Also people surrounding ICE "agents" and talking to them. Say stuff that might leak into their brains and rattle into their awareness later, like talking about the Constitution and due process.

And other people yelling at them. Making them slowly realize that the community hates them, and maybe some of their own family and "communities" began to push back from the ostracization they're also experiencing. Shame them for their cowardice, hiding faces and swapping license plates. Why do you have to hide your identity if what you're doing is legal and moral?

wonderful responses to ICE. I would prefer that people follow the teachings of Martin Luther King, Jr, than yelling at them. I respect that others favor yelling, though.

...I'm really anxious watching frustrated folks drawn to the streets and placing themselves in front of the thugs just sent in to teach them a lesson about coming to the aid of their neighbors.

I don't like seeing folks picked of one by one like the protestors I saw today singled out and encircled in a classic mob action by ICE agents and beaten to the ground before hauling them off.

As I anguished watching them, not a bit of me desiring them to do that, I'm mindful of the dynamic that existed between Bayard Rustin's entreaties to direct action and MLK-style passive resistance, and not actually believing one approach would have succeeded without the other.

That's not to say that I advocate direct action against armed, armored government thugs, I don't.

But I do believe society (and the pols) pay more attention when the people engage in an actual uprising; both the civil rights era's and this one mostly organic and born out of genuine concern for their neighbors, communities, and their own liberty to come outside, as I saw last night in response to the explosions, smoke, and biological warfare being deployed in front of their own homes and being threatened further with their lives for complaining.

It's an inevitability in response to such tyrannical conduct, so much so that though it's hard to witness, it can feel cathartic to the desire most of us feel to reach out and touch these cretins who think they are the boss of us.

I saw a lot of young folks who are going to go through a load of changes as they fathom the degree of their individual power to effect the things they want. That's a lot of energy that can be channeled into real political power, but it should be understood that much of that energy is coming from folks responding viscerally instead of strategically, and that's just a consequence of who we are as humans, to the fate of all of us, including the fascists in our government.

And especially thanks for mentioning Rustin, an important historic figure. He was an influential part in so many of the direct actions that helped to change this country. That includes his assisting in the first of the Freedom Rides long before the more famous ones in the 1960's. (I think in the late 1940s, but being old, my memory isn't always good on dates.)

He would later work with Quakers on "Alternatives to Violence." I took their training years later. Their program eventually was aimed at those incarcerated in jails and prisons, and then expanded to include school children. More, they eventually added things that the Clan Mothers at Onondaga suggested. I would teach it in the clinc's DV groups and the county jail. A few years back, I encountered a gentleman who had been in one of those DV groups, who said it changed his life.

It was a disappointment -- for me, at least -- when Rustin eventually became a neoconservative supporter of Reagan. But I still have great respect for his decades of fighting for human rights. So when you mentioned him, I knew I was in the right place.

...as in all large protest movements, there's the potential for pent up anger and resulting violence, and I grew up in the middle of some of that in 1968 in D.C. with entire of blocks nearby burned to the ground with most of the small Jewish-run stores that the community used.

Jesse Jackson organized his Project Breadbasket with Marion Barry, I believe, along with local grocery stores in the wake of the unrest after the assasination of Martin.

Anyway, I think most folks know that MLK's peaceful demonstrations, and his work with others like Abernathy in the WH in successive administrations, was the actual vehicle for change.

But the impetus to destructive acts was mostly organic, born out of the distressed condition of many of the people protesting.

I think there's been a lot of effort invested by the Trump cabal in representing those expressions of frustration as a organized strategy, when I believe it was mostly just an adjunct to the entire push for liberty and rights in the face of often violent pushback from entire communities, in concert with the governments that enabled those attacks of individuals and communities of color by allowing them to occur with impunity.

Of course, Bayard was just organizing marches and demonstrations, not lynchings. But that dynamic of his calls for direct, impactful action cast by some against MLK's decidedly more subdued gatherings provided room for demagogues to imply that he was in favor of hurting someone or damaging something or the other, much like the direct resistance in the streets is being portrayed today.

I got a feel of that natural urge to directly resist as I watched the young folk come into the streets with disregard for their own safety to measure their individual ability to direct their own government.

What a misdirected wealth of energy that we can use to organize progressive change in our elections. I do think the extremes that some feel compelled go to in their resistance are far from something governors or leaders can counsel well against, though.

Most people aren't in the streets, just a comparative handful to the population, certainly the press and observers outnumbering the young folks who are agitated and are foolishly dancing around within reach of the armed agents.

They're caught up in a very human reaction to bondage, these young ones having just experienced government lockdowns that possibly stifled their development at perhaps pivotal moments in their lives. They'll need to work through that, and we'll all need to take that inevitability into consideration. The government certainly won't do themselves any favors trying to stop it with more military repression. History tells us that.

And when we do see a revolt and a sizable number again take to the streets, the call for that resistance (like Gov. Walz and the mayor of Minnesota made) won't be anymore of an impetus to violence than the government is already fomenting and provoking. Simply put, in that instance, we may be the only ones coming to our defense against them.


*just thinking out loud, not anything negatively directed to you personally, or antagonistic to the considered advice you shared.

my favorite language. Last week, I was asked to venture to my home town this summer, to give a presentation on the development of what became the Constitution we are struggling to hold onto today. As you know, I find the Haudenosaunee influence on the Founding Fathers fascinating, including hearing stories about meetings in Albany and Philly handed down in Chief Waterman's family. More, as I told a gentleman last night (at my sister's granddaughter's high school basketball game) who approached me to discuss local history, the Franklin Plan of Union -- an outstanding document -- was followed by his friend's Galloway Plan of Union.

Galloway is my maternal side of the family. Joseph didn't want to go as far as had Ben, and advocated something of a half-step away from England. Another of my ancestors, John Ross, was a pro-England, close friend of Mohawk leader Joseph Brant. I think that the quality of conversations between the Founding Fathers is what Democrats -- from grass roots to DC -- should be engaging in today. Of course, I prefer a plan for the non-violent revolution of values that Dr. King advocated.

I also am fascinated by the cast of characters who served as the Founding Fathers of the civil rights era. And as you have noted, it wasn't just Dr. King, though all too often he alone is the symbol of that essential era. Forgive me for saying this, but I would not be surprised to see "Martin Luther King Sales!" popping up in dollar stores. There were many other leaders, including from the generation of Daddy King, who was more conservative in approach than his son.

There are hundreds of good books and documentaries on this period. Among my very favorites is Taylor Branch's three volume history of "America in the King Years." I suspect you are familiar, but if by chance anyone else on this forum reads two Elders' conversation, please read those books! For there were thousands of brave people, their names forgotten to history, who joined with Dr. King and the other leaders back then. Thousands of ordinary people who stepped up to accomplish extraordinary advances in human rights.

Even within his small group of closest associates, not everyone always agreed with Dr. King. This is a good thing, an essential feature, for any time two people -- much less thirteen -- think exactly alike, it means only one is thinking, to paraphrase Malcolm. And we remember Malcolm as representing a diiferent school of thought on the best approach at that time. It's ironic that while Malcolm scared a lot of people, the only public violence he was associated with was his being murdered on stage. And there were others like Fred Hampton and Muhammad Ali. A wide range of opinions, and what was best was when these very different men met with each other, behind closed doors, and talked shop.

Now a question I'm hoping you can answer: I know Rustin had planned a trip to India to, among other things, meet with Gandhi. I know that this was not long before Gandhi was killed. Do you know if he actually met with Gandhi? Thanks!

Hahaha for your news clip😀😀