Anti-United Nations (UN) Protests – Dallas (1963)


US Ambassador to the UN Adlai Stevenson Attacked by Angry Crowds

President John F Kennedy was assassinated on November 22nd, 1963, whilst driving in a motorcade through Dallas, Texas. This tragic incident is well-known and the subject of intense ongoing investigation. What I find interesting is how the true extent of hate-filled, racist and ‘insane’ public opinion in this area has been air-brushed out of the common historical narrative. This seems strange for a country that prides itself on ‘free speech’, and odd that White supremacist opinions be struck from the public record, when such opinions are common-place in the USA. White racism (and the fascism that generates) is just as strong in the US today as it was in 1963. What many do not realise is that President Kennedy was very unpopular throughout the rightwing State of Texas, and that threats against his life were routine.


President Kennedy was portrayed as a ‘liberal’ who sided with African-Americans in the ‘Civil Rights’ debate, and was opposed to ‘White’ racism. He was also perceived as being ‘leftwing’, and too soft upon ‘Communism’ in general, and the Soviet Union in particular. Travelling through Dallas was a gamble for President Kennedy. There was no doubt that he was unpopular with the crowds, but his wife – Jackie – being a Southern women – for some reason retained a certain and wide-spread popularity amongst these people. Indeed, her popularity was evident even on the day of her husband’s murder.


On October 24th, 1963, just under a month before Kennedy’s fateful visit to Texas, Adlai Stevenson – the US ambassador to the United Nations – gave a speech in Dallas celebrating the UN inspired ‘World Peace Day’. Stevenson was jeered and immediately set-upon by a rabid crowd of protestors, with some spitting on him, whilst others pelted him with eggs. At one point police had to intercede to protect Stevenson as he was struck about the head with a billboard. This crowd of people represented a certain type of citizen in the US that view the world through a rightwing, religiously inspired mythology that is ‘fascistic’ in nature, and opposed to all notions of world peace, and any ideas of internationalism. What is strange about this protest is that it is clear that the UN – headquartered as it is in New York – has always been a mouthpiece for US foreign policy. Although the UN refers to itself as ‘independent’, it is obvious that UN policy mirrors US policy. The mind-set of these people in the US is so ignorant that they are willing to attack their own ‘capitalistic’ institutions – accusing those who represent their best interests in the world of  being ‘treasonous’ and practising ‘betrayal’. Following this display of blatant rightwingism, President Kennedy was advised to by-pass Texas (even by FDR jr and his wife), but Kennedy was of the opinion that he was everyone’s President and that he had a duty to meet the people there.


These Few Precious Days – The Final Year of Jack and Jackie: By Christopher Anderson, Robson Press, (2013), Pages 287-288

The Oppressed Will Fight Back (Dallas)

images (7)

The white middle class run the US for its own profit. US history is nothing but a white middle class sentimentalist view of itself. In 1776, the British white middle class in America freed itself from direct political control in London. Its motivation was ‘greed’ as it wanted to keep all its profit for itself and nolonger send it back to Britain. This right to regional greed was packaged as ‘freedom’, and the use of ‘armed’ defiance (i.e. ‘terrorism’) against the British Authorities was presented as ‘freedom fighting’. This turned British bourgeois law on its head. Whereas British Citizens were forbidden by law to carry fire-arms, the British middle class in America encouraged its own working class to carry and use arms against the British Authorities. The US ‘Right to Bear Arms’ is in effect a defiance of British Law. The white US middle class today regrets giving its working class the right to bear arms, simply because it has settled into the usual bourgeois habit of systemic domination. Armed civilians hinder the hegemony of this bourgeois dominance, and every effort is made to curb gun-ownership and gun-use throughout US society (whilst hypocritically appearing to ‘ensure’ gun-ownership, etc). This attitude has nothing to do with ‘caring’ about the American people, but everything to do with preventing the US working class over-throwing the US middle class and effecting a ‘true’ American Revolution (rather than the sham of 1776). Race is a major issue in this middle class control mechanism that defines US society.  Racial stereotype, discrimination and prejudice permeates the US system, and is premised upon how the white middle class perceives Blacks, Asian, Chinese, Latino and ordinary (working class) White people.  The US system is awash with a racist toxicity designed to keep the different ethnic groups from uniting with one another, and then uniting with the White working class in an attempt to confront white middle class hegemony and the oppression it enforces.  African-Americans exist in the US due to the British institution of the Transatlantic slave industry.  This saw millions of Black people stolen from their homes in Africa and transported on ships to the Americas – to work for nothing for the White middle class.  Although Lincoln freed the slaves from the legal status of ‘slavery’, he did not free them from the institution of US racism.  US racism views ALL Black people as sub-human, and prone to aberrant behaviour.  This is the status of the disempowered ‘slave’ projected onto modern Black people (by racist Whites) who view themselves as fully ‘human’.  However, the US Police enforces White, bourgeois law, and police officers act as storm-troopers for the white middle class.  It is the function of a police officer to protect the middle class from all aspects of the working class.  As the false image of Black people is one of racialised degradation, the US police are given an ‘unwritten’ ability to enforce the law in a manner that is not entirely ‘legal’ or ‘lawful’.  Therefore White police officers can murder Black people for no reason, and the US system supports that behaviour.  There is little justice for the murdered or their families.  By pursuing this racist policy, the White US system is saying that it is the fault of African-Americans for being ‘Black’, and in no way the fault of the White police officer who pulls the trigger for no reason other than colour prejudice disguised as established ‘procedure’.  As the US system allows its citizens to be armed, it is only to be expected that the victims of this racialised police brutality will oneday use those arms against the police themselves.  The situation has arose because no on (not even ‘Black’ President Obama) will do anything about the manner in which the US police exercises its right to take the life of US citizens.  When a human grouping is under attack, (and Black people in the US have been under collective attack from the White establishment for centuries), elements of that community will eventually fight-back.  What I find remarkable is not the killing of US police officers in Dallas recently, but the fact that African-Americans as a distinct ethnic group, have NOT historically responded to the hatred and death meted out to them by the White racist establishment in this manner, despite the most heinous crimes being committed against them.

%d bloggers like this: