Letters to the Editor: Trump’s deployment of federal troops isn’t like George Washington’s

To the editor: Contributing writer Josh Hammer is trying to rewrite history with this op-ed (“America wants Trump to fight crime,” Sept. 5). To support President Trump’s threat to send the military to police blue cities like Chicago and Baltimore, Hammer claims that history is on Trump’s side and cites President Washington’s suppression of the Whiskey Rebellion in 1794.

This is a false analogy. Washington led troops into western Pennsylvania to put down a violent uprising of farmers who were flouting a new federal law that taxed whiskey. That’s very different from sending federal troops to perform normal urban policing functions. Hammer’s assertion that “federal force has been called in, or sent in, to assist state-level law enforcement plenty of times” fails to appreciate the current circumstances and purpose of Trump’s proposal. By misinterpreting the past to justify Trump’s actions, Hammer proves what Orwell said 75 years ago: “Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.” We can’t forget “1984.”

Bruce Dickey, Costa Mesa

..

To the editor: Hammer has chosen to gloat instead of questioning the wisdom of consolidating so much power in the executive branch. But the powers Trump now claims, and Hammer now applauds, could create a starkly different existence in the hands of a Democratic administration.

Imagine a Democratic president declaring threats to “national security” (no less plausible than those Trump has declared) concerning climate change, civil rights, education, healthcare and gun violence. Imagine the National Guard or Army pouring into red states to “safeguard” the health, safety, liberty and security of the citizens. Imagine armed troops making sure no more oil is pumped, or stationed inside hospitals to ensure women aren’t kept from receiving reproductive medical care, or in schools ever vigilant that anti-science and religious quackery don’t seep into curriculum.

Conservatives lost their minds over the very nebulous forces of “wokeism,” gender identity and critical race theory. They responded to these threats by empowering the president to use armed forces to secure their policy goals and political retribution. Imagine now the liberal agenda being implemented not by milquetoast NPR debates, academic treatises and newspaper opinion columns but, as Trump has done, by troops rolling down their streets in armored personnel vehicles. Either they are so drunk on power they cannot understand that such a future is entirely plausible now, or they believe Trump will somehow never need to cede power. Neither possibility would make life better in America.

Greg Seyranian, Redondo Beach

..

To the editor: I take strong exception to the basic assertion underlying Hammer’s argument. He states as fact that Trump is on the right side of a clear “80-20 issue,” implying that a huge majority of Americans are in favor of deploying the National Guard to our cities. Balderdash! In reality, a recent CBS News/YouGov poll showed that 58% of Americans oppose such deployments. Clearly, America does not want Trump to “fight crime” in our cities.

Jerry Swovelin, Carlsbad