Entering the Neoliberal era, one has to wonder to what extent did the left-wing uprisings from 68-73 have on both the formation of ruling class strategy and consciousness to begin rolling out it’s incredibly reactionary counter-offensive. As the civilizing gains of the Civil Rights movement and Black Power movement begun to genuinely shift consciousness in the United States, we still saw after successive crises in capital (1973-74 and 1979 for the US) the ruling elites use this discombobulating opportunity to gain traction in the single most successful assault on working class gains and human rights as a whole. Such spineless Presidents such as Carter and sociopaths such as Nixon paved the way not only for massive rollbacks on working class organization, but as well as criminalizing black resistance. This criminalization of blacks opposing the United States of Apartheid’s supremacist policies was an important transitional moment. This moment is not only important for it has ruined countless of innocent and valuable lives of freedom fighters, civilians, and genuine people, but as well, it marks the beginning of the “color-blind” construction of laws that explicitly target the black population with out being honest with the public. This construction of a new facade for the white supremacist structure of the American state, built by the same generation of men whom saw being part of the Klan as an honorable legacy and proud slave-owners, was much more honest in the years of the height of the Black Liberation struggle and left-wing upsurge in the United States.
This honesty, to be shrouded by smoke, mirrors, and a carefully constructed PR campaign, would rear it’s head through the fog in “Colonel” Louis O. Giuffrida’s National Surveillance 1970 Thesis surrounding “National Survival – The Racial Imperative”. In this “carefully” constructed thesis, we see Giuffrida not only bracing himself for a “Helter-Skelter” scenario like every other paranoid white man in the United States, but advocating for an internment like situation for blacks before this happens. This chilling paper, written by who would become the FEMA [Federal Emergency Management Agency] director under Reagan (Double Chilling with ahistorical hindsight of watching Michael Brown [Bush FEMA Director] essentially condemn thousands to blacks after Katrina to death with utter apathy) shows that the acceptability of structured racism has official consequences with even ‘Real Politik’ politicians advocating pre-crime statuses to those whom they see as the most prone to destabilize what they see is their nations identity. In this scenario, we see the U.S.’s government representatives view the U.S. identity at risk with black militants asserting their unalienable human right to resist oppressive policies. This identity is that of, what it has remained since 1776, a corrupt and farcical white supremacist empire.
“In the extremely unlikely event that the government were to order the evacuation and detention of all blacks from actual or potential trouble spots, how and by whom would the order be enforced? What are the yardsticks for collecting, evacuating, and interning either militant or pacifistic minority groups; or dissident, potentially disloyal elements; or law-abiding citizens whose only offense is accident of color? Where would the internees be kept? … What would be done with the blacks in the Armed Forces and in civil service and in Congress? The task would be far too large for the Justice Department; it would have to be greatly augmented by military forces, primarily from the United States Army.
The government has historically had the right to protect itself. A government faced with prolonged, simultaneous, apparently coordinated riots disrupting the entire nation to the point where the government feared its very existence was in jeopardy would take many actions which in calmer times would never be considered. “The authority to decide whether the exigency has arisen, belongs exclusively to the President and … his decision is conclusive upon all other persons.” (Martin v. Mott, US Supreme Court 1827).”