The Hardhat Riot by Kuhn entailed an account of the 1970 dispute between citizens dissenting against the unending war between Southeast Asia and New York City construction workers. Four days after the Kent State tragedy, violence erupted on May 8, 1970. Kuhn, a profound writer for C.B.S. news, RealClearPolitics, and Politico, explained how the tension had been building up for numerous years on various fronts (Kuhn, 2020).
In addition to the regular riots across the country, the protest involved the campus of Columbia University, the 1969 moratorium to end the war in Vietnam, the 1968 democratic national convention in Chicago, and Richard Nixon’s rhetoric as president and candidate. Therefore, the book Hardhat Riot by Kuhn provides an account of this riot in New York City and relates it to the current fragmented political landscape. Kuhn (2020) evaluates the street riots as the cause of national political drift. He argues that the rift between activists and unions led to the clashes and votes for Trump’s candidacy. In this paper, I will analyze government actions, patriotism, and politics as part of the societal divide.
Book Critique
Throughout the book, the author struggles with contradicting ideas of patriotism, freedom, liberty, and justice, primarily represented by the American flag. In a few chapters of the book, Kuhn foreshadows the violence committed by construction workers. He also provides educated ideas on why the New York Police Department (NYPD) looked unprepared primarily to protect the protesters exercising their First Amendment rights.
Thus, it gives an impression of the NYPD contravening the freedom and liberty of the U.S. flag and the law. This part ends with Tallman and his friend answering the reporter that if the demonstrators return, they will probably be chased away and even killed. This admission reflects the barbarism and intolerance NYPD employed to contain citizens who otherwise exercised their constitutional rights. It paints the institution trusted with maintaining law and order in a bad light. In this case, using arguments against the police is winning because there is a complex situation and actions that are not only illegal but also immoral to this problem.
Kuhn focuses primarily on the police, protesters, construction workers, and N.Y.C. mayor John Lindsay, exposing their contradictory approaches to the American spirit and the rights the constitution bestows on U.S. citizens (Kuhn, 2020). Lindsay, a Republican and the most liberal candidate in the Democratic race, who failed to understand the combustible nature of the conflicting parties fully, portrayed the hardhat was out for bloodthirsty. He epitomized the challenge surrounding the whole demonstration challenges, which is the disregard for the law and the need to impose personal will in handling the situation.
The emergence of political reality is related to how the followers of conservatism and liberalism were perceived. Kuhn (2020) points out that Richard Nixon’s conservative silent majority and himself played no small part in this. He expounded this idea, shaping the image of the symbolism of the journey of voters from the new deal coalition. Kuhn’s work reveals the rot in some of the policies and political leanings that even go against the spirit of America (Kuhn, 2020). He discloses this fact by narrating how the blue-collar workers who were developing the world trade center assembled in the streets of lower Manhattan, chanting the U.S.A. while physically attacking students rioting against the Vietnam War.
These happenings illustrated people taking their rights to assemble and picket as more critical than other Americans taking a stand for something else, which is also just as important. In recent years towards the 2020 presidential elections, there have been events that could be described as almost similar, especially concerning how police handled those who took to the streets to express their dissatisfaction with how black people are treated. It could be the easiest route to take. Presidents Reagan and Trump figures were confident leaders, so their followers and associates followed them and appreciated the rule of law in their way.
The hard hats men had problems controlling aggression and behavior in society, but to sympathize with them is to justify violence. Kuhn (2020) suggests that the helmeted men became an angry mob who felt impunity and took their aggression out on every anti-war child. Feelings of loneliness and self-pity were probably the main motives that drove them to hit the crowd around them. As the author postulates, actions were justified in the name of the U.S.A., and self-styled paragons of law and order became a mob.
Kuhn documents ably and abundantly the cowardly physical abuse of women, the gratuitous cold-cocking of men, and the storming of a shakily protected City Hall. The mayor’s people had lowered the flag in honor of the Kent State victims, which infuriated the hard hats. Kuhn notes that “a tribal tension had infiltrated downtown.” (Kuhn, 2020, pg. 120) The cops were one of the tribes and were hardly New York’s best that day.
Several instances of cops standing by as the hard hats went rampant. Some of them encouraged violent behavior. Kuhn (2020) writes that the patrolman used foul language to cheer the men on their way to the plaza. Kuhn’s generalization about antiwar protesters being foul-mouthed hippies does not hold water and sets the record straight on certain misconceptions concerning the employees and the demonstrators. Kuhn (2020) describes that hardhats were labeled fascists, comparing them to the nicknames of anti-war activists. Both sides honestly thought they were behaving patriotically.
Many antiwar activists came from wealthy backgrounds, while white blue-collar families were hurt far harder by new social programs like affirmative action and school busing. According to Kuhn (2020), it was also a time when New York City was undergoing rapid, mostly negative change. Many businesses abandoned urban areas for the suburbs and southern states. Kuhn (2020) points out in passing the problem of racism that began to develop with the departure of white people from the city. Consequently, additional questions have arisen about what constitutes adequate punishment and whether it relates to demographics.
Personal Reflection
The book is nicely written and presents several facts that expose the corrupt, self-serving mentality of those in power. Although the novel is pleasant, it disappointed me because characters such as the government or the police are not trustworthy. Consequently, I felt that the government had not taken care of our interests. This book makes a claim about reality, yet it contains little-known jokes, and some readers may dispute its veracity based on ideological differences. The book lacks the role of race in shaping the behavior described. The author’s implication that exclusive liberals individually weakened the Democratic Party by separating its white working-class community during the Vietnam War largely ignored the work of other scholars shaping each other before the start of the war. I liked the novel, but more cause and effect should have been added to explain the interactions of power and society.
Reference
Kuhn, D. P. (2020). The Hardhat Riot: Nixon, New York City, and the dawn of the white working-class revolution. Oxford University Press.