Newsmax TV & Webwww.newsmax.comFREE - In Google Play
Newsmax TV & Webwww.newsmax.comFREE - On the App Store
Tags: George Floyd Protests | Law Enforcement | United Nations | autonomous | zones

Totalitarianism Now Disguised as Police Reform

capitol hill autonomous zone or chaz now known as chop

Protesters in Seattle created a Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone in June 2020 after a couple of weeks of protesting. (Fromourlittlebubble/Dreamstime)

By Saturday, 20 June 2020 05:38 AM Current | Bio | Archive

Ironically, the most avid promoters of accountability, transparency and rule of law abroad, have been U.S. Democratic politicians who now ignore and even encourage the illegal security forces in the self-denominated "autonomous zones" and have celebrated the sadistic, destructive behavior of out of control mobs.

They have permanently lost the moral high ground.

Their plan to centralize police power is nothing but an attempt against the constitutional rights and powers of the states — and the people.

Historical Hypocrisy

For decades, U.S. politicians have actively inserted themselves in the national security and judicial affairs of different sovereign countries globally. As an example, in the case of the Republic of Guatemala, since the Cold War officially "ended," Democratic politicians have meddled in their internal affairs, in issues ranging from police and judiciary reform to improper imposition of judges and magistrates by covert coercion and overt pressure through politicized diplomats in country.

Another clear and recent example of this, was the case of the now defunct United Nations’ International Commission against Impunity in Guatemala (UN-CICIG); a U.N. sponsored, specialized, consulting body beginning as a good and necessary idea but turned into a globalist experiment of politicized persecution and "colonialist" tool; one used to weaken  sovereignty.

UN-CICIG was initially supported by the vast, honest majority of the Guatemalan citizenry, unfortunately as it became politicized by leftist, socialist actors, both foreign and domestic to Guatemala, it quickly lost support and was allowed to die a natural death as its’ mandate was not renewed by the government.

The case of UN-CICIG became an international affair, and as the U.N., the European Union, and other multilateral bodies pressured the government to renew UN-CICIG’s mandate, most of the obviously disingenuous support/pressure came mainly from Democratic politicians and bureaucrats in the U.S. government. They saw UN-CICIG as a tool to force upon a sovereign nation, their political "ideals" and ideological whims.

Fortunately, for the sake of Guatemala’s and other countries sovereignties, a handful of honest, law abiding bureaucrats and Trump-appointed politicians supported Guatemala’s claims against the UN-CICIG (pressure, and coercion from Democrats notwithstanding) the experiment ceased to exist, with nothing but a still pending investigation and audit by U.N. authorities.

The Moral High Ground Lost 

Whether people accept it or not, U.S. military, law enforcement and intelligence agencies have been considered by their Latin American counterparts as paragons of professionalism and excellence. There is not a single military, police or intelligence officer in Latin America who would not jump at the opportunity of participating in any training exercise, or program hosted by an American agency.

Over the years, U.S. security assistance to foreign nations has taken on different configurations. Developing countries have enjoyed millions of dollars in security training and equipment, and even though results have been inconsistent, it could be argued that in general, it has been a good investment by the U.S., in stabilization — and good will generation.

The main strength of the U.S. security assistance programs, besides the amount of necessary monies, has been the ideal of having U.S. experience and exemplary law enforcement practices and capabilities brought into the countries to reshape and professionalize security and police forces.

That ideal is now at risk of disappearing forever, because of the politicized attack on U.S. police departments by the radical left. Thus, what was once a diplomatic tool of influence, is now a moot point. Thanks to the senseless and fanatical defunding/disbanding actions, and rhetoric by leftist politicians and news media against police departments nationally, Democrats have lost their claim to any moral high ground in matters of law enforcement and public safety globally.

Furthermore, the zealous participation of sanctimonious U.S. Democratic senators and members of of the U.S. House in pressuring countries to persecute and dismantle "illegal security forces and clandestine security apparatuses" is now hypocritical and humiliatingly irrelevant considering that not one of them opposed, condemned or criticized the emergence of illegal security forces in the rebellious, autonomous zones in Seattle and other U.S. cities.

What claim to any moral high ground in matters of law enforcement and public safety will Democrats have now, when engaging in foreign policy?

None. Period.

Police Reform

Centralized Power, Centralized Corruption

There is absolutely no data, anywhere in the United States that would support the idea of centralizing police power and controlling it at the national level. The federalist model, aollowing police agencies to be managed at the national, state and local levels, provides a great level of compartment and separation of powers ensuring autonomy, and prevents, and protects against widespread malpractices, corruption, and abuses of power.

Furthermore, there are numerous examples globally, where centrally-controlled police forces eventually become severely politicized and become the oppressive arm of totalitarian regimes. This is the case in Germany. After the Nazi regime’s abuses of power by a centralized law enforcement force, gave total responsibility of law enforcement to the states.

The United Kingdom has a similar territorial police jurisdiction ensuring separation of powers. In contrast, there are other cases where centralized police forces are the only option, but those are due to constitutional and financial restrictions. By promoting a national police force, Democrats are actively working to illegally strip states from their rights and powers to establish and enforce laws, granted to them by the Constitution, specifically by the 10th Amendment, and "not delegated to the United States."

Additionally, the fallout of the recent Russia hoax, and the political weaponizing of federal capabilities against the Trump administration, presents the best example of why a national police force would be a terrible, dangerous, and corruption-prone idea.

No Need for Reform. Accountability, Transparency and Rule of Law

In reviewing 15 "high profile”" cases of black American citizens killed by police officers in the past seven years, there a few details quickly raising red flags:

  • All of the cases occurred in cities led by Democrat mayors, with Democrat governors
  • In 14 of the 15 cases, district/state attorneys were democrats (one bipartisan)
  • Only in four of 15 cases, were there charges against officers, only two convictions.
  • 10 of the 15 cases took place during the Obama presidency.
  • All 15 cases took place in cities with high homicide rates, according to the FBI.

Considering the above data, how is it that the news media and the radical left are blaming the Trump presidency and the Republican Party for the "increase" of police violence against black Americans? Have not the news media taken the time to review publicly the available information on all of these cases?

There is an obvious misdirection of outrage in the current defund/abolish police departments movement. Where is the outrage against the elected Democratic officials for failing to professionalize their police forces? Where is the outrage against the Democratic district and state attorneys for failing to present or bring strong cases? Where is the outrage against Democratic-led states and cities for the high homicide rates?

By the way, rates that were already high prior to Trump becoming president.

Such questions present a problem of accountability, transparency and the rule of law, that the Democratic elected authorities have failed to enforce in their own jurisdictions. Thus, there is an urgent need for a deep analysis of all municipal police data where defund/abolish the police projects are being passed by leftist, irrational, childish politicians.

  • How many calls for police responded to "privileged" neighborhoods versus "poor" neighborhoods?
  • How many situations were deescalated by police officers in "poor" neighborhoods?
  • How many crimes were averted by actions of police officers?
  • How many homicides were there, blamed on lack of police presence?

If the data supports the disbanding and/or defunding of police forces, by all means, let’s do it. But this is not the case; if anything, the data will support more funding for law enforcement.

It's ironic that the three things needed to ensure professionalism in law enforcement in the U.S., are what the U.S. security assistance programs try to promote in different countries.

Necessary Questions

There is no denial that there are racial problems, but these are not exclusive to law enforcement, and they are not systemic to the U.S. as the radical left claims them to be.

As a legal immigrant to the U.S., with an ample circle of friends from more than 10 different countries and of all races, I have never experienced nor witnessed any racist behavior or biased towards me or those close to me here in the United States. Not at the federal, state, private or personal level.

The pernicious and divisive rhetoric of Democratic politicians and news media is what causes the generalized feeling of racial tension in the U.S. It is actually not that bad.

Ironically though, the condescending and pretentious attitude of those promoting and "feeling" "white guilt," may actually incite racism and a "reverse racism" (an oxymoron, because racism is racism, period). People need to start looking inwardly, at their own environments, being more critical of what they are being fed by politicians and the media.

The discussion also needs to be more ample than white racism towards blacks. How about other minorities? How about minorities that are discriminated by blacks more than by whites? How systemic and widespread is racism? Is it that bad?

These are uncomfortable, yet necessary questions.

Mario Duarte is the youngest and longest serving Secretary of Strategic Intelligence to hold office in Guatemala, as well as one of the youngest intelligence chiefs in the world. His professional credentials include more than 18 years of experience in the fields of intelligence, national security, consulting, and strategy development in several countries. Mr. Duarte earned his Bachelor of Science degree in Industrial Engineering from the University of Houston, MBA from Rice University, postgraduate degree from Ortega Gasset Institute-Spain, and completed his PhD studies in National Security at San Carlos University Guatemala. Follow him on Twitter and Instagram: @mario_a_duarte. Read Mario Duarte's Reports — More Here.

© 2021 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

Ironically, the most avid promoters of accountability, transparency and rule of law abroad, have been U.S. Democratic politicians who now ignore and even encourage the illegal security forces in the self-denominated "autonomous zones"
autonomous, zones
Saturday, 20 June 2020 05:38 AM
Newsmax Media, Inc.
Join the Newsmax Community
Register To Comment Login To Comment
Please review Community Guidelines before posting a comment.

Newsmax, Moneynews, Newsmax Health, and Independent. American. are registered trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc. Newsmax TV, and Newsmax World are trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc.

America's News Page
© Newsmax Media, Inc.
All Rights Reserved
America's News Page
© Newsmax Media, Inc.
All Rights Reserved