The Great Chicago Fire – Lee Habeeb

Dennis Prager had Lee Habeeb on to discuss his article “The Story of the Great Chicago Fire — and Its Great Recovery” Previously I uploaded Habeeb discussing school indoctrination.

Larry Elder mentions this in passing in his book, “TEN THINGS YOU CAN’T SAY IN AMERICA,” in which he notes:

In 1871 a fire nearly destroyed the entire city of Chicago, yet, the city rebuilt itself with virtually no government assistance.

The mayor of Chicago put a nonprofit agency, the Chicago Relief and Aid Society, in charge of accepting and distributing the charitable contributions that poured in from all around the country. The police maintained order and attempted to keep looting to a minimum. But this was about the extent of the government’s role.

Just two weeks after the fire, 0. C. Gibbs of the Chicago Relief and Aid Society issued a circular to all Society personnel. The contents of that memo are worth quoting at length:

Every carpenter or mason can now earn from three to four dollars per day, every laborer two dollars, every half-grown boy one dollar, every woman capable of doing household work from two to three dollars per week and her board . . . Clerks, and persons unaccustomed to outdoor labor, if they cannot find such employment as they have been accustomed to, must take such as is offered or leave the city. Any man, single woman, or boy, able to work and unemployed at this time, is so from choice and not from necessity…

Give no aid to any families who are capable of earning their own support, if fully employed….

No aid should be rendered to persons possessed of property, either personal or real, from which they might, by reasonable exertions, procure the means to supply their wants, nor to those who have friends able to help them.

The Society received some criticism for its arguably bureaucratic way of administering aid, but most observers called its work outstanding. The organization’s meticulous record keeping and careful investigation of applicants helped to detect fraud, making sure beneficiaries truly needed assistance, unlike the “get-in-line, here’s-a-check” mentality of today.

If the city of Chicago, now the nation’s third-largest city, could rebuild itself without government assistance, why assume government is required for individuals to rebuild themselves?

  • (New York, NY: St. Martins Press, 2000), 192-193.

Bait-n-Switch: The War On Statues

RebelPundit Filmmakers Jeremy Segal and Andrew Marcus follow Chicago community organizer, Paul McKinley, on a tour of the south side neighborhood, Washington Park, where they find local residents opposed to a pastor’s calls to remove George Washington’s name and statue from the park.

More bait-n-switch via TOWNHALL:

…..Now, we begin a fight over taking down the hundreds and hundreds of Confederate monuments across the country. After that (and, yes, this part has already started) the battle will be over renaming buildings and streets. Liberals in Memphis literally dug up the graves of Nathan Forrest and his wife; so even removing the corpses of Confederate soldiers isn’t off the table. But that’s it, right? 

Wrong. 

On my new Twitter account What Liberals Say: Liberals in their own words, you’ll see that New York is discussing tearing down a statue of Columbus and even Grant’s Tomb. Meanwhile, liberals in Baltimore took a sledgehammer to a Christopher Columbus monument and even Al Sharpton came out againstthe Thomas Jefferson memorial. 

So, you may think you’re arguing about the Confederate flag or the statue of Robert E. Lee, but liberals are also really arguing about memorials to Columbus, Grant, Jefferson, Washington, Lincoln, you name it. 

Furthermore, not only are you never really arguing about what you think you’re arguing about with a liberal, liberals will paint you as evil for continuing to support something they were backing five minutes ago. How many liberals did you hear demanding gay marriage 20 years ago? Almost none. Then, the second Barack Obama changed his mind about it, everyone who disagreed with gay marriage became a gay-hating homophobe. Did you notice the shocking speed with which we moved from “Liberals would never demand that women share bathrooms with men. That’s crazy….” to, “Anyone who doesn’t support men and women in the same bathroom is transphobic”? …..

 

 

Cam Edwards On Anti-Gun Ad (NRA)

Via THE BLAZE

  • “It’s interesting. The big city with the most unintentional, accidental homicides or accidental killings was Chicago, Illinois, where there are no gun stores and there are no gun ranges and JROTC is not in the school system. There’s no way to get education; there’s no way to get training.

Rapper Shot While Making Black Lives Matter Video (Irony Alert)

One must remember this when thinking about the choices in “Mr. Yella’s” life that led him to this point, via HIP HOP WIKI:

King Yella is a rapper from Chicago, Illinois. He is also a member of the Gangster Disciples gang from the set known as Ada Block (Skeeze World/Skeezy Gang). King Yella is affiliated with rappers and gang members from FBG, (Clout Boyz), Bricksquad, and STL among others. Some of King Yella’s most popular songs include “Hot N*gga Remix,” “Ain’t With That Glo,” and “Clout” among others.

[….]

King Yella has a long standing feud with members of Chief Keef’s GBE/Glo Gang crew. This beef stemmed from a gang beef between the Gangster Disciples and the Black Disciples in Chicago and reached its height following the death of well-known GD rapper Lil Jojo. While King Yella and his affiliates are mostly GDs, majority of the rappers affiliated with Chief Keef are members of the Black Disciples gang. King Yella has dissed Chief Keef’s crew in a number of songs including “Aint With That Glo.”

Here is the video:

MOONBATTERY has this comment about the above:

  • White people are not the problem. The police are not the problem. Slavery 2 centuries ago is not the problem. Given that other communities have guns too (44% of US households), and Chicago has some of the strictest gun laws in the country, guns aren’t the problem either. Could it be that black “oppression” is a self-inflicted cultural issue?

The irony is they probably called the police after. BLUE LIVES MATTER points out the main issue that the Chicago police face, and the communities affected by trying to suppress their policing:

King Yella was only one of ten people shot in Chicago on Wednesday alone. The heroes of Chicago PD are constantly trying to fight back a tide of violence while they aren’t given the resources they need and are facing a hostile public and city administrators

Black Lives Matter has made it clear that they wish to get rid of the police all-together, in favor of “community solutions.” How are those community solutions working for you?

“Parents Are Breeding Murders, Thieves And Rapists”

Video Description:

  • From author “This is how our babies die everyday. I was riding down 154th in Harvey,Illinois and I saw 2 little boys creeping from the side of a building, one on each side. I said they’re bad as hell. Looked in my rear view mirror to see what they were up to, and he’s stuffing what seems to be a gun in his shorts. I went down 2 blocks (not to seem obvious) and turned around, got out and this is what occurred. A passerby happened to see (My cousin who knows this child’s mother) called me and said his mom wants the gun back because she purchased it but clearly in the video the kid says it’s his friends and he’s taking it back to him. I had the mom call me and she is livid! She wants this gun back. 😒 I told her I can’t do that. She said she’d purchase another one. This needs to shared because PARENTS ARE BREEDING MURDERS, THIEVES AND RAPISTS. I hope this goes viral like all the other useless videos I see… This occurred on 4/23/16 in Harvey, ILL which is just 15 minutes south of Chicago, ILL”

A Madison Quote Debunked

Wikiquotes records a person asking if the above quote is authentic. As with other quotes I have dealt with in the past, this one too seems a little too self-serving to be Madison. Here is the question and answer to the above:

I have come across this quote, attributed to Madison, in several blogs, and would like to know if it is authentic.

….I don’t know that De Leon meant that as an exact quote. It appears that he was speaking extemporaneously, not from a prepared statement. The whole convention was “stenographically reported by B. F. Keinard.”

Earlier, in 1889, De Leon had written an essay, The Voice of Madison, discussing what Madison had written about suffrage and property. De Leon’s essay is a little vague, but I believe that he is talking about remarks that Madison made at the Federal Constitutional Convention and later elaborated upon in a series of notes. Madison is talking about whether the right to vote should be limited to landholders, a restriction he opposed.

There is some similarity in theme between the purported quote and Madison’s discussion of suffrage. Madison does say that, as the population increased, the proportion of the population with property, especially farm land, will decrease. And he discusses the inherent conflict between the rights of those with property and those without. But I don’t see anything about our republic being an impossibility.

De Leon’s essay “The Voice of Madison” was reprinted, along with an essay about Karl Marx, in a small book in 1920, prefaced by the quote in question. De Leon had died in 1914, so he didn’t have the chance to proofread this book, so is not responsible for it appearing there. As I said earlier, I’m not sure that he meant it to be taken as an exact quote.

I hope that helps.

[….]

The purported quote looks more like it is De Leon giving his own quick summary of what Madison had to say in the essay which can be found here.

The question then becomes, who Daniel De Leon, and why would he twist Madison so? The answer is that he was a Marxist (propagandist):

Daniel DeLeon (1852–1914) was an American socialist newspaper editor, politician, Marxist theoretician, and trade union organizer. He is regarded as the forefather of the idea of revolutionary industrial unionism and was the leading figure in the Socialist Labor Party of America from 1890 until the time of his death.

Here is an excellent background to this communist/anarcho-leftist movement in Chicago in the late 1800s that included De Leon:

  • Theodore Draper, The Roots of American Communism (New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers, 2003), 13-17.

Also transferred across the Atlantic was the bitter feud between Karl Marx and Michael Bakunin, the son of a Russian nobleman and the father of modern revolutionary anarchism. Bakunin’s ideas and methods became the stock in trade of the nineteenth century’s revolutionary underground—the conspiratorial form of organization, the cult of violence, the loathing of all authority, the quixotic vision of liberty and equality through destruction and chaos. A Revolutionary Socialist party was organized in Chicago in 1881 by an extremist faction which split away from the Socialist Labor party. The arrival in New York the following year of a German Bakuninist, Johann Most, gave the anarchists a mordant spokesman. Most spread the gospel of the “propaganda of the deed,” “expropriation” of the rich, and the beauty of a well-placed stick of dynamite. The “Revolutionary Socialists” and the anarchists united at a convention in Pittsburgh in 1883 and drew up a platform proclaiming that “there is only one remedy left—force.” By 1885, this organization claimed about 7000 members, over twice as many as the politically minded Socialist Labor party.

In a well-ordered society, this sort of agitation might have been dismissed as the ravings of madmen. But the United States of this time was not a particularly well-ordered society. Thousands of immi­grants poured into the country from Europe each year—almost 9,000,000 from 1881 to 1900. The relations between labor and capi­tal were largely undefined and uncontrollable except by sheer force on both sides. Employers fought labor organizations by every possible means. Strikes were ruthlessly crushed by armed guards, police, sheriffs, militia, and federal troops. Court injunctions tied the hands of unions on the mere threat of a strike. Working conditions often ranged from the primitive to the abominable. Bad times followed good times with monotonous regularity.

In this inflammable social climate, socialism, trade unionism, and anarchism were not the only panaceas. When the A.F. of L. was formed, the Knights of Labor boasted three times the membership of the trade unions. The Knights, founded in 1869, came out of a period when labor organizations were compelled to work in secrecy

to overcome the lockouts, blacklists, and forcible resistance of em­ployers. Originally conceived to promote education, mutual aid, and cooperation, it came to spend most of its energy on strikes and boycotts. In one respect, its struggles differed from those of the trade unions: the Knights organized the unskilled and semi-skilled, the trade unions the skilled workers. The decline of the Knights in the period 1886-1900 signified the ascendancy of the skilled craft labor of the trade unions, but the tradition of industrial unionism, which finally prevailed, goes back to the Knights of Labor.

The status quo was challenged from other directions. Henry George attacked land speculation as the source of all social evil and sought to stamp it out by taxing all profits from land equal to the full rental value—the “single tax.” In the great American utopian tradition, Edward Bellamy’s tremendously popular novel, Looking Backward, appeared in 1887. Bellamy’s hero awoke in the year 2000 A.D. to find a world of perfect virtue and virtuous perfection because the state had peacefully expropriated all private industrial enterprise and taken charge of the entire economy on a basis of equality and cooperation. Bellamy’s genteel and ethical vision of socialism ap­pealed to many more native Americans than did Marx’s analysis of the class struggle, but some of those who started with Bellamy ended with Marx. The Christian Socialist movement arose in the late 1880s. Some Protestant thinkers and ministers fought sin in the guise of capitalism and sought salvation in the form of socialism. The essential ideals of socialism were scattered far and wide, and in­corporated into many different systems of thought.

The official Socialist movement, however, was little more than a small, moribund, foreign-language sect until the Socialist Labor party was taken over by that imperious, eccentric, and magnetic personality, Daniel De Leon, in 1890. A lecturer on international law at Columbia University, De Leon had supported Henry George’s candidacy for mayor of New York in 1886 and had passed through both the Knights of Labor and the Bellamy movement. De Leon could not make the S.L.P. into a mass movement but he could give it an unprecedented theoretical vitality. The convert to Marxist doc­trine quickly became its outstanding American interpreter and even went on to do his own thinking in order to fill the gigantic vacuum left by Marx on the nature of the future socialist state. De Leon was a doctrinaire, but a creative one, a combination rarely encountered in Marxian dogmatists. When the future Communist leaders were growing up, De Leon was already a force to be reckoned with, and he initiated some of them into the mysteries of Marxism before that other creative doctrinaire, Lenin, came along to replace him in their affections.

Industrial unionism and Bellamyite utopianism served Eugene Victor Debs as stepping stones to socialism. A former railway fire­man born in Terre Haute, Indiana, Debs organized the American Railway Union on industrial-union lines in 1893. After a turbulent strike against the Pullman car company the following year, a sweeping court injunction, the intervention of government troops, and a debacle for the union, six months in jail for defying the injunction gave Debs the enforced leisure to start studying socialist literature. After this strike setback, Debs devoted himself to a scheme for the cooperative colonization of a sparsely settled Western state. Disap­pointed again, he announced his conversion to socialism in 1897. In­stead of joining forces with De Leon in the Socialist Labor party, how­ever, Debs formed a rival organization, the Social Democratic party, in 1898.

At about the same time, a rebellion began to erupt in the Socialist Labor party. The rebels, led by Morris Hillquit of New York, op­posed De Leon’s domineering personal rule and his anti-A.F. of L. trade-union policy. After much negotiation and maneuvering, the forces behind Debs and Hillquit combined to form the Socialist party of America in 1901. It brought together Christian Socialists and orthodox Marxists, immigrant workers and native intellectuals, trade-union officials and millionaire social reformers. Only a few of the delegates at the first Socialist party convention “had more than the haziest intellectual acquaintance with theoretical Marxism,” writes David A. Shannon. “Certainly the anticapitalism of many of the delegates derived more from Edward Bellamy’s Looking Back­ward than from Das Kapital.”

Those who were looking for a militant, extremist movement, however, were no longer likely to find it in socialism. The most excit­ing new phenomenon in the labor movement in the first decade of the twentieth century—the most impressionable early years of the future Communists—was syndicalism. It arose in the Western states where the craft unionism of the A.F. of L. could not or would not penetrate. The original impulse came from the Western Federation of Miners, formed in 1893 with William D. (Big Bill) Haywood as secretary-treasurer. The mine federation, an industrial union, had stormed out of the A.F. of L., charging lack of support, and had retaliated by setting up independent Western Labor centers, first the Western Labor Union, then the American Labor Union. Finally, a conglomeration of anti-A.F. of L. elements, including those in the American Labor Union, the Socialist Labor party, and the Socialist party, met together to form the Industrial Workers of the World (I.W.W.) at Chicago in 1905. At the outset, it was big enough to hold Debs, De Leon, and Haywood—but not for long.

Though most of the organizers of the I.W.W., including Haywood, were avowed socialists, they did not agree on the road to socialism. The fundamental dispute hinged on the old problem of political versus economic action. Should political parties or trade unions or both make the revolution? The orthodox Marxists put their faith primarily in revolutionary parties; the syndicalists, in revolutionary trade unions. The original preamble of the I.W.W.’s constitution referred to a struggle “on the political as well as on the industrial field.” This phrase did not go far enough for those who believed in revolutionary political activity and went too far for those who believed solely in revolutionary trade unionism. Debs left the I.W.W. in 1906 because he felt that it underestimated the importance of po­litical activity. De Leon was ousted in 1908 in a coup executed by an I.W.W. group more sympathetic to anarchism than to socialism. In that same year, the preamble was changed to eliminate the reference to political activity altogether. The I.W.W. developed into an American variety of anarcho-syndicalism whose battle cries were “direct action,” “sabotage,” and the “general strike.”

The Left Wing of the American labor movement before World War I had its deepest roots in two movements—socialism and syndicalism. Therefore it did not have a single home. It was in the main divided in its loyalties among three organizations—the Social­ist Labor party, the Socialist party, and the I.W.W. But that elusive and yet indispensable term—the Left Wing—cannot be fully under­stood organizationally. There are usually a number of rival groups within the Left Wing, each claiming to be the only true Left. The Left Wing of one period differs from the Left Wing of other periods. This instability is characteristic of a term which does not stand for a party or a program but rather for a relative position, and often only for a vague state of mind.

Nevertheless, there has been something like a historic Left in the American labor movement. As one Left Wing has followed an­other, a number of basic issues have recurred again and again. Since the Left Wing was less an organization than a fluctuating body of attitudes and ideas, these issues, more than anything else, gave it an enduring character.

Chicago Islamic Center Imam Urges Jihad Against Israel

Via Creeping Sharia:

Mohamed Elimam: Oh, those of you who want to wage Jihad for the sake of Allah, Palestine is calling you and Gaza is crying out for your help. If you are true believers, real mujahideen, hasten to Palestine. However, if you are collaborators with those who give you weapons and money, then keep indulging yourselves with this money of yours.

[…]

[The Koran says:] “Prepare for them what force and steeds of war you can, to strike fear in the hearts of the enemy of Allah and of your own, and others besides them, whom you do not know, but Allah knows.” All the Arabs have abandoned our brothers in Palestine, and the Muslims are oblivious to them, but Allah supports them. They have prepared for battle. Even if the resistance cannot match [Israel] in numbers and equipment, it does in spirit and steadfastness, as mothers sacrifice their sons and wives sacrifice their husbands for the sake of Allah.

Jihad Watch has this commentary:

This is odd. When non-Muslim analysts of jihad terror quote Qur’an 8:60, “strike fear [or terror] into the hearts of the enemies of Allah,” and other verses of the Qur’an like it, Islamic spokesmen in the West invariably charge that they’re taking it out of context, and that it only applies to a very limited situation in Muhammad’s day, and not to the present. Is Chicago imam Mohamed Elimam learning Islam from the writings of greasy Islamophobes?

“Chicago Imam Encourages Jihad against Israel,” MEMRI, n.d….

…read more….

Chicago Files: 4-Dead and 6-year-old girl Shot ~ But Hey, Let`s March for Trayvon

Via Gateway Pundit:

  • Hundreds attended the ‘Justice for Trayvon Martin’ rally yesterday in Chicago.
  • Meanwhile, a six year-old girl was shot Friday while at a memorial for a loved one gunned down five years ago.
  • And at least four people were killed and nine wounded in Chicago shootings on Saturday night.

 

School Reformer, Author, and Principle-Dr. Steve Perry, Is Interviewed In Regards to the Chicago Teachers Strike

From video description:

Michael Medved interviews principle and author of, Push Has Come to Shove: Getting Our Kids the Education They Deserve–Even If It Means Picking a Fight, Dr. Steve Perry. (Posted by: Religio-Political Talk) Topics discussed are, what exactly the strike is over, some of the particulars in the matter, what true reform is, with of course the ineffable commentary by Medved. Jay Carney, White House Spokes-Person, even makes a cameo appearance.

For more clear thinking like this from Michael Medved… I invite you to visit: https://www.medvedmedhead.com/