Dred Scott, Plessy & Korematsu Still Live

The Boston Herald | July 30, 2005 | Orlando Vidal

[CGVet58]

"...Yes, they choose not to be citizens..."

err, wrong, fellow-freeper. Citizens they are, even as they remain a commonwealth and not a state. Time to hit the books again...

[Rockingham]

I must have missed the part of your post where you listed the stable, long-existing Latin American democracies with a solid tradition of freedom and rule of law. Would it be unfairly stereotypic of me to offer to list Latin America's wars, dictatorships, and coups?

Independence, then statehood by free choice and petition is the best formula for Puerto Rico. That is how Texas was admitted, and surely Puerto Ricans ought to appreciate the opportunity to have valid cause for the same swagger as Texans.

[cll]

What I mean is that it is not fair to bundle Puerto Rico with Latin America. Even here Latin America sounds foreign.

An example of a solid democracy in Latin America would be Costa Rica.

[cll]

"I'm curious about your comment that the current territorial status favors the elite more than the average folks; that may be true but I would be curious to know some examples"

1. Education - In the feudal tradition of keeping the populace down, public schools here are substandard at best. Over 90% of the Education Department's budget goes to payroll. To get a real education kids need to go to private Catholic, Christian or secular schools and that costs a lot of money. And this are not even preppy private schools as in the mainland. Most are bare bones operations. My construction industry father and shipping industry mother worked very hard to get me and my siblings through private Catholic school.

2. Economic Development - Access to resources, like construction and operating permits, is limited to the few and well connected. Sure, Joe Blow can set up shop in Puerto Rico, but you would need an army of lawyers and consultants to fight the red tape, if you're not willing to do it yourself. This scam is centered on the pro-status quo Popular Democratic Party (PPD). Where once it was the party of "social justice", it is now the party of the profiteers. This is why we have such a large, thriving and parallel underground economy. Buchaneers, if you will.

3. Justice - The justice system in Puerto Rico is controlled by the colonialist Popular Democratic Party and its hacks. Even the "Federales" (DoJ/FBI) are infiltrated by this scum. Both the local and federal justice systems have been used, and continue to be used, as a tool of terror for opponents of the status quo.

That's just three samples.

[Rockingham]

Sadly, Costa Rica is very nearly the only enduring example of Latin American democracy.

Fairly or not, the Vieques business has soured me on Puerto Rico, especially when added to the liberal tendencies of most Puerto Ricans and the island's endemic corruption. I am open to being proved wrong as to Puerto Rico's capacity for democratic responsibility and virtue.

I do not see a principled basis for objection to my formula of independence, with an option for eventual statehood by petition. I do see Puerto Rico's politicians running the numbers and feeling faint when they calculate the loss of US cash and tax benefits that independence would bring. Given Vieques, they and most of the island seem to view statehood as mostly a way to open the spigots on cash from the federal treasury on the basis of Hispanic political power.

[cll]

Vieques - I've posted many times here about the fiasco that was this affair. I will dare say that it has also left most locals with your sour feelings. But all the blame cannot be laid on Puerto Ricans. Who was the Attorney General that refused to uphold the law and remove the global leftists from the range before it got out of hand? Janet Reno. Who was the Commander in Chief that tied the Navy's hands on the affair? Bill Clinton. Why did the U.S. Senate scuttle the Puerto Rico Status Bill, forcing our then Democrat governor to use Vieques as his wild card? If it is of any consolation the feds have not given up on Roosevelt Roads NAS. It is now being transformed to support the Air Force and the Army. Camp Garcia and the Vieques range are now in the hands of the US Fish & Wildlife Service.

"I do not see a principled basis for objection to my formula of independence"

Less than 3% of eligible voters support the Puerto Rico Independence Party. Consistently.

[Rockingham]

Yet the Puerto Rican community in the US and the island's legislature and political class did not weigh in with resolute support of the Navy and American defense interests. Most places in the US beg for military bases and patriotically accept the risks, burdens and annoyances that come with them. Puerto Rico let the Navy get run off and then acted surprised that the base is being closed.

The argument between the Puerto Rican statehood and commonwealth camps is less about principle than which path offers more cash, boodle, and political power. I do not want that mentality as the premise of statehood, making an endorsement of the beggar and entitlement culture of Puerto Rican politics. Give them independence and make them swim in the deep end of the pool at least once before being allowed to hang with the big kids.

[cll]

I appreciate that you can argue a polar opposite to my beliefs without resorting to insults, as some people here do.

The way I see the Vieques fiasco is that there are more living veterans on the island than people who protested the Navy. Ever. With a Democrat president and a Democrat governor the Navy didn't have much of a chance.

Your proposal about "making us swim in the deep end of the pool" of independence before going back to statehood is being taken seriously even by some statehooders.

My position on that is that forced, unilateral independence will result in a civil war, both on the island and on the mainland.

[Rockingham]

Puerto Rican veterans, no matter how abundant or patriotic, proved to be silent or ineffective as a counter to the agitation against the Vieques base and training range. The only credible argument against that facility was the risk to local civilians, as demonstrated by the death of a single civilian guard from a stray shell.

On analysis, so what? Numerous civilians died in the mainland US due to military accidents and will die in the future, an inevitable risk and cost of having a potent military. I shared that risk for many years, as I grew up in Florida in a suburban neighborhood within a few miles of a major SAC base.

B-52s and other large aircraft frequently flew over our house, laden with fuel and risk to the neighborhoods in their flight paths. On one tragic day in 1972, a B-52 crashed on takeoff, burning out about two blocks of houses, killing the seven crew and leaving a ten year old boy mortally burned. After that horrible accident, there were no demonstrations, no protests, just grief and gratitude that the losses on the ground were miraculously slight when compared to the massive damage.

What troubles me about the Vieques episode is that a decisively large and influential slice of Puerto Rican political opinion seems to have regarded the Navy base and training range as an imposition. The negligible risks and burdens attached to it were not accepted as shared with other Americans. In a profound sense, many Puerto Ricans seem to regard themselves as Americans only by imposition, convenience, or circumstance.

Your comment about independence as resulting in civil war, both in Puerto Rico and the mainland US is unsettling. I cannot imagine any other American territory of which that could be said, except for "bleeding Kansas" before the Civil War, which was a vastly different context. I am still inclined to think that independence ought to be strongly offered if not threatened for the sake of encouraging a better sense of responsibility by Puerto Ricans.

Burkean conservatism though would seem to urge that the current status of Puerto Rico be maintained, including the Insular cases. I defer to Burke for his exposition of the principle involved:

"Society requires not only that the passions of individuals should be subjected, but that even in the mass and body, as well as in the individuals, the inclinations of men should frequently be thwarted, their will controlled, and their passions brought into subjection. This can only be done by a power out of themselves, and not, in the exercise of its function, subject to that will and to those passions which it is its office to bridle and subdue. In this sense the restraints on men, as well as their liberties, are to be reckoned among their rights. But as the liberties and the restrictions vary with times and circumstances and admit to infinite modifications, they cannot be settled upon any abstract rule; and nothing is so foolish as to discuss them upon that principle.

* * *

The science of constructing a commonwealth, or renovating it, or reforming it, is, like every other experimental science, not to be taught a priori. Nor is it a short experience that can instruct us in that practical science, because the real effects of moral causes are not always immediate; but that which in the first instance is prejudicial may be excellent in its remoter operation, and its excellence may arise even from the ill effects it produces in the beginning. The reverse also happens: and very plausible schemes, with very pleasing commencements, have often shameful and lamentable conclusions. In states there are often some obscure and almost latent causes, things which appear at first view of little moment, on which a very great part of its prosperity or adversity may most essentially depend. The science of government being therefore so practical in itself and intended for such practical purposes — a matter which requires experience, and even more experience than any person can gain in his whole life, however sagacious and observing he may be — it is with infinite caution that any man ought to venture upon pulling down an edifice which has answered in any tolerable degree for ages the common purposes of society, or on building it up again without having models and patterns of approved utility before his eyes."

Of course, that does not mean that I cannot remain angry about the Puerto Rican attitude toward Vieques.

[cll]

"Of course, that does not mean that I cannot remain angry about the Puerto Rican attitude toward Vieques"

Yet, when the Navy proposed to move the range to South Padre Island and the Texans refused and protested, that was quite alright. But we're Puerto Ricans without political power so we're easy to kick around.

Veterans and others staged numerous counter-protests that most times outnumbered anti-Navy protestors. Of course, that wasn't covered in the MSM so you didn't get that information. Admiral Kevin Green consistently got standing ovations when he spoke at the Rotary Club, at 4th of July activities, at the Army ball, and wherever he could muster an audience. But you did not get any of that information. We fought to keep the Navy here, even if by tradition Puerto Ricans are mostly Army-leaning.

Yet Bubba wouldn't have any of it. He wanted Hillary in the Senate and she needed the so-called Puerto Rican vote in New York. It's because of such idiocy that there's a schism between "Newyoricans" and "Puerto Ricans".

You and others focus on the Navy losing a weapons range in Puerto Rico. When it happens in Hawaii there's not a peep from ya'll. When hordes of mainland and global leftists descended upon Vieques to get some face time on TV, far outnumbering actual Vieques residents, you keep blaming Puerto Ricans, as we're easy to kick around.

So you see, we're powerless and that's the source of our frustrations and social ills. That's why I fight.

But thank you for your interest on the subject.

[cll]

On forced independence and civil war, we have an infantry brigade, three field artillery battalions, close to 200,000 veterans, of which nearly half are in their 50's or younger (Vietnam and post Vietnam), and at least 3 million full blooded Americans that will not stand for it. There are four million Puerto Ricans on the mainland most of whom will not lose their ties with their roots. You figure it out.

What was that line about the tree of freedom needing the blood of patriots and tyrants from time to time?

[Rockingham]

What you overlook is that it is a far different proposition to put in a new base and test range in an area -- South Padre Island -- than to continue one long-established -- Vieques. It is similar to the difference between residents opposing a new highway proposed for a settled neighborhood and residents complaining about noise on a highway that has been there for many decades and has less traffic than ever before.

All credit to those Puerto Ricans who supported Vieques. But Puerto Rican opinion and the body politic were not sufficiently supportive or resolute to dissuade the protesters. Indeed, they gained strength as time went on.

Hillary Clinton and other leftists took up the Vieques issue because it was expected to generate votes for them among Puerto Rican voters in New York and New Jersey. Long before Hillary ever said a word on the subject, I am sure that her polling showed that Vieques would produce a net gain of votes among Puerto Rican voters resident in New York.

Do not get me started about Hawaii's protesters and nativist lobby. Their state created racial and cultural preferences and grievance mongering two generations after statehood and full American legal rights does not support an argument that Puerto Ricans only want equality.

[RedMonqey]

"Harlan was also the lone dissenter in Plessy v. Ferguson.

Truly one of the greatest Supreme Court justices."

Only if you prefer "activist" judges. You must love Souter,Kennedy et. al.
Sorry but the rest voted according to the CONSTITUTION.
To right the wrong of this sacred document,one must AMEND it as proscribed in the manner the Founders created.

[RedMonqey]

"Yet, when the Navy proposed to move the range to South Padre Island and the Texans refused and protested, that was quite alright. But we're Puerto Ricans without political power so we're easy to kick around. "

Get off your high horsr fellow. Have you or your family had your land taken from you? Well my family had not one but TWO farms taken away by this Federal government for Army bases(Ft Campbell, circa 1940)
Quit whining about getting "kicked around" and start acting like "patriots"

[cll]

Interesting. But at least you and your family have Congressmen that are supposed to represent and protect your interests and you also have the power of Electors to kick Presidents in and out of office. We have nothing, zip, zero, nada.

I'll read up more about land takeovers in the mainland for military purposes. I agree that our leftists grievance with the Navy was petty. In fact, Vieques residents are worse off now than when the Navy was there. They can thank Hillary for that. (I live on the main island).

[cll]

"start acting like "patriots"

Here's a sample: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1411806/posts

If you're ever on Caribbean cruise and make a call on San Juan harbor, walk one block north of the cruise ship docks, and on the south side of the "state" capitol you'll find a granite wall with the names of thousands of other KIA patriots, from WWI through OEF/OIF. KIA wearing a U.S. uniform.

[RedMonqey]

I didn't and I don't question the patriotism of Puerto Ricans.
No truer patriot than my old baseball coach. He was born there and fought in Vietnam. Had an 101st Airborne tattoo on one arm and the American flag on the other and numerous scars from shrapnel. He NEVER whined and nether did my uncle about his daddy's farm being taken by the same federal government he fought for in the Pacific during WW ll (served on the USS Tennessee and later the USS Idaho) Or my father during Korea.

I questioned your incessant whining about "getting kicked around" implying it's racism because its Puerto Ricans getting kicked. We all get kicked around but we don't use race as an excuse. That's an Dimos tactic.

[RedMonqey]

AS for representation, the fault(or responsibility lies with the Puerto Rican people themselves. AS we seen with the Vieques problem, the federal government is all too willing to response to the wishes of the majority(or at least to the loudest) Anytime the citizens of that proud island decide their situation is so unbearable, let them hold a referendum about whether to be a state, or independent or keep the status quo.

I believe the last time held such a election the people decide on the latter.

[cll]

Puerto Rican is not a race. Sorry if it sounded like race baiting. I say we're easy to kick around because as a group, defined by geographical location, not race, we have no political power at the national level and that we are governed without our consent. Since we have no political power and there exists not a political process to settle this issue, what can we do but raise our voices in this and every forum that will listen?

According to the Insular Cases, which is nothing but legislation from the bench, Puerto Rico falls under the territorial clause of the Constitution, which means it is up to Congress to legislate a vote with clear choices. The so-called locally produced plesbiscites we've had over the years mean nothing but a show of force by the several political parties prior to a general election.

I urge all Freepers in the "upper" 48 and the other two to press your Congressmen to settle this issue with the territories once and for all.

It will be good for your tax money and it will be good for the islanders as well.

Again, thank you for your interest on the subject.

[RedMonqey]

And I apologise for my mistake. However I firmly believe the future of Puerto Rico is up to the good people of this Island. IMHO,the people of the mainland have no desire to dictate the lives of Puerto Ricans. We both can agree that a small group of self interested groups have put their selfish interests in front of the people, whether on the island or mainland. Until the people grow so restless with the current situation, it will continue.

Just the way the world works.

God be with you.