate, although unable to stand and suffering from brain damages, a visibly disabled reminder of the potential violence which can follow free speech.

In another 1856 incident, Wisconsin congressman John Potter was challenged to duel by a Southern politician named Pryor. As the person challenged, Potter had the right to choose the weapons for the duel. He selected large-bladed Bowie knives. Pryor then backed down, refusing to duel with so vulgar a weapon as Potter had chosen. Republican supporters later honored Potter with the gift of a 7-foot- long Bowie Knife, inscribed to be used "For Pryor Engagements." (You can still see that 7-foot Bowie knife displayed at the Wisconsin Historical Society, unless historical revisionists have had it removed as an offending reminder of the past.)

Even Abraham Lincoln was challenged to a duel early in his political career. Not as wise as he would later become, Lincoln had sent a letter to a newspaper ridiculing another politician. When that politician challenged Lincoln to duel, Lincoln chose the longest obtainable broad swords for weapons. When the 6-foot, 4-inch-tall Lincoln swung his broad sword high and cut right through a tree branch above his 5 foot 9-inch-tall adversary, demonstrating the extent of Lincoln's reach and power, and a truce was immediately called. Lincoln was no fool. Refusal to duel would have made Lincoln look weak and dishonorable. Instead, he displayed the great physical strength he developed when he was a young man, splitting wood with an axe making railroad ties. This was Lincoln's version of "fight, fight, fight", which helped convince voters that Lincoln was admirably courageous.

Before the time of the Civil War, Chief Supreme Court Justice Roger Taney's legal opinion upheld the validity of the Fugitive Slave Act, which passed to benefit slave owners in the South. However, this Act's unfair provisions actually worked against Southern interests as the unfairness of the law increased opposition to slavery in the North; The Fugitive Slave Act made criminals of anyone who assisted slaves on their way to freedom in Canada, where slavery was prohibited. This obviously unjust law was sanctioned by the highest court in America. It enabled the seizing and kidnapping of free blacks in the North to return them to the Southern slavery. Although passage of this Act enraged Abolitionists, just the same the way Supreme Court decisions can enrage people today, although responding in violence was rejected by most Abolitionists.

In the South, as the conflict in values increased, so did the violence. In 1857, an Anti-Black southerner named Hinton Rowan Helper had sought to "whiten" Southern society by publicizing his plan to outlaw slavery and deport all freed slaves from the USA. Helper wrote a best-selling book called The Impending Crisis, with was banned throughout the South. Importing Helper's book into Southern states risked the death penalty. Mobs beat or lynched anyone who supported Helper in his plan to end slavery by transporting all the slaves out of America. In Texas, a mob burned a peddler alive for selling copies of Helper's book. This extreme form of "cancellation" long predates our current cancel culture, where individuals also resort to violence. For example, the shooter who hit President Trump's ear appears to have wanted to eliminate a person he perceived as a threat to transgender rights.

As the onset of the Civil War loomed in 1860, a series of unusual barn fires triggered The Texas Insurrection Panic. Rumors had spread that rebellious slaves were setting barn fires. These rumors also claimed that slaves were poisoning well water as a prelude to an imminent slave insurrection. Motivated by these rumors, Texas vigilantes killed more than 75 blacks and anti-slavery white suspects. Later, the fires were proved to have been ignited by unusually hot weather and improper storage of grain. No one was ever punished for the violence. Also in 1860, In Fort Worth, a vocal anti-slavery Methodist Minister named Anthony Bewley was hanged by Texas vigilantes who scraped the flesh off his bones, adorned his skeleton with a sign naming it "The Old Abolitionist", and propped it up as gruesome warning on the roof of a store in that city. (No one removed the skeleton until 7 years later, long after the Civil War ended.)

Violence was also undertaken in the North. During the Civil War, in New York City, a military draft was organized to replace the massive number of Union soldiers who had been killed in battle at Gettysburg. Irish immigrants were to be included in the draft. When the announcement of the draft was made, the Irish formed mobs and brought mayhem to the city, destroying draft offices, newspaper offices, and the homes of Abolitionists. These mobs roved though poor neighborhoods, torturing, lynching and drowning Blacks. They looted, burned police stations and Black orphanages.

Recent immigrants with little money, the mostly Catholic Irish believed that the wealthy Protestants who ran New York City were responsible for the poor conditions in which the Catholics were living. There was no way these poor Irish would willingly fight in a War for Black freedom, which would result in large numbers of Blacks migrating north to compete with the Irish for paying work. After 5 or 6 days of violent chaos, Union troops restored order. The grotesque violence of the riots worked against the motives of the Irish, by convincing other New Yorkers to accept that the evils of slavery needed to end for social stability to return. In the end, like with the Black Lives Matter riots of our times, the violence and destruction worked against the interests of their communities. There was no lasting positive effect of this political violence. There never is. Political change takes place pursuant to the efforts of very large numbers of people. Individual violence is ineffective as a method to create lasting changes.

In a New York City plot, in 1864, a local newspaper learned that Confederate President Jefferson Davis had secretly hired Canadian agents to plant fire bombs in hotels, theaters, and the P.T. Barnum Museum in New York City. Davis wanted to kill thousands of New York City civilians, which he believed would cause Northerners to end the War, and grant the Confederacy the secession it sought. The firebombs turned out to be duds, although most New Yorkers panicked when they learned about the scope of the attempt. This underhanded Confederate plot to injure civilians enraged New Yorkers and hardened their resolve to defeat the Confederates, which was another backfire, just the opposite of what Jefferson Davis had intended.

Similarly, President Andrew Johnson's failure to prevent violence and discord in the South following the end of the Civil War motivated voters to elect Republicans to every governorship. Republicans also won the majority in Congress in the mid-term elections of 1866. Johnson's refusal to prevent criminal action against Blacks resulted in Republicans taking power away from the people Johnson failed to control.

I have detailed these events to help deter people from trying to take the law into their own hands. People may chose to undertake violent actions, but these often energize the opposition. Highly effective in harming or destroying the lives of those unlucky enough to be at the wrong place at the wrong time, thugs and assassins choose their targets, seeking to change the power structures in America. But didn't the guy who shot, but failed to kill President Trump only help President Trump to be re-elected? Didn't the guy who shot Charlie Kirk make Charlie Kirk's message ten times more popular?

These are thoughts we need to consider: Voting is the only action which changes how America operates. We believe that the right to vote is precious because it is so powerful, a great tool to help the American people to make required changes. But to try to sway voters by saying that a politician "is dangerous" or "needs to be stopped" in America must be made solely as an encouragement to vote for someone else. Every politician must clarify that he or she is not encouraging violence to make change. Impassioned political statements must be clearly avoid being interpreted as calls for violence. The American republican democracy continues to be the best form of government ever invented, as renegade factions do not have the power to harm it, due to the checks and balances it provides. Thoughtful voting, not violence, will create a better America.

Note: The primary source for the stories contained here is a wonderful book by University of Virginia Professor Alan Taylor, American Civil Wars. After reading this book and Alan Taylor's prior American Colonies: The Settling of America, I remain stunned by the extent of violence and psychopathy described in these works. If anyone thinks our times are the worst ever, read those books to learn the terrible extent of past North American violence. Professor Taylor is prominently featured in the recent Ken Burns/PBS documentary celebrating the 250th Anniversary of the American Revolution.