MAGAThread XX: A Journal of the Plague Year

[Galloism]

So violence occured quicker and was more accepted. Sure disproves that "escalation thing."

Well, and there’s a lot of excuses in there for violence committed, and the claim that the violence wasn’t broadly supported by people inside CHAZ and therefore it’s not really the same.

This may even be true, but it’s also true in the DC protests. Right wing protestors have been protesting in DC for weeks (mostly peaceful, to borrow a funny turn of phrase now), and this riot was much smaller than many of the larger protests over the last few weeks.

It’s also well known that many people vocally disavow the violence on the right while excusing it, not unlike the left. You can see politicians like Cruz, who, let’s face it, is one of the people most vocal on this stupid “stop the steal” nonsense, immediately distance himself and disavow the violence.

This is to a large degree a matter of subject framing, but not entirely. DC marks an escalation of the pattern of violence.

While you are correct the Seattle violence occurred faster and was more excused, I don’t think that’s the greatest part here.

It’s a zoom level:

If you go onto Google earth and look at Atlanta airport, you will find an airplane is in mid-takeoff. If you zoom in close enough, you can see just that airplane and declare “see, the airplane is taking off”.

Zoom out a bit, and you see most airplanes are parked. So you can say “see, airplanes are mostly parked.”

Neither is wrong exactly, but by reframing the context in an uneven way, you can excuse one side while vilifying the other.

[Nakena]

So violence occured quicker and was more accepted. Sure disproves that "escalation thing."

Wow.

Well like I said, everyone has now figured out that violence works.

[Vassenor]

Wow.

Well like I said, everyone has now figured out that violence works.

And yet one side is more willing to resort to violence than the other.

[Galloism]

Well like I said, everyone has now figured out that violence works.

And yet one side is more willing to resort to violence than the other.

Which? Because I’m not sure now. It was the left for most of the year, but the right massively raised the stakes with this Capitol Building business.

[Borderlands of Rojava]

And yet one side is more willing to resort to violence than the other.

Which? Because I’m not sure now. It was the left for most of the year, but the right massively raised the stakes with this Capitol Building business.

The FBI stats don't lie. The right wing kills alot more people than the left.

[Cannot think of a name]

So violence occured quicker and was more accepted. Sure disproves that "escalation thing."

Well, and there’s a lot of excuses in there for violence committed, and the claim that the violence wasn’t broadly supported by people inside CHAZ and therefore it’s not really the same.

This may even be true, but it’s also true in the DC protests. Right wing protestors have been protesting in DC for weeks (mostly peaceful, to borrow a funny turn of phrase now), and this riot was much smaller than many of the larger protests over the last few weeks.

It’s also well known that many people vocally disavow the violence on the right while excusing it, not unlike the left. You can see politicians like Cruz, who, let’s face it, is one of the people most vocal on this stupid “stop the steal” nonsense, immediately distance himself and disavow the violence.

This is to a large degree a matter of subject framing, but not entirely. DC marks an escalation of the pattern of violence.

While you are correct the Seattle violence occurred faster and was more excused, I don’t think that’s the greatest part here.

It’s a zoom level:

If you go onto Google earth and look at Atlanta airport, you will find an airplane is in mid-takeoff. If you zoom in close enough, you can see just that airplane and declare “see, the airplane is taking off”.

Zoom out a bit, and you see most airplanes are parked. So you can say “see, airplanes are mostly parked.”

Neither is wrong exactly, but by reframing the context in an uneven way, you can excuse one side while vilifying the other.

The DC riots were an escalation of racist fueled violence over centuries, the violence in such a smaller scale that the comparison is laughable also immediately dissolved the otherwise peaceful demonstration at Capitol Hill, ironically with more violence.

You're right, it's a matter of framing. Framing them as the same is disingenuous and ignores centuries of context in order to do a strained 'both sides' argument and continue a centuries long pattern of marginalizing the efforts to address issues of race in this country.

[Galloism]

The DC riots were an escalation of racist fueled violence over centuries, the violence in such a smaller scale that the comparison is laughable also immediately dissolved the otherwise peaceful demonstration at Capitol Hill, ironically with more violence.

Yeah, they finally tackled the open sedition after one of the border guards murdered a couple black kids and then apologized to the (temporary) survivor for running out of ammunition.

Thankfully they had worn them down over time and the dispersal didn’t lead to more death.

You're right, it's a matter of framing. Framing them as the same is disingenuous and ignores centuries of context in order to do a strained 'both sides' argument and continue a centuries long pattern of marginalizing the efforts to address issues of race in this country.

I mean, that’s not my point, I actually have a broader and more important point about the efficacy of political violence, but I guess if we can’t address that we’ve got some rocky years ahead.

Maybe I’ll move to a more stable country before shit gets real.

[Cannot think of a name]

The DC riots were an escalation of racist fueled violence over centuries, the violence in such a smaller scale that the comparison is laughable also immediately dissolved the otherwise peaceful demonstration at Capitol Hill, ironically with more violence.

Yeah, they finally tackled the open sedition after one of the border guards murdered a couple black kids and then apologized to the (temporary) survivor for running out of ammunition.

Thankfully they had worn them down over time and the dispersal didn’t lead to more death.

You're right, it's a matter of framing. Framing them as the same is disingenuous and ignores centuries of context in order to do a strained 'both sides' argument and continue a centuries long pattern of marginalizing the efforts to address issues of race in this country.

I mean, that’s not my point, I actually have a broader and more important point about the efficacy of political violence, but I guess if we can’t address that we’ve got some rocky years ahead.

Maybe I’ll move to a more stable country before shit gets real.

The cold hard uncomfortable truth is that the DC riots have way more in common with the Tulsa massacre in 1921 than some hippies not being able to contain a loosely organized section during a time of tension while having a sit in. If we don't address that, if we instead twist ourselves into a 'both sides' pretzel where we tell someone with a knee on their neck that we won't get off unless the use some unknown magic words, we are indeed in for a few rocky years and running away from the problem you contributed to won't solve it.

[Galloism]

Yeah, they finally tackled the open sedition after one of the border guards murdered a couple black kids and then apologized to the (temporary) survivor for running out of ammunition.

Thankfully they had worn them down over time and the dispersal didn’t lead to more death.



I mean, that’s not my point, I actually have a broader and more important point about the efficacy of political violence, but I guess if we can’t address that we’ve got some rocky years ahead.

Maybe I’ll move to a more stable country before shit gets real.

The cold hard uncomfortable truth is that the DC riots have way more in common with the Tulsa massacre in 1921 than some hippies not being able to contain a loosely organized section during a time of tension while having a sit in. If we don't address that, if we instead twist ourselves into a 'both sides' pretzel where we tell someone with a knee on their neck that we won't get off unless the use some unknown magic words, we are indeed in for a few rocky years and running away from the problem you contributed to won't solve it.

I mean, I’ll admit I contributed to it. I made excuses while people were burned to death, cities burned, police were executed in their cars, children were killed in the street, riots and looting decimated our small businesses, independence was declared, and our institutions largely ran away from the problem.

It was because protests weren’t working I said. It’s the only way to get the government’s attention I said. Peaceful protest failed I said.

Well, the right wing listened to me (and people like me) even though I wasn’t talking about trying to violently overturn an election.

And here we are.

You’re right though - I can’t run away from the problem I had a part in creating. It’s time for the violence to end, regardless of cause. We can’t have politics consisting of who can scare enough people with violence to win the levers of power.

[Cannot think of a name]

The cold hard uncomfortable truth is that the DC riots have way more in common with the Tulsa massacre in 1921 than some hippies not being able to contain a loosely organized section during a time of tension while having a sit in. If we don't address that, if we instead twist ourselves into a 'both sides' pretzel where we tell someone with a knee on their neck that we won't get off unless the use some unknown magic words, we are indeed in for a few rocky years and running away from the problem you contributed to won't solve it.

I mean, I’ll admit I contributed to it. I made excuses while people were burned to death, cities burned, police were executed in their cars, children were killed in the street, riots and looting decimated our small business, independence was declared, and our institutions largely ran away from the problem.

It was because protests weren’t working I said. It’s the only way to get the government’s attention I said. Peaceful protest failed I said.

Well, the right wing listened to me (and people like me) even though I wasn’t talking about trying to violently overturn an election.

And here we are.

You’re right though - I can’t run away from the problem I had a part in creating. It’s time for the violence to end, regardless of cause. We can’t have politics consisting of who can scare enough people with violence to win the levers of power.

What disengenious bullshit. In your overreach you've made a tennious connection between a single digit actors in CHOP that resulted in the people who were otherwise giving lectures, distributing healthcare and food, and creating art that resulted in 30 arrests and a return to rubber bullets and tear gas.

Meanwhile, within the same administration years rightwing militia men aimed guns at police trying to enforce public land rules and later took over a government building where they were waited out and then faced no consequences. That is what lead to the Capitol Riots, that is your progression and the fact that the responses to the two events are so disproportionate continues the divide, the fact that we are going to sit here and make the oppressed apologize to the oppressors before we'll consider the conversation is distasteful, more so to watch someone paint themselves noble in the process of continuing this pattern of violence against the citizens.

The truth is CHOP and its supporters denounced the violence as it happened and people who threatened police and took over government buildings with right wing ideals and white skin faced no consequences. That is the pattern you're contributing to.

[Kexholm Karelia]

I mean, I’ll admit I contributed to it. I made excuses while people were burned to death, cities burned, police were executed in their cars, children were killed in the street, riots and looting decimated our small business, independence was declared, and our institutions largely ran away from the problem.

It was because protests weren’t working I said. It’s the only way to get the government’s attention I said. Peaceful protest failed I said.

Well, the right wing listened to me (and people like me) even though I wasn’t talking about trying to violently overturn an election.

And here we are.

You’re right though - I can’t run away from the problem I had a part in creating. It’s time for the violence to end, regardless of cause. We can’t have politics consisting of who can scare enough people with violence to win the levers of power.

What disengenious bullshit. In your overreach you've made a tennious connection between a single digit actors in CHOP that resulted in the people who were otherwise giving lectures, distributing healthcare and food, and creating art that resulted in 30 arrests and a return to rubber bullets and tear gas.

Meanwhile, within the same administration years rightwing militia men aimed guns at police trying to enforce public land rules and later took over a government building where they were waited out and then faced no consequences. That is what lead to the Capitol Riots, that is your progression and the fact that the responses to the two events are so disproportionate continues the divide, the fact that we are going to sit here and make the oppressed apologize to the oppressors before we'll consider the conversation is distasteful, more so to watch someone paint themselves noble in the process of continuing this pattern of violence against the citizens.

The truth is CHOP and its supporters denounced the violence as it happened and people who threatened police and took over government buildings with right wing ideals and white skin faced no consequences. That is the pattern you're contributing to.

The rioters are being tracked down and arrested,

[Cannot think of a name]

What disengenious bullshit. In your overreach you've made a tennious connection between a single digit actors in CHOP that resulted in the people who were otherwise giving lectures, distributing healthcare and food, and creating art that resulted in 30 arrests and a return to rubber bullets and tear gas.

Meanwhile, within the same administration years rightwing militia men aimed guns at police trying to enforce public land rules and later took over a government building where they were waited out and then faced no consequences. That is what lead to the Capitol Riots, that is your progression and the fact that the responses to the two events are so disproportionate continues the divide, the fact that we are going to sit here and make the oppressed apologize to the oppressors before we'll consider the conversation is distasteful, more so to watch someone paint themselves noble in the process of continuing this pattern of violence against the citizens.

The truth is CHOP and its supporters denounced the violence as it happened and people who threatened police and took over government buildings with right wing ideals and white skin faced no consequences. That is the pattern you're contributing to.

The rioters are being tracked down and arrested,

This time. Meanwhile, literally as it happens, the Iowa man who was one of many people over the summer to drive his car into crowds of protesters won't be going to jail.

A white man who deliberately sped his car through a crowd of racial injustice protesters in Iowa City, striking several, will avoid prison and have the incident erased from his record if he stays out of trouble for three years.

The Bundy standoff directly emboldened militias, the exact kind that raided the Capitol Building.

Energized by their success, Bundy’s supporters are already talking about where else they can exercise armed defiance. They include groups deeply suspicious of what they see as a bloated, over-reaching government they fear wants to restrict their constitutional right to bear arms.

Alex Jones, a radio host and anti-government conspiracy theorist whose popular right-wing website, Infowars, helped popularize Bundy’s dispute, called it a watershed moment.

“Americans showed up with guns and said, ‘No, you’re not,” before confronting the armed BLM agents, Jones said in a telephone interview. “And they said, ‘Shoot us.’ And they did not. That’s epic. And it’s going to happen more.”

Militia experts interviewed by Reuters said they could not think of another example in recent decades where different militia groups had banded together to offer armed resistance to thwart a law enforcement operation.

In the days since the showdown, right-wing websites have begun searching for other Bundys. Several conservative and survivalist blogs have seized on the case of Tommy Henderson, a rancher on the Texas-Oklahoma border who they say is fighting BLM attempts to seize some of his land.

Someone shooting two people disolves an entire otherwise peaceful experiment, but another right wing white kid guns down protesters and becomes a right wing hero with other right wing racist groups scurry to his defense, even getting together to pay for it and turn him into a folk hero.

Sing me another song about how CHOP led to the Capitol Riots and it's the left that needs to look inside.

No, this is a pattern of marginalizing voices that has excused institutional violence against minorities since the founding of this country and anyone acting enlightened while contributing to it should be ashamed of themselves.

[Diahon]

"The PGA of America Board of Directors voted tonight to exercise the right to terminate the agreement to play the 2022 PGA Championship at Trump Bedminster." — Jim Richerson, PGA of America President

in terms of negative impact -- second or third?

[Senkaku]

Thank you to CTOAN for doing the effortposts I could not bring myself to, it still feels weird to talk about CHAZ/CHOP tbh but I appreciate someone doing it justice

So violence occured quicker and was more accepted. Sure disproves that "escalation thing."

Well, and there’s a lot of excuses in there for violence committed, and the claim that the violence wasn’t broadly supported by people inside CHAZ and therefore it’s not really the same.

Yes, shocker, people can make qualitative distinctions between different types of violence. A pitched conventional battle is not a riot is not a zone of state absence is not a premeditated coup d'etat. Well done on identifying this concept, now if only you'd read rest of the stuff CTOAN actually wrote...

It’s also well known that many people vocally disavow the violence on the right while excusing it, not unlike the left. You can see politicians like Cruz, who, let’s face it, is one of the people most vocal on this stupid “stop the steal” nonsense, immediately distance himself and disavow the violence.

Given that Cruz was one of the people who might've been the target of the mob, rather than an actor within the mob, I don't know why this analogy is being deployed

The cold hard uncomfortable truth is that the DC riots have way more in common with the Tulsa massacre in 1921 than some hippies not being able to contain a loosely organized section during a time of tension while having a sit in. If we don't address that, if we instead twist ourselves into a 'both sides' pretzel where we tell someone with a knee on their neck that we won't get off unless the use some unknown magic words, we are indeed in for a few rocky years and running away from the problem you contributed to won't solve it.

I mean, I’ll admit I contributed to it. I made excuses while people were burned to death, cities burned, police were executed in their cars, children were killed in the street, riots and looting decimated our small businesses, independence was declared, and our institutions largely ran away from the problem.

It was because protests weren’t working I said. It’s the only way to get the government’s attention I said. Peaceful protest failed I said.

And you were correct. I don't see what happened at the Capitol and what happened in Seattle or any number of other cities as part of the same trend; there are different strains of political violence in the US and while you may be able to argue they're all on the rise, your continued insistence on lumping them together as "THESE THINGS ARE THE SAME" seems like it's more about not wanting to separate them than about being unable to grasp the reasons why they should be separated.

Well, the right wing listened to me (and people like me) even though I wasn’t talking about trying to violently overturn an election.

And here we are.

You’re right though - I can’t run away from the problem I had a part in creating. It’s time for the violence to end, regardless of cause. We can’t have politics consisting of who can scare enough people with violence to win the levers of power.

Blaming people (and yourself) for something they didn't do, acknowledging that the cat is out of the bag regardless, and then wistfully proposing some vague unilateral disarmament anyways is QUITE a ride for one post.

If you can identify the problem of rising political violence, but can't ( or won't) orient yourself politically to discern between the different emergent strains, you're useless both analytically and ideologically. The stories you tell about its origins, its trend, and its comparative value won't effectively explain the past or predict the future, much less strike anyone as intellectually or emotionally compelling.

[Washington Resistance Army]

And you were correct. I don't see what happened at the Capitol and what happened in Seattle or any number of other cities as part of the same trend; there are different strains of political violence in the US and while you may be able to argue they're all on the rise, your continued insistence on lumping them together as "THESE THINGS ARE THE SAME" seems like it's more about not wanting to separate them than about being unable to grasp the reasons why they should be separated.

It's worth pointing out that the people who actually stormed the Capitol largely view them as the same trend. While I'm not active on Parler and can't tell you if the mindset still exists over the last month or two I noticed a growing trend among the right to point to the events of the summer as examples they should follow going forward. In the eyes of many on the right over the summer BLM and affiliated groups were able to run wild and break whatever laws they want and still get cover from the DNC and force the party to align with them on the issues. Whether that's true or not doesn't matter, it's the perception they have and at least some of them fully intend on using that formula going forward.

[Picairn]

And you were correct. I don't see what happened at the Capitol and what happened in Seattle or any number of other cities as part of the same trend; there are different strains of political violence in the US and while you may be able to argue they're all on the rise, your continued insistence on lumping them together as "THESE THINGS ARE THE SAME" seems like it's more about not wanting to separate them than about being unable to grasp the reasons why they should be separated.

It's worth pointing out that the people who actually stormed the Capitol largely view them as the same trend. While I'm not active on Parler and can't tell you if the mindset still exists over the last month or two I noticed a growing trend among the right to point to the events of the summer as examples they should follow going forward. In the eyes of many on the right over the summer BLM and affiliated groups were able to run wild and break whatever laws they want and still get cover from the DNC and force the party to align with them on the issues. Whether that's true or not doesn't matter, it's the perception they have and at least some of them fully intend on using that formula going forward.

Ironically the Progressives also pointed out how Repubs played dirty (obstructionism, Birther conspiracy, Tea Party movement, Merrick Garland) and won as an example for why the Democrats should also play dirty.

[Galloism]

And you were correct. I don't see what happened at the Capitol and what happened in Seattle or any number of other cities as part of the same trend; there are different strains of political violence in the US and while you may be able to argue they're all on the rise, your continued insistence on lumping them together as "THESE THINGS ARE THE SAME" seems like it's more about not wanting to separate them than about being unable to grasp the reasons why they should be separated.

These strains feed on each other. Many of the people in the DC riots were also at the BLM protests/riots as counter protestors (including buffalo guy, but he sticks out). It’s beyond absurd to think they learned nothing from being at these events and the coverage of these events.

There are even statements from the rioters comparing the treatment of them to BLM protests/riots. Clearly, they’re doing comparisons and feeding off the other.

This isn’t unusual. People often learn best from their opponents, and they see blm as, I dunno anarchocommunist lizard people or something, so they are opponents.

Blaming people (and yourself) for something they didn't do, acknowledging that the cat is out of the bag regardless, and then wistfully proposing some vague unilateral disarmament anyways is QUITE a ride for one post.

If you can identify the problem of rising political violence, but can't ( or won't) orient yourself politically to discern between the different emergent strains, you're useless both analytically and ideologically. The stories you tell about its origins, its trend, and its comparative value won't effectively explain the past or predict the future, much less strike anyone as intellectually or emotionally compelling.

Multilateral, not unilateral. But suffice to say, the people who stormed the capitol were in attendance at these other violent events, are making those comparisons when they do it, and therefore it’s clearly an influential factor.

[Galloism]

It's worth pointing out that the people who actually stormed the Capitol largely view them as the same trend. While I'm not active on Parler and can't tell you if the mindset still exists over the last month or two I noticed a growing trend among the right to point to the events of the summer as examples they should follow going forward. In the eyes of many on the right over the summer BLM and affiliated groups were able to run wild and break whatever laws they want and still get cover from the DNC and force the party to align with them on the issues. Whether that's true or not doesn't matter, it's the perception they have and at least some of them fully intend on using that formula going forward.

Ironically the Progressives also pointed out how Repubs played dirty (obstructionism, Birther conspiracy, Tea Party movement, Merrick Garland) and won as an example for why the Democrats should also play dirty.

Yes, people often learn the best tactics from their opponents.

[The Marlborough]

Ironically the Progressives also pointed out how Repubs played dirty (obstructionism, Birther conspiracy, Tea Party movement, Merrick Garland) and won as an example for why the Democrats should also play dirty.

Yes, people often learn the best tactics from their opponents.

Exactly. :^) Sixteen years to the day as well!

[Galloism]

Yes, people often learn the best tactics from their opponents.

Exactly. :^) Fifteen years to the day as well!

Sixteen. It’s 2021.

[The Alma Mater]

Ironically the Progressives also pointed out how Repubs played dirty (obstructionism, Birther conspiracy, Tea Party movement, Merrick Garland) and won as an example for why the Democrats should also play dirty.

Yes, people often learn the best tactics from their opponents.

Sofar even that we might be seeing a new party switch ?

I mean - suddenly the democrats are all "BLUE LIVES MATTER" over the cop that was killed and "LAW AND ORDER - jail the terrorists !" about the Trumpets that stormed the Capitol - while the republicans are suddenly all "Private companies should not have the right to refuse to serve us !"

Yes, this post is not entirely serious. But it is funny.

[The Marlborough]

Exactly. :^) Fifteen years to the day as well!

Sixteen. It’s 2021.

Considering how this year has been so far, I'm considering it an extension of 2020 (also insomnia is a pain and I'm very tired with only five hours of sleep).

[Galloism]

Yes, people often learn the best tactics from their opponents.

Sofar even that we might be seeing a new party switch ?

I mean - suddenly the democrats are all "BLUE LIVES MATTER" over the cop that was killed and "LAW AND ORDER - jail the terrorists !" about the Trumpets that stormed the Capitol - while the republicans are suddenly all "Private companies should not have the right to refuse to serve us !"

Yes, this post is not entirely serious. But it is funny.

It really is. But as they say, the best jokes have truth at their heart.

[Page]

Yes, people often learn the best tactics from their opponents.

Sofar even that we might be seeing a new party switch ?

I mean - suddenly the democrats are all "BLUE LIVES MATTER" over the cop that was killed and "LAW AND ORDER - jail the terrorists !" about the Trumpets that stormed the Capitol - while the republicans are suddenly all "Private companies should not have the right to refuse to serve us !"

Yes, this post is not entirely serious. But it is funny.

These things happen with conservatives and liberals from time to time. When Wikileaks put out Collateral Murder all the conservatives wanted to hang Assange. When they put out the DNC emails, all the liberals wanted to hang Assange and Wikileaks was on right-wing Santa's nice list for awhile.

Leftists generally stay consistent though.

[Kexholm Karelia]

Yes, people often learn the best tactics from their opponents.

Sofar even that we might be seeing a new party switch ?

I mean - suddenly the democrats are all "BLUE LIVES MATTER" over the cop that was killed and "LAW AND ORDER - jail the terrorists !" about the Trumpets that stormed the Capitol - while the republicans are suddenly all "Private companies should not have the right to refuse to serve us !"

Yes, this post is not entirely serious. But it is funny.

Or we could be in for another Progressive Era, this isn’t the first time it happened, in the Gilded Age, almost everyone agreed monopolies were bad and both parties ran as "progressives'