Violence & Escalation

     Just a week ago, your humble author noted a marked increase in the acceptance of violent rhetoric and and warned of “fringe individuals who live in political echo chambers who are likely to do something stupid”. Less than a week after posting, there was an attempted assassination of Donald Trump.   Initial reporting on the shooter suggests that the shooter was a loner of the “school shooter” variety, rather than some dedicated ANTIFA or other Leftwing nutball. The actual reason for the assassination attempt does not, and can not, detract from the very basic fact that that it must be condemned without reservation. Let us also not forget the other victims, either.

     There were, unsurprisingly, plenty of anecdotes of “undecideds” or people who were planning to skip the that line on the ballot suddenly coming out as newborn die-hard Trump supporters. However, this was far from a universal observation—both online and in the real world.   You humble author previously noted that so many voters are treating the election like a non-event and seem almost indifferent to an extent hitherto not seen in modern era politics. But people are being swamped with more politics than ever by a smaller number of people than ever. They’ve stopped caring, and the people responsible don’t care. This disinterest is real and may not be accurately measurable. Case in point:

What worries me less than the crazy leftists is the lumpen mass of the American people. My apolitical friend was completely disinterested in the assassination attempt on Trump. I suspect she’s not alone.

— Andrea Widburg (@Bookwormroom) July 14, 2024

     It’s telling that people are choosing indifference over siding against one side or the other.   The “double-haters” are real and it’s a sign of the sad state of politics today that not even an assassination attempt of a former President and current major party Presidential nominee is enough to get them to care. From an electoral standpoint, this assassination attempt will likely help with turning out Trumps voters and push some “double-hater” likely voters to vote for Trump rather than skip the ballot or vote for Biden. But this will be marginal, though margins matter a lot, just as they did in the previous two Presidential elections.

     Before the motive of the assassin was even known, rhetoric on social media by the Right placed the blame, not on the shooter, but on Biden and the Democrats in general for hyperbolic rhetoric about how Trump will be a dictator or become the new Hitler. Your humble author yet again notes that less than a week ago condemnation of over the top violent rhetoric and fearmongering would lead to an escalation of violence was made, and a call for people to get out of their bubble fear and vitriol and touch proverbial (or not so proverbial) grass.

     And yes, this was a condemnation of the violent rhetoric and violent actions from the fringe of both sides.   And for that condemnation, typically sensible people became incensed that the Right was not blameless in the increased ratcheting of fearmongering and violent rhetoric, or that it didn’t matter because the Left started it or was worse.

     Indeed we’ve seen over the past decade other Republicans being shot at, including confirmed Leftists such as the “Bernie Bro” who attacked Rep. Steve Scalise, or the planned assassination of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh. Yes, the “bullets are only flying in one direction” (i.e. from the Left to the Right), but that a handful of lunatics have resorted to the bullet against a handful of Republicans does not, and can not, negate that not only has violent rhetoric and full on demonization has become just as accepted on the Right as it has on the Left, but that the Right has demonstratedly shown to be able to engage in violence.

     of the many reasons Trump is so popular to so many is because “he fights”.   “Triggering” the libs and making them go crazy with “Trump Derangement Syndrome” is an integral part of his popularity within the GOP. Even in the absence of Democrats calling Trump a threat to democracy, the rhetoric and actions from the right are enough to make many believe that Trump is a threat to democracy. But admitting this gets in the way of the narrative and the urge for the Right to impose the rules that it felt was imposed on them.

     Plenty on the Right, particularly many “National Conservatives” talk about how we are already in a post-Constitutional world with no rules beyond those that can be imposed by force. So no, this can’t all be blamed on the Left, even though they can and ought to be blamed. This isn’t some call for a unilateral surrender, just a call to stop making it worse. One can attack their opponent without proclamations of histrionic doom.

     And yes, that violence, while not rising to assassination attempts—yet—is very real and just as much of an attack on democracy as an assassination attempt is, or a successful assassination would be. Less than four years ago overheated rhetoric and emotional rage led to a violent mob trying to interfere with a core Constitutional duty of Congress on January 6^th, resulting in a woman getting herself killed.   We’ve seen mail bombs mailed to Trump critics—a clear attempt at assassination. Stop trying to whitewash violent rhetoric and actions of your own side because it gets in the way of your narrative that the other side is a threat because they say your side is a threat.

     The Left and the Democrats more broadly ought to be condemned for escalating histrionic rhetoric. Many who have so condemned them, however, take offense to the idea that theyir side is anything but innocent angels in politics and try to deny their own side’s contribution to the madness. You should tend to your side and your own house to it doesn’t fester and get as bad violently, if not worse. Don’t turn a blind eye because you rationalized “your side” as being “not as bad”. Stop trying to minimize the attack on democracy by a violent mob on January 6^th. The Left should be telling its own side to tone down the rhetoric, but that doesn’t mean the Right should exempt itself because the problem isn’t which side the rhetoric is coming from, but that it’s coming at all. It’s hard for the Right to seem sincere about the Left shushing up the over-the-top rhetoric when the Right continues to ignore its own side.

     We’ve seen the President of the Heritage Foundation declare “we are in the process of the second American Revolution which will remain bloodless if the left allows it to be” and even calls to murder because the opposition is evil and “needs killing”.   So please excuse your humble author who is taking the sincerity of those on the Right condemning anti-Trump rhetoric for creating a violent political climate with a grain of salt.

     Your humble author has seen a GOP chairman declare that Trump was sent by God to save America and that he is the only one who could be America’s savior, while others have declared the other side “Satanic”. So maybe, juuust maybe, people, including those on the Left, might come to see the Right (or MAGA, or Trump, or whatnot) as existential threats to democracy even in the absence of Democratic messaging.

     Perhaps an even greater concern is how the attack on rhetoric of the Democrats and the Left more broadly devolves into citing the Leftist idea of “Stochastic Terrorism”:

“Stochastic terrorism is targeted political violence that has been instigated by hostile public rhetoric directed at a group or individual. Unlike incitement to terrorism, this is accomplished by using indirect, vague, or coded language that allows the instigator to plausibly disclaim responsibility for the resulting violence. A key element is the use of social media and other distributed forms of communications where the person who carries out the violence has no direct connection to the users of violent rhetoric.”

     The idea is that even though there isn’t an explicit call to “imminent lawless action” that is “likely to incite or produce such action”, rhetoric or speech that may increase the chance of someone else engaging in a “lawless action” is enough to justify censoring or opposing such speech. Many on the Right are embracing this now that they can use it against the Left to destroy them. This is a dangerous normalization against the rule of law and denormalization of the jurisprudence that the Bill of Rights protects (at least for now). It is embracing the same logic that the Left used to attack Sarah Palin after the attempted assassination of Gabby Giffords.

     So yes, by all means condemn the insane histrionic rhetoric of the Left for what it is, but don’t use that as an excuse to not police the crazies and histrionics of your own side.

Tweet