There once was a Congress so low,
Whose actions left citizens cold.
When human rights they did bash,
Protesters were incited to smash—
A warning that freedom’s not sold.
If you want to protect immigrants from ICE, you need to know this number.
Limerick Prompt: The role of Congress is to deter civil disobedience; if it fails to do so, domestic terrorism may ensue. The Republican Speaker of the House had a golden opportunity to address the immigration crisis but instead chose to use it as a wedge issue to aid Trump’s reelection efforts. Wannabe authoritarians believe they can run the country like a corporation, with the president acting as its CEO. This flawed analogy suggests that if a CEO can threaten employees with termination to enforce obedience, then the president should be able to deport citizens who do not assimilate. However, employees who are forced to leave a company still have other options, whereas civilians forced to leave their country often have none. This disparity is why Democratic citizens protest when they perceive that their elected Republican officials are attempting to push defenseless residents out of the country. As Exodus 32:21 warns, “Do not mistreat or oppress immigrants, for you were once immigrants in Egypt.” History has shown that when a government becomes an autocracy, it’s only a matter of time before all citizens become oppressed by the same regime.
L.A. Under Siege: Trump Sends in National Guard as Protests Continue over Militarized ICE Raids
Independent voters who supported Trump in 2016 may suffer from amnesia; during his first term, the United States experienced increased protests, riots, and social unrest. It seems they did not learn their lesson, as we appear to be heading into similar chaos again.
ICE raid protests, Day 6: Federal raids at churches, hospitals in LA County
By refusing to pass comprehensive immigration reform, Congress has allowed Trump and his sycophants to sow unrest in America. Galatians 6:7 states, “Do not be deceived; God is not mocked. A man reaps what he sows.” Some illiberal Republicans appear content with this anarchy, as their ultimate goal may be to incite civil disobedience and frame it as domestic terrorism. They hope to justify a heavy-handed government response—potentially including martial law—and use it as an excuse to dismantle the First Amendment. When the Constitution is undermined, democracy itself is at risk. Many Christian evangelicals seem willing to forfeit their civil rights, preferring authoritarian rule over individual freedoms.
Photo Caption:
Dean Cain aka “superman” actor could use his platform to promote ‘Truth, Justice and the American Way’, but instead he chooses to promote ‘fear, bigotry and the MAGA way’.
I believe I can fly.
I believe I can touch the sky.
Because—
I’m better than the immigrants
That’s why…
Edited by: ElRoyPoet, 2025
ICE carries out ‘mass workplace enforcement operation’
“[Our founders] created a document that built a representative democracy. Because the idea is: that our elected officials represent us, they don’t rule us, they have to listen. And in order to achieve this, you need the machinery for people to have their voice heard. However, it is the republican party that constantly seeks to attack the machinery for change—the method in which the average person can have their voice heard. This is why they suppress the vote, this is why they seek to criminalize assembly, speech, it’s why they attack the media—fake news. This is a method outlined by the founders, so the government can hear the opinions of the people—when it comes to petitioning for a redress of grievances. [Regardless], when it comes to the republican party you are always doing it wrong!” Excerpt from: Trump, the constitution, and the machinery for change
The Role of Government in Maintaining Civil Order: A Historical Perspective on Civil Disobedience, Autocracy, and Democracy
The fundamental role of Congress and the federal government is to maintain social order and deter civil disobedience. When governments fail in this duty, unrest can escalate into more severe forms of opposition, including domestic terrorism. The delicate balance between authority and civil liberties has been tested throughout history, often revealing that neglecting this balance leads to chaos, oppression, and long-term societal damage.
Historical Roots of Civil Disobedience and Government Response
Historically, civil disobedience has been a powerful tool for marginalized groups seeking justice. Figures such as Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr. demonstrated that nonviolent resistance could challenge oppressive regimes and effect meaningful change. These movements often faced government repression, but their persistence and moral authority eventually prompted reforms. However, when governments respond with excessive force or repression—such as the violent crackdowns on civil rights protests in the 1960s (e.g., the Birmingham Campaign, 1963) or the Tiananmen Square massacre in 1989—the outcome may include heightened social unrest and diminished legitimacy.
The Civil Rights Movement exemplifies how civil disobedience, when met with repression, can backfire. Initially, violent responses to peaceful protests in the 1960s only heightened public awareness and moral outrage, ultimately leading to legislative reforms like the Civil Rights Act (1964). Conversely, authoritarian regimes that suppress dissent without addressing underlying grievances often descend into cycles of rebellion and oppression. The fall of the Soviet Union, for instance, was precipitated by decades of internal dissent suppressed by autocratic rule; eventually, the public’s desire for freedom and reform overtook oppressive structures.
The Flawed Analogy of Corporate Management in Governance
The current political landscape reveals a troubling tendency among some republican leaders to equate governing with running a corporation, with the president acting as a CEO. This analogy is flawed because it overlooks the fundamental differences between managing a business and managing a nation. Employees in a corporation can be terminated or reassigned, and their options are often limited to seeking employment elsewhere. Civilians, however, are citizens with rights and protections enshrined in the Constitution. Deporting or oppressing residents who do not assimilate ignores their fundamental human rights and the social complexity of immigration.
Historically, authoritarian regimes have attempted similar tactics, forcibly removing or oppressing populations they deem undesirable. The Holocaust is a stark example of a government attempting to dehumanize and deport entire groups of people, leading to genocide. Such actions are driven by a flawed logic that equates societal control with the ability to eliminate dissent—an approach that invariably results in societal breakdown and moral catastrophe.
Civil Disobedience as a Response to Oppression
When governments act oppressively—such as attempting to push defenseless residents out or denying basic civil rights—civil disobedience often emerges as a moral response. The biblical admonition from Exodus 32:21, “Do not mistreat or oppress immigrants, for you were once immigrants in Egypt,” underscores the moral obligation to treat all individuals with dignity. Historically, protests against unjust immigration policies, such as the marches for immigrant rights, demonstrate that civil disobedience is an inevitable response when governments violate moral or constitutional principles.
In the United States, the 1960s civil rights protests, anti-war demonstrations, and more recent immigration marches exemplify how civil disobedience can serve as an effective catalyst for change. Yet, repression or neglect by authorities often leads to escalation—riots, social unrest, or even violence—highlighting the importance for governments to address grievances constructively.
Autocracy, Oppression, and the Fall of Democratic Societies
History demonstrates that autocratic tendencies within governments threaten democratic stability. The rise of authoritarian regimes—such as Nazi Germany, Stalinist Soviet Union, or Pinochet’s Chile—show that once leaders begin undermining constitutional norms and suppressing dissent, it is only a matter of time before civil liberties erode and societal oppression intensifies. The fall of these regimes, often preceded by widespread protests and civil disobedience, underscores the importance of maintaining democratic institutions and respecting civil rights.
In the American context, neglecting immigration reform or dismissing protests as mere disorder risks fueling public discontent. If unchecked, this discontent can escalate into widespread unrest, which authoritarian factions may exploit to justify draconian measures like martial law or suppression of free speech. Such actions threaten to dismantle foundational democratic principles, including the First Amendment, which safeguards free expression and assembly.
The Contemporary Threat and the Role of Civic Engagement
The current political climate suggests that some factions may deliberately sow unrest, framing civil disobedience as domestic terrorism to justify crackdown and erosion of civil liberties. Historically, such tactics have been employed by regimes seeking to consolidate power—most notably, the expansion of police powers in Nazi Germany or the suppression of dissent under authoritarian regimes in Latin America during the Cold War.
Civilians, however, have historically responded to oppressive regimes with resilience and resistance. Civil disobedience, strikes, and peaceful protests have repeatedly challenged authoritarian tendencies, forcing regimes to reform or face collapse. The United States’ history of civil rights protests, anti-war demonstrations, and recent immigrant rights marches exemplify this dynamic. When the government respects the rights of its citizens and engages with their grievances, social cohesion and democratic resilience are strengthened.
Throughout history, the tension between government authority and civil liberties has defined the trajectory of societies. When governments neglect their duty to address grievances, suppress dissent, or attempt to consolidate power through oppressive means, unrest and societal decay often follow. Conversely, respecting civil disobedience, engaging constructively with protest movements, and upholding democratic principles foster societal resilience.
As Galatians 6:7 reminds us, “Do not be deceived; God is not mocked. A man reaps what he sows.” Governments that sow seeds of repression and injustice will inevitably face the harvest of unrest and societal breakdown. The challenge for modern democracies is to recognize that civil disobedience is a vital signal of underlying issues, and that addressing these grievances—rather than suppressing them—can lead to societal growth and the strengthening of democratic institutions.
This Is How Power Protects Itself
How Authoritarians squash protests: MAGA Republicans hate higher education, but what they really despise is the 1st Amendment
Peaceful protests have agitators, just as police departments often have ‘rogue cops’. You can’t infringe on the First Amendment due to ‘bad actors’, just as you can’t disband the police force because of bullies. Protests are not a parade of happy people. The word ‘protest’ indicates that the participants are angry and fed up with an injustice. When a peaceful protest devolves into a riot, because it’s been hijacked by anarchists, the governor often declares an emergency curfew to force everybody to go home and forget about it. In other words, “Sorry, better luck next time, you don’t have to ever protest again, because we didn’t learn our lesson.” This results in the dismissal of legitimate concerns from the protesters, so that nothing changes.
However, this is usually orchestrated by the police chief, who employed illegal rules of engagement and commanded his officers to act as covert armed counter-protesters in order to dominate and coerce the peaceful protestors into engaging in civil disobedience. These intimidation and scare tactics are executed by ‘kettling’ and roughing up the protesters. This, in turn, escalates tensions and exacerbates the situation to the point of inciting confrontations. Basically, what the police department did in concert with the Governor is tyranny and the federal crime of censorship, in order to silence the voice of the people.
The Republican Congress also cries foul by claiming that the protests have gotten out of hand and act as if their constituents are being victimized. They take advantage of the protests to expand their control and spheres of influence, while disregarding the efforts of peaceful protesters. Even though these elected officials are guilty of having instigated the protests in the first place by allowing tyranny to fester under their watch. It’s not about society’s shortcomings; it’s about these politicians not defending the public from an oppressive police state. They were elected to uphold the Constitution and protect the rights of all citizens, not just those who agree with their political views.
Every time progressives try to bring positive change, conservatives dig in their heels to maintain the ‘status quo’. If it were up to them, there would never be another protest or any need for our First Amendment. Fortunately, our forefathers understood that the government would attempt to suppress our civil rights, which is why they enacted the Constitution.
Ultimately, the government can’t blame or collectively punish protesters because of the actions of outliers and radicals, just as we can’t abolish the police force because of the behavior of ‘bad apples.’ It’s up to our government to police the community’s anarchists and to punish the corruption within the police force. Regrettably, the public frequently bears the brunt of the consequences, due to our elected representatives selling us out to police unions, when they should have instead reformed or defunded them a long time ago!
“We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission; which is the stage of the darkest periods of human history, the stage of rule by brute force.” By: Ayn Rand
“Zero tolerance for protestors, they better be peaceful or else, besides nobody cares about ungrateful minorities’ and their sympathizers’ grievances, anyway. However if our law enforcement officials accidentally mess up, we need to give them a pass because they have a very dangerous job to do and need our support so that they won’t become demoralized.” By: B. Bondman
“Police brutality doesn’t stop protests, it provokes them. Only tyranny stops protests, because it makes the First Amendment mute.” By: B. Bondman
“Conservatives believe social movements and protests divide us, but actually, it’s the opposite, at least for popular demonstrations. French democracy was built on a model in which voting is not the only means of popular expression. A demonstration expresses dissatisfaction with government policy. Some commentators have quipped that it doesn’t make sense for the French to essentially be on stand-by for protest at all times, when they have things so good in comparison to everyone else. But this is exactly why things are better in France—because they see the power in collective action and demand change. The French don’t wear their suffering like a badge of honor as is the custom in England.” Excerpt from Why are the French so good at protesting?
“Those who make peaceful revolution (freedom of speech) impossible, will make violent revolution (protest theatrics) inevitable.” By: John F. Kennedy
Read About The Psychology Of Rioting
“…people who value social conformity […] support the government when it wants to increase its control over social behavior and punish nonconformity […] valuing social conformity increases the motivation for placing restrictions on behavior […] the desire for social freedom is now subservient to the enforcement of social norms and rules. Thus, groups will be targeted for repression to the extent that they challenge social conformity…” Excerpt from: Stanley Feldman, Enforcing Social Conformity: A Theory of Authoritarianism, 2003
“Each of us feels some aspect of the world’s suffering acutely. And we must pay attention. We must act. This little corner of the world is ours to transform. This little corner of the world is ours to save.” By: Stephen Cope
“Kettling” Protesters in the Bronx: Systemic Police Brutality and Its Costs in the United States
“The Beginning of Fascism”: How Trump’s Immigrant Crackdown Is Crushing Democracy
‘This is fringe politics being played out in real time’
elroypoet.blog 