Tag: Ronald Reagan

When Leaving, Go Via London

Richard Barnes

When on work assignments, I’d often write journals, hoping to share with friends and family later on in life.

At the end of an assignment in the Arabian Peninsula, my departure took me via London. Having seen recent, disturbing reports from there, I thought you would like to read my personal impressions and interactions as I returned to the United States in 2015.

London, 2015:

The cab driver said, “I’m sure Dallas is a fine city. But I’ve travelled much, and I’m even what most would call ‘a right winger’, but, to me, London is the best city in the world.'”

You do not have to agree with him, but you certainly can understand his sentiment. We can at least agree that London is a fine city, whose Christian capital has endured far longer than I would have estimated. I cannot imagine it can last much longer, absent another Reformation. But, for now, if you gave me a choice between Dubai, New York, Singapore, and London, I’d go for London.

I’ll have more about my conversations with two cab drivers further below.

Visiting the famous Burlington Arcade I saw that several stores had “disappeared”, including Pickett, the fine leather goods store. However, I was happy to learn that Pickett had merely moved outside, between the Arcade and Regent Street. I bought a portfolio there. The one that Arthur Andersen had given me finally bit the dust after 33 years of service. Good things, if cared for properly, will last half a lifetime, or more.

Regent Street is known as a “shoppers paradise.” Since I am not a shopper, it’s not paradise to me, but it is a nice street to walk and observe peoples from all over the world and laugh at little children tugging at their parents to get out of Burberry’s and go to Hamley’s.

Hamley’s, founded in 1760, is five stories of toys. Being Saturday, it was pandemonium. On the fourth story they had “snack bars” of cotton candy, sweets, chocolates, shakes — just the sort of thing to keep the little kiddies quiet for Mommy and Daddy. It was a circus: vendors loudly proclaiming the wonders of their flying machines, magic lights, boomerangs, plush animals. They should have filmed Jingle All The Way here.

One major disappointment, though not surprising: almost everything was made in China. Even the London double decker toys and the England history toys and the die cast English vehicles. I saw a few things made in Belgium and one thing made in France. But nothing made in England. Of course, I did not check “everything” (I would have still been there!); but it was sad. What? Westerners can’t make toys anymore?

When you say “Let’s go to the food court” to an American, they’ll imagine you mean the Dallas Galleria, or, when in Puerto Rico, the Plaza Las Americas. However, to a European, “Food Court” conjures up a completely different scene. I had a light lunch at a sidewalk cafe in a food court off Regent Street: caprese salad with homemade bread dipped in olive oil.

And there is Berkeley Square, dating back to the 1700’s. Used to be only residential. Today only one residential block remains and it’s not cheap but flats rarely come up for sale anyway. No, I didn’t hear a nightingale, but I’m sure it sang in Berkeley Square, because Nat King Cole heard it there once.

The cab driver who drove me to London Center was of Indian heritage. We talked about how quickly subsequent generations forget their own history. His children know nothing about “the largest migration in history”, which occurred a mere 70 years ago, at the time of the partition of India. He said that about 130 million migrated from India to Pakistan or vice-versa. In addition, many hundreds of thousands, if not millions, left the sub-continent altogether. Including his own parents, who came to London, where he was born.

“And about 10 million were slaughtered,” I added.

“No,” he corrected me, “20 million.”

I do not know if his figures are correct; but I do know that is an ugly part of modern history of which we hear very little. It is also a blot on British colonial (mis)government. There was no need to succumb so quickly and so pathetically to calls (including calls from the U.S., I might add) for “de-colonization now!” But they supinely did so. And now they are criticized for mismanagement of the event. You never win in these situations.

But, back to London. The cab driver went on to tell me how the younger generations simply do not care. They’ll take fish and chips over Asian spice; English over Urdu; hip-hop over Punjabi; etc.

That last one is truly tragic. But I understood where he was coming from and sympathized with him.

“Even I myself have begun forgetting my history; not to mention my descendants. They forget their religion, their history, their food — now it’s fish and chips and Irish beef.”

As we drove by the Ritz, I noted, “I understand that Prime Minister Thatcher lived here towards the end of her life.”

“Yes she spent the last 6 months of her life here. She died here. But she was content. Many of her friends would come and visit her. She was content. She and Ronald Reagan were the best political partnership in our time.”

I also spoke with the cab driver who took me back out to the hotel in Terminal 5 at the end of my visit.

He too said, “Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher were the best partnership ever. And George W. Bush and Tony Blair were a disaster from which we still cannot recover.”

He buys his shoes at Church’s, although he did not know they had been acquired by Prada. I warned him the shoes were now looking more and more “ritzy.” He was disappointed. He has been married 29 years and still uses the Church shoes he bought for his wedding day. “I always wait for a sale. Sometimes a GBP300 pair of shoes is down to GBP 90!” That’s about $480 down to about $234.

He’s been driving a cab for 29 years.

He owns a house in Cyprus (in addition to his home in London); he buys his shoes at Church’s; he visits Cyprus 3 or 4 times a year. And he has 4 grown children; all doing him proud. Yes, he and his wife are thrifty and his children too.

Earlier, upon arrival in early morning, I had breakfast at the Heathrow Terminal 5 lounge. Then I did a bit of work in the business lounge area and once again saw the TV preachers on screen. Their hair styles were cute and their smiles were sweet and, depending on their audience, one wore a neat leather jacket, like Marlon Brando in The Wild One, and another looked like he had just stepped out of Saks Fifth Avenue. The musicians gave the impression they were performing on some night show.

I remembered that as I pondered my conversations with the cab drivers.

The mass migration facilitated by our politicians, both in Europe as well as in the United States, can overwhelm and transform us negatively. But it need not be so.

The Church, the masculine Church, can also make it a great and grand opportunity, much as the Puritans did when the Crown was sending its criminal element to our shores. Our fathers would meet them at the docks and instruct them in the Bible and in colonial laws.

If later generations forget where they came from, as the cab driver said, then why can’t the Church tell them where they can head to, in Christ? We possess a great arsenal. We must use it to advance God’s Kingdom. And, simultaneously, we would be defending our own culture and country while also helping those who arrive.

Interestingly, both cab drivers I interacted with, one of Indian descent, the other, Anglo, had similar outlooks. Decent outlooks. I would proudly call either a friend and wish I had had more time with each.

I enjoyed dinner at La Belle Epoque, a fine restaurant at the hotel. It was not as expensive as others, but, again, we must note that elegance is not “ritziness.” It is simplicity; it is as little clutter as possible, even on the dishes.

Regent Street, London, 2015

Hamley’s, London, 2015

Food Court off Regent Street, London, 2015

Berkeley Square, London, 2015

Pickett, Outside Burlington Arcade, London, 2015

Edward Winslow and His Friend, Massasoit

Richard Barnes

Much history concerning the New England Pilgrims is relatively unknown. This is unfortunate, especially given the flagrant tergiversations of American history by those whose mission is to teach our children to hate their country. 

This short post on this Thanksgiving Day, of 2023, will tell a little about Edward Winslow, who is inextricably bound not only with the Plymouth Colony but with the Wampanoag Chief, Massasoit. Although he was one of the signers of the Mayflower Compact, his name nevertheless remains relatively obscure.

Winslow was one of the best educated among the Pilgrims. He was the son of a prominent merchant in the salt industry in England; a Puritan as distinguished from a Pilgrim Separatist. However, in Holland, he became acquainted with William Brewster and Winslow himself joined the Pilgrim congregation which eventually sailed to the New World. 

Winslow’s education and temperament propelled him to eminence among both the Pilgrims and the Indians. He was chosen to greet Massasoit on the chief’s first visit to the Plymouth Colony. They became immediate friends and Winslow became the primary author of the Pilgrim-Wampanoag Peace Treaty that was signed on April 1, 1621. This was a notable accomplishment as the treaty remained in force for over 50 years, outlasting the lives of William Bradford, Winslow, and Massasoit. 

It is the only such treaty to have been honored throughout the lives of its signatories. “It established the longest-lasting and most equitable peace between natives and immigrants in the history of what would become the United States.” Put another way, in the face of bloody conflicts between other colonists and tribes, such as the Pequot War in Connecticut, the Pilgrims had no such conflicts. A most unusual and worthy feat for which we can be grateful to Edward Winslow and Massasoit.

Winslow wrote about the Plymouth colony that it was a community “not laid upon schism, division, or separation, but upon love, peace, and holiness; yea, such love and mutual care of the Church of Leyden for the spreading of the Gospel, the welfare of each other and their posterities to succeeding generations, is seldom found on earth.”

Winslow lived what he wrote.

In 1623 word reached the colony that Massasoit was very ill, near death. Winslow, accompanied by a Pilgrim and an Indian, immediately departed on a 40-mile journey, by foot, to his friend. He did what he could, including chicken soup. “There is a wonderful relation by Winslow about going to Massasoit’s home and making chicken broth for him,” a historian writes. “It’s very tender.”

Massasoit recovered and said, “Now I see the English are my friends and love me.” 

Winslow was also able to nurse back to health several other Indians who seemed to have been stricken with the same disease. As a result, Massasoit bound himself more firmly with the Pilgrims.

Winslow’s comments about the foundation of love undergirding Plymouth Colony were true. This love enabled tolerance towards those who did not subscribe to the Pilgrim tenets and, most importantly, towards the Indians whom they served and sought to help, even as they, the Pilgrims, had been helped.

Winslow proclaimed the success of the Pilgrims in England, earning the respect and admiration of Oliver Cromwell who assigned him to various diplomatic tasks, the last of which was Cromwell’s appointment of Winslow as governor of Jamaica.

However, the Lord had a different purpose. Edward Winslow took ill and died on the open seas, on his journey to Jamaica, in 1655.

Our early and colonial history is rich with truly remarkable men and women. It is critical to know that history and teach it to our children.

With that very brief background about one of the individuals on the Mayflower and his Indian friend, it is most appropriate to conclude with President Ronald Reagan’s last Thanksgiving Proclamation, given in 1988:

“In this year when we as a people enjoy the fruits of economic growth and international cooperation, let us take time both to remember the sacrifices that have made this harvest possible and the needs of those who do not fully partake of its benefits.

“The wonder of our agricultural abundance must be recalled as the work of farmers who, under the best and worst of conditions, give their all to raise food upon the land.

“The gratitude that fills our being must be tempered with compassion for the needy.

“The blessings that are ours must be understood as the gift of a loving God Whose greatest gift is healing.

“Let us join then, with the psalmist of old: O give thanks to the Lord, call on His name, Make known His deeds among the peoples!

“Sing to Him, sing praises to Him, Tell of all His wonderful works!

“Glory in His holy name; Let the hearts of those who seek the Lord rejoice!

“NOW, THEREFORE, I, RONALD REAGAN, President of the United States of America, do hereby proclaim Thursday, November 24, 1988, as a National Day of thanksgiving, and I call upon the citizens of this great Nation to gather together in homes and places of worship on that day of thanks to affirm by their prayers and their gratitude the many blessings God has bestowed upon us.”

Edward Winslow (1595-1655)

Massasoit (circa 1581-circa 1661)

Signing of the Mayflower Compact; Edward Winslow is standing at center, right hand on the table, left hand holding the ink bottle.

Pilgrim-Wampanoag Peace Treaty, April 1, 1621

President Ronald W. Reagan (1911-2004)

All Within the State: Understanding the Cuba – Venezuela Nexus II: Spurning Fidel

Richard Barnes

“What I want to say I’ll say even more forcefully. If the Castro regime continues with its policy of aggression against Venezuela and [other countries] the moment will come when those governments will lead a joint action of their armed forces by air, sea, and land to make war on Fidel Castro, on his 300 thousand militias, and on his Soviet military advisors.” — Rómulo Betancourt, papers, 1972

While it is true that Rómulo Betancourt founded the Communist Party of Costa Rica in the 1930s, it is also true that he moderated his views over the years. 

That allowed him to see through and size up Castro very quickly: he must have wondered why many in Venezuela’s army leadership seemingly did not see what he saw. Vice Admiral Wolfgang Larrazábal, the leader of the military coup against Marcos Pérez Jiménez in 1958 and the provisional government’s president, was at the very least sympathetic to Fidel Castro, even giving the effusive welcome speech on Castro’s arrival in 1959. Although he vehemently denied providing weapons to Castro’s Communist guerrillas, there is much evidence to the contrary, including a letter from Fidel thanking him for his “noble gesture.”

(Although seemingly counterintuitive, the Venezuelan army was mined with leftists enamored with Communism. For example, Wolfgang Larrazábal ran for president, with Communist support. He was defeated by Betancourt. And we should not forget that Hugo Chávez himself came to prominence leading two Communist-supported army coup attempts in 1992. We in the West all-too-often unthinkingly genuflect before military leaders. We should be more cautious.)

But Larrazábal had plenty of company: Fidel was feted by many Venezuelan luminaries, including future president, Rafael Caldera, perennial presidential candidates and political leaders, such as Jóvito Villalba, and intellectual elites such as Prieto Figueroa.

President Betancourt was the only major politician in Venezuela, and very likely in all of Latin America, who understood from the start the grave danger Castro posed to national, regional, and hemispheric stability. He recognized a “gangster” who sat before him in 1959. He readily understood that this man was willing to sink his own island nation just to retain power or destroy the United States — preferably both — by any means necessary. His willingness, nay, his craving to destroy became clear to the rest of the world a few short years later during the 1962 missile crisis. This suicidal disposition is a common trait with apocalyptic dictators, including Hitler.

Betancourt, almost alone, saw this.

In 1972 he led efforts to raise a legitimate multinational Latin American army to confront Castro’s tyranny. However, this objective died along with Betancourt’s failing health and subsequent death in 1981.

But his greatest legacy also became a danger to his country and region: he not only spurned Fidel Castro, he defeated him time and again. Castro backed deadly guerrilla and army uprisings in Venezuela, including Barcelona in 1961 and Carúpano and Puerto Cabello in 1962, not to mention the very real attempts to disrupt the 1963 elections. Betancourt’s energy and vigilance ensured the defeat of all such attempts, which inflicted great loss of life and property. And profoundly angered the Cuban dictator.

We must also credit his successor, President Raúl Leoni, who acted with energy in repulsing Castro’s attacks, including an armed landing in 1967 of Cubans and Venezuelans trained in Cuba. President Leoni’s 5-year term was also attacked by Communist activists and guerrillas including yet another military coup attempt in 1966, which was quickly squashed. That same year, Leoni felt compelled to order an army search for revolutionaries in Central University in Caracas. By the end of his term, however, most subversive activity had practically ceased.

Castro never gave up on his designs on Venezuela. After Betancourt, his obsession grew apace.

In the high councils of Havana, it must have grated when another politician who saw through Castro uttered the following words upon President Betancourt’s death: 

“I speak for all Americans in expressing our heartfelt sadness at the death of Rómulo Betancourt. While he was first and foremost a Venezuelan patriot, Rómulo Betancourt was an especially close friend of the United States. During the 1950s he considered the United States a refuge while he was in exile, and we were proud to receive him. We are honored that this courageous man whose life was dedicated to the principles of liberty and justice spent his final days on our shores. We join the Venezuelan people and those who love freedom around the world in mourning his death.” — President Ronald Reagan, September, 1981

It is necessary to understand the above background if one is to understand the Cuba-Venezuela nexus and the quid pro quo between Castro, Chávez, and Maduro.

To be continued.

Large crowds welcoming Fidel Castro on his visit to Venezuela, January, 1959. He was invited by Vice-Admiral Wolfgang Larrazábal, leader of the military coup against Marcos Pérez Jiménez. The crowds were composed mostly of the recently legalized Communist Party in Venezuela (Betancourt later outlawed it), but also, it must be said, many in the AD and other parties.
Father Luis Manuel Padilla holds a dying Venezuelan soldier shot down in Puerto Cabello, Venezuela, during an army uprising of leftist army personnel backed by Fidel Castro’s Cuba. It was put down by Betancourt’s army but not before 200 soldiers and 400 rebels were killed. Photo above won the Pulitzer Prize for Héctor Rondón Lovera in 1963. 
Castro with Venezuelan politicians, clockwise, beginning from upper left: Wolfgang Larrazábal, Betancourt, Carlos Andrés Pérez, and Hugo Chávez.

November 11: 1918 and 1620 (Written on November 11, 2020)

Richard Barnes

All the best to our veterans and their families today. 

As most Americans know, or should know, this day was once known as Armistice Day, commemorating the ceasing of hostilities of World War I (“The Great War”) at the 11th hour of the 11th day of the 11th month of 1918. It was renamed “Veterans Day” in the USA in 1954. 

But that’s not the November 11 I’d like to address in this post. 

Earlier today, as I was beginning to put these thoughts on paper, my younger daughters shared a quote by Ronald Reagan: “We are never defeated unless we give up on God.” That further reminded me of today’s topic: The Mayflower Compact, which was signed on November 11, 1620, 400 years ago today. 

America’s history, including the constitutions of the 13 colonies, the Declaration of Independence, the United States Constitution, and the constitutions of the states simply cannot be understood if we ignore the covenantal nature of our founding.

Although 20th century historians began to insist that ours was an “Enlightenment” founding, and by that, they meant a secular founding, the truth is otherwise, and is far more interesting and meaningful. 

Some date The Enlightenment around the mid-17th century, either with Descartes’ declaration, “I think, therefore, I Am” in 1637, or Newton’s Principia Mathematica in 1687; however, the Enlightenment is mostly identified with the French philosophes and atheists such as Voltaire. Perhaps we should date it according to most French historians, somewhere between 1715 – 1789, meaning the period between the death of Louis XIV until the French Revolution.

Modern historians swoon over this period, assuring us that we inherited religious toleration, separation of church and state, not to mention our very liberties from this Age. 

But “by their fruits ye shall know them”.

The fruits of the Enlightenment are most evident in the French Revolution and its progeny, including the blood soaked South American revolutions of the 19th century, the Russian Revolution of the early 20th, and various and sundry others, mostly characterized by bloodshed, tyranny, and chaos.

For more on the French Revolution see July 14 and More on July 14. 

The United States owe their liberties and religious toleration and much more, not to the Enlightenment but to the Protestant Reformation. It is not for nothing that the German historian, Leopold von Ranke, wrote, “Calvin was virtually the founder of America.” American historian, George Bancroft, agreed, “He who will not honor the memory and respect the influence of Calvin knows but little of the origin of American liberty.”

To take only one example, the Puritan divine, Richard Baxter, wrote in 1659: 

“And where his [the ruler’s] Covenants with his people limit him, he hath no power in the exempt points: e. g. if he be restrained from raising taxes without the people’s consent, if he yet command the payment of such taxes, he doth so not by Authority: for neither God nor man did ever give him Authority thereto.”

These and words such as these were very familiar to the Founders, the preachers, and the people in the American colonies for a century before 1776.

Ambrose Serle, secretary to British General Howe in New York City, wrote to the British Secretary of State in 1776 telling him that the American Revolution was ultimately a religious war. And Serle was no ordinary observer. He knew whereof he spoke. But he was one of many who made this observation. A Hessian soldier fighting for England said, “Call this war, dearest friend, by whatsoever name you may, only call it not an American Revolution, it is nothing more nor less than an Irish-Scotch Presbyterian Rebellion.” A later historian, John C. Miller, who specialized in America’s early history, wrote, “To the end, the Churchmen [Church of England] believed that the Revolution was a Presbyterian-Congregationalist plot.”

There are many such references, including comments from King George himself, who believed that the rebels were Presbyterians. 

There is much, much more, but the above is enough to note the importance of the Mayflower Compact.

The Compact was signed by all on the Mayflower and predated the earliest date of the Renaissance by decades, and the more accepted dates, by a century. It was not an Enlightenment document but rather a most covenantal, Christian one.

In brief, the Mayflower was blown 300 miles off course by a storm and, instead of arriving in Virginia, she anchored off the coast of Massachusetts. And that was a major problem because they now were under no one’s immediate jurisdiction. Rebellion and “we’ll-do-as-we-please” began almost immediately to foment within her bowels.

We must remember that of the 102 passengers on the ship, only 41 were true Pilgrims, religious separatists. The others, whom the Pilgrims called “strangers”, were merchants, craftsmen, indentured servants, and orphaned children. This was the primary source of the rapidly rising anarchistic impulses.

The Pilgrims huddled together amongst themselves and drew up an agreement, a sacred “covenant,” making them a “civil body politic” and promising “just and equal laws.” They had already done this as a congregation of like-minded believers; however, they now had 61 persons who did not belong to their group. Hence, their political document which all signed, even the indentured servants.

This document was signed before they left the ship and quieted those “strangers” who were making “discontented and mutinous speeches.” It was designed to stop the impulse of every man or woman to do as he or she pleased, or to succumb to the spirit of every-man-for-himself.

The Pilgrims knew that for their colony to be successful, they needed folks to be law abiding and productive. 

And so, on November 11, 1620, 400 years ago today, the Compact was signed. 

And, in my opinion, this goes a long way to explaining why Plymouth Colony was long-lasting, remaining faithful to her Compact until 1691 when they became part of Massachusetts Bay Colony. By contrast, the famous Jamestown Colony was characterized by disastrous governments and was even abandoned in 1610, although later settled once more.

Calvin Coolidge said this about the compact, 300 years after its signing:

“The compact which they signed was an event of the greatest importance. It was the foundation of liberty based on law and order, and that tradition has been steadily upheld. They drew up a form of government which has been designated as the first real constitution of modern times. It was democratic, an acknowledgement of liberty under law and order and the giving to each person the right to participate in the government, while they promised to be obedient to the laws.

“But the really wonderful thing was that they had the power and strength of character to abide by it and live by it from that day to this. Some governments are better than others. But any form of government is better than anarchy, and any attempt to tear down government is an attempt to wreck civilization.”

The first words of the Compact are: “In the name of God, Amen.” 

Alexander Solzhenitsyn said, “To destroy a country, you must first cut off its roots.”

Let us commit to teaching America’s history aright to our children and grandchildren.

Reading of one of Voltaire’s works in a French salon, circa 1750.
François-Marie Arouet Voltaire (1694-1778)
Frequent scenes during the French Revolution.
YouTube screen grab of “celebrations” in DC after the media declared former Vice-President Joe Biden the winner in last week’s election. The similarities to the French Revolution are not coincidental nor accidental.
Image for the United States seal proposed by Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, and John Adams. The allusion to Moses and to the Lord’s drowning of Pharaoh’s armies in the sea are unmistakable.
This collection is over 1,500 closely typed pages. One cannot be honest about our country’s founding while also ignoring her religious roots.
Replica of the Mayflower Compact. The original has been lost, but a duplicate from 1622 exists.

Universities: 1960’s

Richard Barnes

John Gunther’s Inside South America gives a concise overview of universities in South America in the 1960’s. Gunther had a gimlet eye towards those who were slightly to the right of Franklin Roosevelt, whom he would debrief after his trips to the continent. I say this only to note that his perspective was left-of-center. As far as education, he was a Deweyite. So his comments on universities in South America — comments which apply to Venezuela — are “friendly” — he did not think they were controversial in that day, the day of Kennedy’s Alliance for Progress, and Johnson’s Great Society:

“South American universities differ markedly from ours in many respects. Students in some schools have such freedom that they do not even have to attend classes, and scholastic discipline is lax. (Of course, this is true in England and much of Western Europe too.) … Education is a serious matter. A student is apt to take himself much more seriously than ours do; to be a student is practically to be a member of a profession. Most students are passionately political, and many are Communists or Communist-inspired. Student councils are powerful, and actively assist in the running of most hemisphere universities and … have an official voice in appointing faculty members to positions of tenure. This has been a rule for a long time in several South American institutions.

“[T]he national university is theoretically exempt from search or seizure by army, police, or other government authorities; students have, in a word, immunity from arrest.

“….[Students feel] liberated all over the continent. Their political self-consciousness and assurance have increased ever since [the early 20th century]. Having the right of refuge, they have more temptation to defy authority. Moreover, the universities became convenient asylums for bogus students, semi-students, and the like….

“Students make demonstrations, cripple the continuity of teaching by prolonged strikes, and take political sides…it is part of the profession of being a student. As to Communism it is undeniable that there are strong Communist or extreme left-wing elements today in almost all the national universities, both in the faculties and student bodies….

“Student violence should be taken with a certain perspective…. When a student throws a rock at a window this is not an example of mere hooliganism, but part of an essential revolutionary mood and mentality. The student has no other way of expressing immediate effective protest [sic!].”

Again, the above is from a friendly source. The schizophrenic nature of intellectuals’ rationalization of indefensible behavior is succinctly captured: students are fully in control, they launch prolonged strikes, yet they have no way of “immediate effective protest.” Glad he cleared that up.

In Venezuela student strikes would often turn violent. To take one example from the mid-60’s: stopping taxis, turning them over, setting them on fire. All for the purpose of supporting a transportation strike.

This problem was not new in Venezuela. In 1896, Richard Harding Davis in Three Gringos in Venezuela told of an American photographer stoned by students and concluded with these remarks: “And I am sure that the Venezuelan fathers would do much better by their sons if they would cease to speak of the University in awe-stricken tones, but would rather take away the boys’ revolvers, teach them football, and thrash them soundly whenever they caught them soiling the walls of their alma mater with nasty verses.”

When news outlets were quick to “report” that the mob who attacked Vice-President Nixon and his wife in 1958 were angry students, many, if not most, throughout the country knew that those mobs were instigated by Communist agitators and such was later confirmed. As recently as 2005, during my visit, a government organ celebrated that event and praised the Communist Youth for their actions and leadership in the mob attack. 

In mid-1960’s United States (the time of Gunther’s visit in Venezuela) most institutions still saw the university’s purpose as the transmission of culture, of civilization. John Henry Newman put it this way, “…a habit of mind is formed which lasts through a life, of which the attributes are freedom, equitableness, calmness, moderation, and wisdom; of what… I have ventured to call the philosophical habit of mind.”  

Russell Kirk expands further, “…genuine education is something higher than an instrument of public policy. True education is meant to develop the individual human being, the person, rather than to serve the state. We tend to ignore the fact that schooling was not originated by the modern nation-state. Formal schooling actually commenced as an endeavor to acquaint the rising generation with religious knowledge: with awareness of the transcendent and with moral truths. Its purpose was not to indoctrinate a young person in civics, but rather to teach what it is to be a true human being, living within a moral order….”

Too many fail to grasp that student protest behavior in an otherwise civilized society significantly increases the power of the state, which ostensibly is contrary to what students want. However, notice to whom the students appeal in such disruptions. Is it not to the state? Is it not to compel or urge the state to take such and such an action or to prohibit this or that speech or behavior, even to the criminalization of thought and belief? How many such major student protests appeal to the Triune God? None come to mind.

Some insist that such protests merely promote anarchy. That is obviously true in many cases; however, anarchy also ends up increasing the power of the state, which will restore immediate order and then see to it that it is ever-present to prevent a repetition of such actions.

A few years after Mr. Gunther’s visit to Venezuela, Columbia University in New York City was “occupied” by student protesters. Their actions included defecating into the college president’s office wastebaskets.

And a year after that, Berkeley riots were dealt with by then California Governor Ronald Reagan, who had no patience with the intellectuals’ justification of such behavior.

A measure of the effectiveness of anarchic actions can be seen in the number of pages in the federal register. The register had 14,479 pages in 1960 compared to 97,110 in 2016. In that span of time, there were only two years with significant reductions from the previous year: from 87,012 pages in 1980 to 63,554 pages in 1981; and from 97,110 pages in 2016 to 61,949 pages in 2017. Other than those two years, the numbers have skyrocketed since 1960. And this doesn’t even consider state and local regulations.

Educational institutions bear a major responsibility for this increase in the intrusiveness of the state, as they produce our leaders in thought, politics, and morality.

I am in great sympathy with the students in Venezuela who today protest at the tyranny under which they struggle. I want them to “win.” Many have been killed.

However, do they realize that they were not well served by their predecessors, who, in effect, rioted and struck and protested in favor of a system akin to that which rules there now? That’s a harsh thing to write and it hurts to write it. But sometimes the truth is harsh. May we learn to pause in order to ponder what brought us to this point. As we’ve seen in prior posts and will continue to see in future posts, Venezuelan, and much of South American history is more reflective of the French Revolution than of the American. This helps explain, at least in part, what has brought us to this pass.

Pray for Venezuela.

Mr. and Mrs. Richard Nixon attacked by student mob in Venezuela in 1958
Génesis Carmona, former Venezuelan beauty queen shot dead at a student protest in 2014
Miguel Castillo shot at point blank with smoke grenade by “security police” who then rode away (2017)
Students “liberate” Columbia University in 1968 (New York City)
Berkley University riots in 1969. The actions of the “students” were beyond filthy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y2j4ndg51BQ
Gov. Ronald Reagan rebukes the students and the faculty of Berkeley University
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fx6_9z3ujik
In the same press conference Governor Reagan accuses a professor, “You are a liar,” to his face. This, at a time when words meant something. The sound is not the best.