Pages

Saturday, April 26, 2025

8 Taken Into Custody During Immigration Enforcement Raid At Beaver County Mexican Restaurant

 


By Madeline Bartos

CBS Pittsburgh

Eight people were taken into custody after an immigration enforcement raid at 1942 Tacos & Tequila, a popular Mexican restaurant in Beaver County, a spokesperson for Immigration and Customs Enforcement confirmed on Friday.

Multiple federal agencies, including ICE, the FBI and ATF, executed a search warrant at the restaurant in Rochester on Wednesday. Photos showed federal agents and a white van with blacked-out windows outside the establishment.

An ICE spokesperson said the search was part of "an ongoing criminal investigation into hiring and employment" of people who are in the country illegally. ICE said eight people were taken into custody for violating U.S. immigration law.

The restaurant was closed on Wednesday but back open on Thursday. While details had been limited until ICE released its statement on Friday, customers said they were surprised by the news.

"If they were personally really illegally here, then I don't have a problem with them going. But they were amazing. We were just in there, there's no same people in there, it's all new people," said customer Donna Bentler.

Congressman Chris Deluzio's office told KDKA-TV that it first heard about the raid from concerned community members. His office said it was working to get answers from federal agencies.

The ICE spokesperson declined to release further details, citing an ongoing investigation.

"It's mind-boggling, to be honest with you," said customer Tiffany Mcallister. "I mean, I understand they have certain criteria or different things for certain situations, but I've never had any problems with any of them."

1942 Tacos & Tequila has three locations in Rochester, Cleveland and Newell, West Virginia.

emoji_like
emoji_wow
emoji_angry
24

Monday, April 14, 2025

There’ A New Silent Majority — And They Need To Be Activated

 

x



There is a robust pro-democracy majority in America, but it needs to be more vocal and take action to defend our shared values.

By Nathan Stock 

Waging Nonviolence

March 18, 2025 - Most Americans support democracy and oppose political violence. These shared values provide a foundation for organizing across the aisle to revitalize our democracy.

In November 2024, a plurality of Americans voted to bring President Trump back into office. During his campaign, he made numerous statements demonizing broad swaths of people, encouraging violence or vowing retribution for opponents. For many on the left, the election result generated a mix of despair, anger and incomprehension. Some have painted Trump’s voters with a broad brush — assuming their vote indicated support for his most extreme positions.

There are at least three reasons to believe that a vote for Trump should not be interpreted as 77 million Americans endorsing using the military to target the “enemy from within.” First, there is evidence that most Americans — liberals, conservatives and independents — agree on basic pro-democracy values. Before the election large majorities of Americans — over 80 percent —  consistently opposed political violence. Pre-election, there was also ample data suggesting a range of other values that crossed party lines, including the 90 percent of Americans who agreed that equal protection under the law, the right to vote, and freedom of speech are important to our country’s identity.

The election does not seem to have changed these views. According to a post-election survey by More in Common, openness to political violence remains relatively low, coming in at 14 percent. Most Americans also opposed Trump’s sweeping pardons for those convicted for participating in the Jan. 6 insurrection.

Second, changes in the media landscape mean that at least some Trump voters were likely unaware of his most extreme positions. Most Americans did not receive information about the 2024 election from traditional news media. They may not have heard Trump’s vow to be a “dictator” on “day one,” while those in the conservative media ecosystem consistently heard Trump characterized as a victim who was working on their behalf.

Third, there is evidence that at least some Trump voters did not believe he would carry out his most extreme threats.

Understanding the values that many Democrats and Trump voters profess to share matters because pro-democracy liberals and conservatives will need each other in the coming years. Hate crimes and other forms of political violence increased significantly during President Trump’s first term. During his second term, America needs the broadest possible coalition to stand up for democracy and oppose political violence — a coalition that can and should include Democrats and Trump voters.

In 1969, President Richard Nixon made famous the term “silent majority.” In 2025, there is a new silent majority in American politics that — at least for now — remains committed to democracy and strongly opposes political violence.

I see the new silent majority every day in my work with The Carter Center. I lead a cross-partisan project made up of Americans volunteering their time to build trust in elections and mitigate political violence. The project’s networks — in Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Michigan, North Carolina and Wisconsin — are led by Republicans and Democrats in tandem, many of them former elected officials with long records of public service. They have recruited thousands of civic leaders, including liberals, independents and conservatives. These are folks from urban and rural areas, with differences in racial, ethnic, sexual and gender identities.  

And they disagree on plenty. They disagree on abortion. They disagreed on the war in Gaza. Yet, like the rest of us in the new silent majority, they agree on basic values. Candidates who lose elections — and lose legal challenges in court — should concede gracefully. No one in public life should demonize their fellow Americans. No one should incite violence.

My work, as well as reams of survey data, make clear that there remains a robust pro-democracy majority in America. That’s the good news. The bad news is that this silent majority must be activated. Supporting certain values in the abstract is not the same as standing up for those values in practice — and American democracy has been backsliding. The University of Chicago’s Robert Pape, among others, argues persuasively that demographic change will provoke long-term backlash and violence by some American conservatives. This is not a surprising conclusion.

Much of my career has been spent working to address armed conflicts in the Middle East. That experience underscores that groups accustomed to being in charge can react very negatively — even violently — when they feel a loss of power. European scholars looking into drivers of civil wars since 1946, for instance, found that dominant groups’ loss of power significantly increases the risk of violent conflict. They noted that “a sense of unfairly lost entitlement and the lust for revenge” drive these conflicts.

These trends could drive increased violence and democratic backsliding in the future — but that should not obscure the reality in the present that most Americans share fundamental democratic values. Despite political rhetoric in recent years that increasingly demonizes our fellow Americans, only around 4 percent of the public consistently expresses support for political violence. Most Americans, including 81 percent of Democrats and 94 percent of Republicans, even share pride in being American, while being able to “acknowledge” our “country’s flaws.”

Activating the new silent majority requires at least three steps. First, you need to engage across party lines to get to know the other side and counter profound partisan misperceptions. In the November election, Republicans and Democrats alike listed inflation as their top priority. But Republicans erroneously perceived Democrats to be heavily focused on trans issues, while Democrats overestimated the extent to which Republicans prioritized immigration and abortion. With most Americans living in politically-segregated communities, finding and getting to know folks with differing political views can be challenging — but it’s still doable.

Living Room Conversations has guides for facilitating discussions on numerous topics. If you’re in Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Michigan, North Carolina, or Wisconsin, join one of the cross-partisan networks supported by The Carter Center. Braver Angels regularly hosts cross-partisan dialogues on a range of issues. You are very unlikely to change the politics of folks who vote differently from you, but you can humanize each other and build trust.

Second, you need to think ahead about the values that matter most to you — and know what your red lines are. Should this administration carry out its more extreme threats, the data cited above indicate that most Americans — those of us in the new silent majority — will oppose these steps. But being vocal in that opposition — speaking up and taking action to defend our values — requires first ensuring that we do not engage in “anticipatory obedience.” As Tymothy Snyder notes, when democracies fray, communities can conform “instinctively” to violations of the values they otherwise profess to hold. Not doing so requires considering in advance what you and your community will do if, for example, journalists are arrested or pro-democracy nonprofits are targeted. As David French recently wrote, “We don’t know our true values until they’re tested.”

Third, activating the pro-democracy majority requires proactive planning. It is particularly important to organize across the political divide, recruiting diverse community leaders and messengers to stand up for democracy and mitigate political violence. Be intentional about working with individuals of varying backgrounds and identities, finding local leaders who have credibility in their respective communities. One example was the bipartisan campaign against neo-Nazis in Whitefish, Montana, where a range of community leaders organized nonviolently to push these groups out of their community.

Nonviolence scholar Maria Stephan has a range of recommendations for building large, diverse movements capable of countering democratic backsliding. The Horizons Project and the 22nd Century Initiative offer a guide detailing tactics to nonviolently counter the threat of political violence. Over Zero has guides for building community resilience to identity-based violence.  

None of this is meant to downplay the damage that can be done by a small minority. But we can take comfort and courage knowing that most Americans still support democracy and oppose political violence. The task before us then is to build a vocal majority, planning and organizing across the political divide to stand up for the values that so many of us share.

Nathan Stock designed and leads a new Carter Center project to mitigate political and identity-based violence in the United States. Through this work, he is building diverse networks of citizens, from across the political spectrum, to serve as community advocates for electoral democracy and the peaceful resolution of disputes.

Saturday, March 29, 2025

Shaking the Cherries Down: As an Antifascist Movement Awakens, Our Job Is to Build Organization


By Carl Davidson

Liberation Road Notes

March 27, 2025 - It’s spring, a season of hope, and the prairie grass is dry, waiting for sparks. And we face a clear challenge from the Trump fascist clique. People are suffering. Some are being “disappeared.” We are called to fight.

Antifascist movements don’t arise out of nowhere. The clique now 

in the White House sets them in motion by inflicting one outrage 

after another against people’s liberties, lives, and livelihoods.


In the past week alone, some 550 grassroots protests emerged in 

every state—with dozens, naturally, in D.C. itself, the seat of 

federal power. That power is now split into three: those defending 

the fascists, those enabling it by conciliation or silence, and those 

taking stands against it in various ways. We have to learn how to 

use contradictions among those on top, while healing contradictions 

among the people at the base.


I am thrilled by the tens of thousands turning out in the heartland 

for Bernie and AOC. A large coalition of the progressive organizers 

behind the upsurge has already formed.


It’s calling on all of us to turn out on Saturday, April 5, 2025

There will be a very large mobilization in D.C. But if you can’t make 

it there, substantial local mobilizations also will take place in nearly 

every city and college town in the country. (Our local Democrats

are calling one on April 5, 1pm, at the Beaver County Courthouse).


We have dozens of reasons to join them and even more demands to 

be raised. The tip of our spear must aim at the ICE/DHS secret raids 

against immigrants, documented or not, who have spoken out against 

the genocide being inflicted on Gaza. The thugs start here because 

they consider it low-hanging fruit, our weak point, believing that 

these voices are a despised minority within another unpopular 

minority of a wider peace and justice movement. We demand a 

foreign policy in tune with the UN Charter and its Principles of 

Peaceful Coexistence.


We must do a deeper exposure of Team Trump and prove them 

and their policy of division wrong. The core value in all our 

diverse narratives of who we are and what we want is solidarity

An injury to one of us is an injury to all of us. We don’t have to 

agree with everything any of those targeted might say. But we 

must stand with them on the right to speak, the right to equality 

before the law, and the right to due process. Most of all, we want 

their voices in our campaigns and organizations.


Our 14th Amendment gives these “due process” rights to all 

persons in our country, whether they are citizens or not. If you 

think otherwise, you are abandoning what it means to be an 

American. You are abandoning the legacy of our “Second Revolution," 

of the 500,000 or more who perished, Black, white, and otherwise, 

those who  “gave the last full measure of devotion.” Moreover, “It 

is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work 

which they who fought,” for a nation  rooted in an abolition democracy

This is the core value that is never granted to us by our “betters,” and 

never can be. Why? Because, self-evidently, these core values and natural 

rights are part of our nature as social beings. Tyrants can deny them 

or try to restrict them, but they can never take them away.


We demand that today’s anti-American neo-confederates stop all 

their fascist projects. We aim for their removal from power. We 

demand that they and any successors respect the rights of immigrants 

and welcome those fleeing injustice. We demand that they stop their 

attacks on veterans, whom Trump has always despised, and restore 

the VA and its hospitals and benefits. We demand they cease their 

attacks on the Department of Labor and the NLRB. All workers have 

the right to form unions in every state and to stand up for better wages, 

working conditions, and the expansion of social justice. We demand 

the restoration of all DEI measures won in all the civil rights battles 

of every decade. There is one race, the human race, and we defend 

the rights of all, regardless of skin color, nationality, language, or 

religious faith. We demand respect and equality for all women, including 

health care and abortion rights. The attacks on doctors and their 

female patients must cease and desist in every state. Likewise for 

all LGBTQ persons. In short, we want consistent democracy for all 

the exploited and oppressed, all along the line.


Our task in the weeks ahead is to join these movements and “fan the 

flames of discontent.” But we also must avoid a trap, one this writer 

observed earlier in the Jesse Jackson campaigns of the 1980s. 

My organization at that time, the League of Revolutionary Struggle, 

or LRS, played an important role in shaping Jesse’s Rainbow Coalition. 

Jackson started with a firm base in Chicago’s Black and Latino 

communities. But LRS did important work in bringing in Chicanos, 

Chinese-Americans, Filipinos, and all Pacific Islanders and others. 

(I worked with a small team taking Jesse to Iowa and Nebraska, 

bringing in progressive farmers, the “green stripe” in the Rainbow).


We saw ourselves as “building a movement.” But Jesse frequently 

warned us: 


“My job is to shake the cherries down from the tree. But I can’t do 

it all. Your job is to gather up the harvest on the ground.” 


We found the wisdom in that warning the hard way, soon after the 

election activities ebbed. All the “build a movement” assertions 

turned into empty air. We won a few new recruits to the LRS here 

and there, but not much else, even though a few of us continued 

with staff positions in Jesse’s Rainbow-Push operation in Chicago.


















We fell into the “build the movement” trap. We do not create movements. 

We can see what actually builds them every day, with the flurry of Oval 

Office assaults and inflections on us everywhere. Wherever there is 

oppression, there is resistance. But it’s also true that movements, like 

everything else in the universe, move in waves; they flow, and they ebb. 

At one point of upsurge in the “long 1960s,” we thought it would be 

ever upward and onward, and when the ebb came, our old set of tactics 

for flow failed miserably. Think of the Weather Underground as an 

extreme case in point.


We can help build movement in many ways, such as by fanning the 

flames. But to avoid the hidden trap, we must also build structured 

campaigns and new mass organizations within movements. 

Organizations of all sorts are our most essential weapons, including 

but not limited to our own socialist organizations. The socialists who 

think straight matter a great deal. As Uncle Ho once noted, “the harder 

the core, the broader the front.” We have a far-sighted strategy and 

tactics. If we deploy them well, everyone in our common front can 

grow.


But the key important lesson arises as the wave begins to ebb. We have 

to know when to cast the net out, during the flow, and when to draw 

the net in, when the crest begins to ebb. We need to keep stronger and 

larger campaigns, like Rev. Barbour’s “Third Reconstruction” and 

organizations within it that can survive and thrive either way, so when 

the next wave comes, we start on higher ground with better and larger 

organizations. We especially need this when we are in Gramsci’s “war 

of position,” where we engage in our “long march” winning “strong 

points” (Lenin) in all of them. Why? Because at some point the crisis 

deepens, and we face the tasks of winning governing power—a war 

of movement that can start to “capture the castles,” tactically, at all 

levels, starting with cities, counties, and states.


At some point, the war of movement will arise everywhere, and a dual 

power will become a new power. This will create new problems. We 

would all love to have these new problems on our plates, but we are not 

there yet. For the moment, we solve the problem of organization-building 

within movement-building.


Here's a closing hint for an efficient way to do all this: when you go to 

a protest event or action, take a clipboard, pens, and calling cards with you. 

Then ask questions of people you don’t know, outside your comfort zone,

listen to them, and ask more. Learn to persuade by sharing common 

passions of weal and woe. Record and report. If you don’t take these 

tools, you are simply an activist. If you do and you use them well, 

you are an organizer and a party-builder. Now is the time for us to build.



Carl Davidson is a veteran organizer with roots in the New Left 

of the 1960s, where he served as a Vice President and National 

Secretary of Students for a Democratic Society. He continues 

to write prolifically.