The Democratic Party: A History Of Anarchy, Part 3

“The presence of Chinese and their competition with free white labor is one of the greatest evils with which any country can be afflicted” Adopted at the 1881 Federation of Labor convention

The collaboration between socialists, trade unions and the Democratic Party started slowly during the late 1800’s as several banking crisis caused businesses to close across the nation. Because of the recent emancipation of the slaves and continuous immigration from Europe and China, there was severe competition for jobs. This resulted in lower wages for white workers as other races were willing to do the same job for lower pay. This caused white laborers to join with socialists and anarchists to form labor unions. The goals of the unions were varied but the most common was higher wages and better working conditions. To do this, they would embrace violence to terrorize foreign workers and intimidate US companies. Over the next several decades, union violence would claim the lives of thousands and destroy millions of dollars of private property.

Between 1852 and 1880, some 300,000 Chinese people fled the ongoing wars in China and immigrated to the American west coast, principally San Francisco. Many would remain in America where they became the principle workers on the Central Pacific railroad’s leg of the first transcontinental railroad. The Chinese were popular with the railroad because they were willing to work for lower wages and perform more dangerous tasks than the white American workers. These traits soon put them at odds with the radical socialists and anarchists of the trade union movement.

Hatred of the Chinese immigrant was the basis of the first collaboration between the Democratic Party and the trade union movement in San Francisco. Baptist Reverend Isaack Kalloch (a Democrat) joined with radical union organizer Denis Kearney to get Kalloch elected as mayor, and enlarge the Workingman’s Party. Their goal was to launch a movement to forcibly evict the Chinese from San Francisco. Denis Kearney was a young Irish immigrant who first gained notoriety by denouncing the Chinese immigrants, then participating in the socialist “Workingman’s Party” riot which killed 4 Chinese and did over $100,000 damage to Chinese owned buildings. Below is a speech made by Kalloch:

“If the men of capital and resources in this city continue to show such criminal indifference, as many of them have, to the suffering of the people; if corporations and large firms continue to take the bread from their children’s mouths and give It to the Chinese dogs, if, in fact, it becomes apparent that there is no hope for American labor, then there will be trouble; then there will be conflagrations; then there will be bloodshed. I say, and I will say it a hundred times more if necessary, that there will be trouble and bloodshed over the Chinese question,”

Joining Kalloch and Kearney in their campaign to expel the Chinese from America was American Federation of Labor president (AFL), Samuel Gompers. Gompers would famously say of the Chinese “the superior whites had to exclude the inferior Asiatics, by law, or if necessary, by force of arms.” Their collaboration was instrumental in the passage of the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 which outlawed Chinese immigration to the US and limited the rights of the Chinese already living here.

Further anti-Chinese labor riots were common all over the US but two of the most violent were led by the Democratic Party in Denver CO. during 1880, while the Seattle, WA riot of 1886 was led by the Knights of Labor union.

During the Presidential election of 1880, a staunchly democratic newspaper began running a series of articles calling the Chinese the “Pest of the Pacific” and warned that “if more Chinese invaded Colorado, white men would starve and white women would be forced into prostitution.” These anti-Chinese articles would be used to justify the mob attack on Denver’s Chinatown, killing one Chinese laundryman and causing some $53,000 in property damage.

The Seattle anti-Chinese riot was also caused by intense labor competition and the anti-Chinese attitude of the growing union movement in the United States. There were several union ringleaders that instigated it but the name most attached to the actual violence of the riot was Daniel Cronin. He was from California and had strong ties to Denis Kearney’s “International Workingman’s Union.” He, like Denis, was an outspoken critic of the Chinese, and the companies that hired them, often stating “there will be riot and bloodshed this winter” if the Chinese did not leave Seattle. True to his word, in February, 1885, he was able to start a riot which left dozens of people injured as the mob literally threw hundreds of Chinese onto boats and trains to evict them from town before burning Chinatown to the ground.

“A Black Skin was a Death Sentence” —Carlos F. Hurd

Union violence converged with democratic racism in East St. Louis during 1917. St. Louis, at the turn of the century was a bustling industrial town with a decidedly white democratic population. With many American companies gearing up for entering into WWI, the demand for workers increased at the same time European immigration stopped. The AFL and other unions seized upon this opportunity to increase the unionizing of American manufacturing by calling numerous strikes all over the nation and particularly in East St. Louis.

To combat these practices, companies began to recruit African-American strikebreakers from the south, bringing them in as replacement workers and helping them settle in. This threatened white worker jobs, and the Democratic Party’s hold over the area.

The St. Louis based Aluminum Ore Co employed thousands of workers and was determined to remain a non-union shop. When the AFL called a strike, the company brought in the African-American strikebreakers that would ultimately crush the union’s power. As the strike lines thinned and more of the white workers crossed the picket lines, the union began to spread rumors of incoming trainloads of African-Americans to colonize East St. Louis which would oust white workers from their jobs and dominate local politics. As confrontation seemed inevitable, both sides began to arm themselves.

Alexander Flannigan, a local lawyer and politician stated at a labor meeting in late June, that “East St Louis must remain a white town” and that “there is no law against mob violence.”

The violence erupted on July 1, 1917, when a group of plain clothed policemen were fired upon as they went through the African-American part of town. The shots killed two officers. In retaliation, a group of whites began to actively beat and/or kill African-Americans and burn down their homes and businesses. By the time the Governor of Illinois had called in the National Guard to stop the violence, the mob had killed between 100 to 200 people and torched over 300 buildings leaving over 6,000 people homeless. A few perpetrators faced justice before the incident was overshadowed by America’s entry into WWI.

“I couldn’t have thrown the bomb. I was at home making bombs.” —Louis Lingg

Beatings, shootings, mob violence and lynchings soon took a back seat as anarchists/socialists introduced a new gruesome weapon in what the New York Times labeled as the “dispensation of dynamite.” There had been bombings prior to the Chicago union strike of 1886, but the Haymarket Square bombing shocked the nation when seven police officers were killed by an unknown assailant throwing dynamite at them. In the aftermath that followed eight anarchists were brought to trial for murder. When in the course of the trials it was determined that none of the defendants had actually thrown the bomb, the police changed the charge to “conspiracy to murder” because in the words of prosecuting attorney Francis Walker: “the eight defendants were part of a vast labor conspiracy to launch a revolution–a conspiracy that cost the lives of dedicated public servants such as patrolman Mathias Degan.” Before the bombing had taken place, one of the defendants, August Spies, had joked with a reporter by saying; “take it to your boss and tell him we have 9,000 more like it,” as he tossed him a casing for a bomb. The democratic Mayor, Harrison Carter, had befriended and defended the socialists and anarchists before and during the trial.

The results of the trial were that seven of the eight were condemned to be hung while the eighth was given a fifteen year prison sentence. When four of the defendants were hung, there was a nationwide outcry, resulting in the remaining three being pardoned after serving six years in prison. Haymarket would turn the defendants into martyrs and become a rallying point for the Weather Underground in 1969 to start another terrorist war on America.

Haymarket marked the beginning of a reign of terror that lasted for decades that included the 1892 bombings of the Bunker Hill mine in Coeur d’Alene, and the Los Angeles Times in 1910, which killed twenty-one people and injured dozens more. The LA Times trial would be labeled as the trial of the century when Clearance Darrow, the famous defense lawyer defended the two McNamara brothers charged with placing the bomb. When the evidence against the brothers became irrefutable, Darrow arranged a plea bargain which sentenced John McNamara to fifteen years and his brother James to life in prison. As he left the courtroom, James yelled out to a reporter; “You see? I was right and you were wrong. The whole damn world believes in dynamite.”

“We will dynamite you,” became the rallying cry of anarchist publications as the wave of bombings peaked in the years 1919 and 1920. In April of 1919, a group of anarchists nicknamed the Galleanists, tried to spark a revolution in the U.S. by sending 36 bombs through the US mail to politicians, bankers, judges and other “enemies” on “May Day.” The majority of the bombs were caught at various Post Offices around the country but one succeeded in blowing the hands off of a maid of US Senator Thomas Hardwick.

The final anarchist strike of the early 20^th century was the 1920 bombing of the headquarters of J.P. Morgan and Co., which killed 38 and injured over 200 people, making it one of the most deadly acts of terrorism in U.S. history. The bomber was never caught but was believed to have been Italian anarchist Mario Buda, a Galleanists and a close associate of Nicola Sacco and Bartolomeo Vanzetti, the Italian anarchists convicted of murdering two bank employees. The Sacco and Vanzetti case is still enshrined by democrats and other left leaning groups as a major case of legal in-justice. In 1977 Democratic Governor of Massachusetts, Michael Dukakis exonerated Sacco and Vanzetti as heroes and martyrs. Considering the strong ties Sacco and Vanzetti had with the Galleanists, one would suspect the 38 killed and hundreds wounded by the bombing of the JP Morgan Building might not have agreed with Dukakis.

A note found in 2005 which had been authored by Upton Sinclair (socialist writer of the novel “The Jungle”) would state that he (Sinclair) met with Sacco’s and Vanzetti’s lawyer, Fred Moore, to discuss the case. Moore would confide to him that Sacco and Vanzetti were both guilty of the crime. Later Sinclair would talk to other anarchists who also confirmed that Sacco and Vanzetti were guilty. In the end, Sinclair asked the note to be hidden.

Following the bombing of the JP Morgan building, the Galleanists, faded into obscurity as many of them were deported back to Europe while the remaining members went into hiding or were jailed.

“ In the city of Boston I cannot stop a jackrabbit, but here in Chicago I can put you out of business and I will if you don’t do what I tell you to” Cornelius P. Shea

During the 1920’s the unions allied with mobsters, labor unions, democrats and communists:

Mob influence in the New York City Democratic Party started in 1931 when mobster Lucky Luciano used armed gunmen to place one of his stooges in a New York City political office. The mob’s control over various construction unions would help finance such powerful political organizations as the Thomas Jefferson Democratic Club of Canarsie, in Brooklyn which was instrumental in the careers of both current NYC Mayor Bill DeBlasio and Harold Ickes, Deputy Chief of Staff under Bill Clinton.
Perhaps no other labor union represents violence, the Democratic Party, corruption, the mob and communism better than the Teamsters:

“Sure, we loaned money to build hotels and casinos in Las Vegas. So what? Las Vegas borrowers were good customers.” —Jimmy Hoffa

Organizing in 1903 under Cornelius Shea, the Teamsters would grow into one of the most powerful unions in the country. Shea’s use of strikes in Chicago helped the union to grow but his personal corruption would almost destroy it before he had been ousted as union president in 1907. Once expelled, Shea became one of Al Capone’s enforcers, specializing in planting bombs to kill and intimidate people, head an extortion ring, and stab his mistress 27 times.

His successor, Daniel J Tobin, would lead the Teamsters from 1907 until 1952. He was closely aligned with FDR and even though he himself was never accused of criminal activities, he most certainly was aware of the strong Teamster ties with the mob in Kansas City, NYC and Chicago. Five of the next six Teamster Presidents would all be convicted of major crimes with the one standout, Frank Fitzsimons, who died before being investigated. All had ties with the mob, including providing loans from union member’s pensions plans to fund hotels in Las Vegas. The Teamsters ties with organized crime and internal corruption are rampant even today and numerous Teamster pension plans are nearly bankrupt because of mismanagement.

Even though Tobin was anti-communist, the most important strike for the Teamsters was orchestrated by the members of the Minneapolis Teamsters Local 574 which was run by members of the Trotskyist Communist Party. The violent 1934 strike would run on and off for months, resulting in four deaths and wounding dozens. After the successful strike was over, the Trotskyist led local would organize some 250,000 Midwest truckers, becoming the Central Conference of Teamsters.

The Teamsters Local 574 strike was used by FDR to help pass the pro-union National Labor Relations Act, or the “Wagner Act.” Union membership would reach its peak after the “Wagner Act” was passed and created close ties between Northern Democrats and the labor unions.

In, 1986, a conflagration burned through the DuPont Plaza Hotel, San Juan, Puerto Rico leaving 97 dead and 140 injured. Within weeks, three Teamster Union members were arrested for starting the fire in a pile of furniture stored in the ballroom. On the day of the fire, the hotel had offered the Teamsters employees a new contract which the union members rejected and then voted to go out on strike. The arsonists were each sentenced to 99 years in prison for setting the second most deadly fire in U.S. history.

Under Ron Carey, Teamster President from 1991 – 1998, the Teamsters became involved in several money laundering schemes with the Clinton Whitehouse, Carey’s plea bargain with the Department of Justice acquitted him of perjury charges but barred him from re-election. Carey’s political director William Hamilton, Jr. would eventually be convicted of misappropriating $885,000 in Teamsters treasury funds and giving them to liberal groups.

Union membership in the private sector has declined from 26 percent in 1979 to today’s 10.7 while union membership in the public sector has actually increased. The decline of union membership along with a change in their long term strategies has caused the Democratic Party to slowly abandon the once mighty alliance they had the craft unions.

In order to uncover fraud and embezzlement committed by union officials, President George Bush Jr encouraged Congress to pass the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act (LMRDA). The LMRDA reforms had revealed over $93 million in stolen union member dues during Bush’s administration. One of President Obama’s first acts was to reverse those reforms as a “thank you” for union money for his election campaign, displaying once again, how little the rank and file manufacturing union member means to the democrats.

By failing to pass the extreme “Employee Free Choice Act,” or rein in the Right to Work Laws established under the Taft-Hartley Act when they controlled both houses of Congress and the White House, the Democratic Party has shown how little they value the craft unions. In fact it was Democrat Bill Clinton that hastened the demise of U.S. manufacturing by signing NAFTA. While the union leadership has remained Democratic Party lapdogs, many union members supported Donald Trump in 2016. This is because the democrats have sacrificed union jobs on the altar of environmentalism and unlimited immigration.

“As the number of legal Hispanics increases, the number of Democratic votes increases as well” Unnamed Democratic “insiders” National Journal Insiders Poll, April 14, 2007

The disastrous Hart-Celler Immigration Act of 1965 was championed by the three Kennedy brothers, John, Robert and Edward and it can be said to be the real Kennedy legacy. This Act ended the national origins quota system began under the Johnson-Reed Immigration Act of 1924 which had installed racial quotas. The Hart-Celler Act doubled the immigration cap to 170,000 people from the eastern hemisphere and 120,000 people from the western hemisphere. The increase in immigration has not proven to be as problematic as the “unintended” consequence of chain migration. Chain Migration allows a US resident to bring family members from foreign countries, who in turn can bring others, none of which are counted towards the immigrant cap.

Whether the democrats foresaw the demographic transformation of the country produced by the Hart-Celler Act or not, embracing that change has become a winning policy for them. In 1965, just four percent of the US population was foreign born; by 2015 it stands at eighteen percent. Seven out of eight immigrants were from Europe in 1960, today, nine out of ten are from Latin America and Asia, with the majority of them being Asian. By 2045, the US Census Bureau projects that whites will become a minority of the US population.

Four US states along with the District of Columbia, are now minority-majority, they are California, Hawaii, New Mexico, and Texas. Since the majority of these immigrants come from socialist nations, they notice little change when they vote for the democrats which have turned California into a one party state. There is not a single Republican elected to a state office today. Immigration has not only allowed the Democrats to seize control over California, they have increased the number of seats California has in the U.S. Congress. For every 770,000 people in a sanctuary city or a state, the democrats will take a Congressional seat from a less populated and generally more conservative state. Unless the immigration policy is immediately changed, the United States will become a one party nation.

The prospect of the immigration policy actually changing however is not very likely as numerous “republican” leaders, lawmakers and “right” leaning think-tanks/lobbying groups such the Brookings Institute and the US Chamber of Commerce all hold pro-immigration views. This at a time when the Democratic Party has been pushing through a program to fundamentally and permanently change the US into a socialist nation and they have been open about it for years:

“Top Democratic leaders and activists see Hispanic migration as a long-term opportunity for the party. The arrival of additional immigrant workers is “bad for blue-collars,” but immigrants can help elect Democratic majorities, and if [a Democratic Congress] were to significantly strengthen unions, then you would offset the negative effect on the income of workers.”

Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., former chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, told National Journal in 2006.

“To get a citizenship bill through Congress, President Bush and the Democrats probably need to convert a large bloc of anti-immigration Republican members, perhaps 40 in the House and 20 in the Senate. Somehow, we have to convince them that voting for comprehensive reform does not amount to ‘enfranchising their defeat. Our problem, is that we are hoping that the legislation will build the Democratic electorate.”

Unnamed Democratic Lawmaker; “Border Politics,” National Journal, Feb. 10, 2007

“So I think there’s two things that matter for the progressive community.”

“Number one, if we are to expand this electorate to win, the progressive community needs to solidly be on the side of immigrants, that we’ll expand and solidify the progressive coalition for the future…” When you are in the middle of a fight for your life you will remember who was there with you. And immigrants count on progressives to be able to do that.”

“Number two: “We reform the immigration laws; it puts 12 million people on the path to citizenship and eventually voters”. Can you imagine if we have, even the same ratio, two out of three? If we have eight million new voters who care about …… and will be voting. We will be creating a governing coalition for the long term, not just for an election cycle.”

SEIU International Executive Vice President Eliseo Medina, 2009

“I am not going to Pennsylvania to recruit back the Trump voters … I am going to Pennsylvania to create new voters.” U.S. Rep. Luis Gutiérrez (D-Ill.) When asked why he was rallying Hispanic voters with an initial a focus on Pennsylvania, Ohio and Florida, with a large Puerto Rican population. 6/24/18

“If @realDonaldTrump declares a “national emergency” to pay for his border wall, we’ll fight him in Congress, in the courts, and in the streets.” — Mike Levin (@MikeLevinCA) January 10, 2019

It is clear that the democrats are not in an all-out war with President Trump over the border wall for their love of America, they are doing it for the same reason Thomas Jefferson may have been willing to spill blood over the 1800 election; the lust for power.

E-Mail Steven Neill: scneill@msn.com

References: