12 ms·

I can't believe this needs to be said, but the fact it failed doesn't mean the danger wasn't real. Some members of the mob were actively looking to kill the pe

by slg 6y ago

I can't believe this needs to be said, but the fact it failed doesn't mean the danger wasn't real. Some members of the mob were actively looking to kill the people who were 2nd and 3rd in line for the presidency. Let's not pretend that there was zero danger to democracy.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
throwaway894345 6y ago
> I can't believe this needs to be said, but the fact it failed doesn't mean the danger wasn't real. The danger is unreal not because it failed, but because it was obviously going to fail. We're talking about a bunch of delusional LARPers. If some foreign intelligence unit tries and fails to overthrow your country's government, that's insurrection. If it's the doofus who stole the podium or the guy with face paint and a horned fur hat, not so much. Note that the factual crimes are already plenty bad--they don't need to be exaggerated. > Some members of the mob were actively looking to kill the people who were 2nd and 3rd in line for the presidency There were murderers and arsonists at BLM riots as well; that doesn't impugn the legitimate protesters. Similarly, these few actual insurrectionists don't make the MAGA trespassers, rioters, even murderers into insurrectionists. > Let's not pretend that there was zero danger to democracy. There is a danger to our democracy in that a sitting president undermining democracy by spreading lies about election fraud. More generally, the media and tech companies are deliberately cultivating division and mistrust among the American people. These are real, credible dangers to democracy. The MAGA LARPers were not a credible threat to our democracy.
- slg 6y ago
  >The danger is unreal not because it failed, but because it was obviously going to fail. We're talking about a bunch of delusional LARPers. If some foreign intelligence unit tries and fails to overthrow your country's government, that's insurrection. If it's the doofus who stole the podium or the guy with face paint and a horned fur hat, not so much. What are you basing the obviousness of the failure on? The mob was seemingly a few dozen feet away from numerous politicians with the only thigs between them being a barricaded door and seemingly less than a half dozen security people. >There were murderers and arsonists at BLM riots as well; that doesn't impugn the legitimate protesters. Similarly, these few actual insurrectionists don't make the MAGA trespassers, rioters, even murderers into insurrectionists. How many murders were committed by the millions of BLM protester in the dozens of cities they protested in over the months they protested? Because these thousands of people in DC were able to murder one and get multiple of their own killed? The violence rate of the two isn't comparable. >There is a danger to our democracy in that a sitting president undermining democracy by spreading lies about election fraud. More generally, the media and tech companies are deliberately cultivating division and mistrust among the American people. These are real, credible dangers to democracy. The MAGA LARPers were not a credible threat to our democracy. What happened on 1/6 was a direct result of those first two. This is part of the danger to democracy manifesting itself.
- NicoJuicy 6y ago
  > The danger is unreal not because it failed, but because it was obviously going to fail. Being 1 door away from where they were hiding seems a pretty close call imo
- dragonwriter 6y ago
  > The danger is unreal not because it failed, but because it was obviously going to fail They came very close to having members in the hands of the mob; I think you very much overestimate what was required for this to succeed. Even if the mob itself was disavowed, simply getting a presiding officer more that would be more sympathetic to the President’s interests int he circumstances (which probably would have taken at least one more removal than “Hang Mike Pence”, but may not have been impractical) would potentially have provided a sufficient pretext for a process in which the Congress would have ended up declaring Trump the winner. But even if it was “obviously going to fail”, that doesn’t make it not-dangerous (even if the intended violence didn’t have the intended political effects, it still would have been horrific) or not-insurrection. > If some foreign intelligence unit tries and fails to overthrow your country’s government, that’s insurrection. No, its a (covert) invasion. > If it’s the doofus who stole the podium or the guy with face paint and a horned fur hat, not so much. How about if it is the retired Air Force Lt. Col. with zip ties who was directing action, including efforts at intelligence gathering on members, in the Senate chamber? Just because the unusual outfits get disproportionate media attention doesn’t mean they were the dominant factor in the insurrection.
  - sanderjd 6y ago
    It is making me very disappointed that all the good comments in this thread are downvoted and all the bad ones upvoted. Looking like end times for this community, to me. I don't want to participate in a community with a bunch of insurrection apologists.
    - jacquesm 6y ago
      Essentially you're talking about roughly 33% or so of the American electorate, that's bound to get some downvotes, I wouldn't sweat it, note the good guys, upvote them where you can and stick around to stop it from sliding away even further. And yes, it is annoying. Also: typically it corrects itself in the longer run, so don't take a snapshot like this as the end state.
      - sanderjd 6y ago
- viraptor 6y ago
  > We're talking about a bunch of delusional LARPers. There were lots of LARPers. There were also some groups moving in organised fashion with less expensive and more useful equipment. There were people with bombs. There were some people ready to inflict harm on LE and luckily they didn't carry on to other people. It was not a homogeneous group with same ideas and goals. That idea is just distracting from what happened.
  - smichel17 6y ago
    Can we get some number or range for "lots of"? I imagine those words mean wildly different things (1-2 orders of magnitude) to different people.
    - XorNot 6y ago
      I mean pipe bombs were found at both political party headquarters, so how many bombs is enough to be serious?
      - smichel17 6y ago
        You're ascribing intent to my words where there is none. I have no interest in arguing my opinion here. I am interested in reading other people's thoughtfully formed opinions. Using words like "lots of" without clarifying further seems likely to lead to people talking past each other. That's why I commented.
      - brandonmenc 6y ago
        Hundreds, at least. https://time.com/4501670/bombings-of-america-burrough/ https://time.com/4501670/bombings-of-america-burrough/
      - nyolfen 6y ago
        puerto rican nationalists stormed the capitol and shot congressmen in 1954; leftists literally bombed the senate chamber in 1983; we somehow managed to persist without restricting civil liberties both times. have you ever even heard of these events? i would wager most of us haven't. this time though, they had a 10,000 page anti-terror bill waiting in the wings and ready to push through, a dark reminder of the patriot act and the post-9/11 expansion of the security state. and just like telecoms and media companies after 9/11, the corporations line up to kiss the ring.
- tinyhouse 6y ago
  I agree with the sentiment that this thing was blown out of proportion. I watched the videos and the police could easily stop them by using deadly force. They decided not to and the protestors took advantage of it. There was only one woman who got shot from my understanding. I think the police should get a lot of credit here. That's the police we want to see - officers who use common sense and don't apply deadly force unless someone is in serious danger (I didn't see the xx ç video of the shooting yet). Unfortunately a lot of people including many celbreties decided to ignore that and instead focus on white privilege and if those were black people the result was different. Some people don't want peace, just wars. With that being said, you cannot take it lightly. The FBI should take it very seriously. We all remember Timothy Mcveigh. I really hope the next few weeks will pass quietly.
  - throwaway894345 6y ago
    > Unfortunately a lot of people including many celbreties decided to ignore that and instead focus on white privilege and if those were black people the result was different. It also seems to me that "race" isn't the only pertinent difference with respect to the differing police response between the two riots. Even if the police simply leaned right, that would provide a non-racial explanation. Of course, we can't have a politicized police force, but that's a non-racial explanation. Similarly, BLM spent the entire summer campaigning aggressively against the police (whether or not their campaign was righteous is immaterial for this conversation) while MAGA was consistently "Back The Blue" right up until the Capitol Hill riots. Again, it's not acceptable for police to act on such biases, but it's a very different problem with a very different solution than a racial motive. > Some people don't want peace, just wars. Sadly, I agree. I get the distinct feeling that people want to crush their political opponents these days, and they're happy to use any post-facto reasoning to rationalize their anger, hatred, etc. It seems like we as a society no longer value peace, mercy, forgiveness, or grace; there is only vindictiveness masquerading as "justice".
DudeInBasement 6y ago
Do you remember the shooter who shoot congressmen at a congressal ball game? The difference, he had a gun these people didn't
- sixothree 6y ago
  You really think these people weren't armed? edit: to be clear, there were a number of people pictured and arrested carrying firearms.
- abakker 6y ago
  Someone brought pipe bombs that he made himself...
  - tomp 6y ago
    To the Capitol? Or are you spewing fake news?
    - abakker 6y ago
      I mean, I’m going off of this: https://www.fbi.gov/wanted/seeking-info/suspected-pipe-bombs-in-washington-dc https://www.fbi.gov/wanted/seeking-info/suspected-pipe-bombs... https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-joe-biden-inaugurations-capitol-siege-8828a6a920198d0ea1ee0c73a49d8847 https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-joe-biden-inaugurati... https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.al.com/news/birmingham/2021/01/lonnie-coffman-alabama-man-arrested-in-dc-ordered-held-without-bond.html%3foutputType=amp https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.al.com/news/birmingham/2021...
      - tomp 6y ago
        Fake news, then. Pipe bombs and RNC/DNC headquarters, not the Capitol. Typical motte and bailey. “They bombed the Capitol building” except they actually didn’t.
        abakker 6y ago
imgabe 6y ago
> Some members of the mob were actively looking to kill the people who were 2nd and 3rd in line for the presidency. Let's not pretend that there was zero danger to democracy. Do you realize that numerous times throughout history people have successfully killed the actual president and it didn't end democracy? What these people did was a serious crime and it should absolutely be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, but no it was never going to destroy the country or end democracy. This is hyperbole people are using to grab and consolidate power. Democracy is not a single person that can be killed and taken over. It's all of us acting in concert to uphold those values. It doesn't end by this person or that person being killed, it ends by all of us collectively agreeing to give up the values that make it work. That's the real threat here.
- SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
  Your description of democracy is on the nose, but that's exactly why I think it's reasonable to be concerned. One of the critical values that makes democracy work is the peaceful transition of power, and if there'd been just a bit more violence, it would be impossible to maintain even a polite fiction that this transition was peaceful.
  - smichel17 6y ago
    We've still survived worse. The civil war comes to mind (although in some ways, current tensions are an extension of that conflict).
    - SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
      "Survived" is just a very low bar. I'm not scared of the US becoming Mad Max - I'm scared of something like the Troubles, where democratic institutions still exist but struggle to maintain the peace against large, powerful groups who don't consider them legitimate.
- vharuck 6y ago
  >Do you realize that numerous times throughout history people have successfully killed the actual president and it didn't end democracy? I'm no historian, so was there ever a time the killing was instigated by a sitting politician who then was not punished? (Yes, the Senate has yet to decide, but chances are they won't vote for removal or banning from office). Because politicians trying to have their political opponents harmed or killed is basically all one needs to have fake democracy.
roland35 6y ago
I think you should read this blog (popular on HN), he explains it in a historical context better than I could. Basically this type of thing happened a lot in ancient democracies and even then it often seemed silly and harmless, until it wasn't. https://acoup.blog/2021/01/15/miscellanea-insurrections-ancient-and-modern-and-also-meet-the-academicats/ https://acoup.blog/2021/01/15/miscellanea-insurrections-anci...
haram_masala 6y ago
In 1983 a group of people actually did bomb the Senate, which seems much more severe than just a bunch of rednecks roaming the halls and yelling stuff. Democracy endured just fine.

by slg 6y ago

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

throwaway894345 6y ago

> I can't believe this needs to be said, but the fact it failed doesn't mean the danger wasn't real. The danger is unreal not because it failed, but because it was obviously going to fail. We're talking about a bunch of delusional LARPers. If some foreign intelligence unit tries and fails to overthrow your country's government, that's insurrection. If it's the doofus who stole the podium or the guy with face paint and a horned fur hat, not so much. Note that the factual crimes are already plenty bad--they don't need to be exaggerated. > Some members of the mob were actively looking to kill the people who were 2nd and 3rd in line for the presidency There were murderers and arsonists at BLM riots as well; that doesn't impugn the legitimate protesters. Similarly, these few actual insurrectionists don't make the MAGA trespassers, rioters, even murderers into insurrectionists. > Let's not pretend that there was zero danger to democracy. There is a danger to our democracy in that a sitting president undermining democracy by spreading lies about election fraud. More generally, the media and tech companies are deliberately cultivating division and mistrust among the American people. These are real, credible dangers to democracy. The MAGA LARPers were not a credible threat to our democracy.

slg 6y ago
>The danger is unreal not because it failed, but because it was obviously going to fail. We're talking about a bunch of delusional LARPers. If some foreign intelligence unit tries and fails to overthrow your country's government, that's insurrection. If it's the doofus who stole the podium or the guy with face paint and a horned fur hat, not so much. What are you basing the obviousness of the failure on? The mob was seemingly a few dozen feet away from numerous politicians with the only thigs between them being a barricaded door and seemingly less than a half dozen security people. >There were murderers and arsonists at BLM riots as well; that doesn't impugn the legitimate protesters. Similarly, these few actual insurrectionists don't make the MAGA trespassers, rioters, even murderers into insurrectionists. How many murders were committed by the millions of BLM protester in the dozens of cities they protested in over the months they protested? Because these thousands of people in DC were able to murder one and get multiple of their own killed? The violence rate of the two isn't comparable. >There is a danger to our democracy in that a sitting president undermining democracy by spreading lies about election fraud. More generally, the media and tech companies are deliberately cultivating division and mistrust among the American people. These are real, credible dangers to democracy. The MAGA LARPers were not a credible threat to our democracy. What happened on 1/6 was a direct result of those first two. This is part of the danger to democracy manifesting itself.
NicoJuicy 6y ago
> The danger is unreal not because it failed, but because it was obviously going to fail. Being 1 door away from where they were hiding seems a pretty close call imo
dragonwriter 6y ago
> The danger is unreal not because it failed, but because it was obviously going to fail They came very close to having members in the hands of the mob; I think you very much overestimate what was required for this to succeed. Even if the mob itself was disavowed, simply getting a presiding officer more that would be more sympathetic to the President’s interests int he circumstances (which probably would have taken at least one more removal than “Hang Mike Pence”, but may not have been impractical) would potentially have provided a sufficient pretext for a process in which the Congress would have ended up declaring Trump the winner. But even if it was “obviously going to fail”, that doesn’t make it not-dangerous (even if the intended violence didn’t have the intended political effects, it still would have been horrific) or not-insurrection. > If some foreign intelligence unit tries and fails to overthrow your country’s government, that’s insurrection. No, its a (covert) invasion. > If it’s the doofus who stole the podium or the guy with face paint and a horned fur hat, not so much. How about if it is the retired Air Force Lt. Col. with zip ties who was directing action, including efforts at intelligence gathering on members, in the Senate chamber? Just because the unusual outfits get disproportionate media attention doesn’t mean they were the dominant factor in the insurrection.
- sanderjd 6y ago
  It is making me very disappointed that all the good comments in this thread are downvoted and all the bad ones upvoted. Looking like end times for this community, to me. I don't want to participate in a community with a bunch of insurrection apologists.
  - jacquesm 6y ago
    Essentially you're talking about roughly 33% or so of the American electorate, that's bound to get some downvotes, I wouldn't sweat it, note the good guys, upvote them where you can and stick around to stop it from sliding away even further. And yes, it is annoying. Also: typically it corrects itself in the longer run, so don't take a snapshot like this as the end state.
    - sanderjd 6y ago
viraptor 6y ago
> We're talking about a bunch of delusional LARPers. There were lots of LARPers. There were also some groups moving in organised fashion with less expensive and more useful equipment. There were people with bombs. There were some people ready to inflict harm on LE and luckily they didn't carry on to other people. It was not a homogeneous group with same ideas and goals. That idea is just distracting from what happened.
- smichel17 6y ago
  Can we get some number or range for "lots of"? I imagine those words mean wildly different things (1-2 orders of magnitude) to different people.
  - XorNot 6y ago
    I mean pipe bombs were found at both political party headquarters, so how many bombs is enough to be serious?
    - smichel17 6y ago
      You're ascribing intent to my words where there is none. I have no interest in arguing my opinion here. I am interested in reading other people's thoughtfully formed opinions. Using words like "lots of" without clarifying further seems likely to lead to people talking past each other. That's why I commented.
    - brandonmenc 6y ago
      Hundreds, at least. https://time.com/4501670/bombings-of-america-burrough/ https://time.com/4501670/bombings-of-america-burrough/
    - nyolfen 6y ago
      puerto rican nationalists stormed the capitol and shot congressmen in 1954; leftists literally bombed the senate chamber in 1983; we somehow managed to persist without restricting civil liberties both times. have you ever even heard of these events? i would wager most of us haven't. this time though, they had a 10,000 page anti-terror bill waiting in the wings and ready to push through, a dark reminder of the patriot act and the post-9/11 expansion of the security state. and just like telecoms and media companies after 9/11, the corporations line up to kiss the ring.
tinyhouse 6y ago
I agree with the sentiment that this thing was blown out of proportion. I watched the videos and the police could easily stop them by using deadly force. They decided not to and the protestors took advantage of it. There was only one woman who got shot from my understanding. I think the police should get a lot of credit here. That's the police we want to see - officers who use common sense and don't apply deadly force unless someone is in serious danger (I didn't see the xx ç video of the shooting yet). Unfortunately a lot of people including many celbreties decided to ignore that and instead focus on white privilege and if those were black people the result was different. Some people don't want peace, just wars. With that being said, you cannot take it lightly. The FBI should take it very seriously. We all remember Timothy Mcveigh. I really hope the next few weeks will pass quietly.
- throwaway894345 6y ago
  > Unfortunately a lot of people including many celbreties decided to ignore that and instead focus on white privilege and if those were black people the result was different. It also seems to me that "race" isn't the only pertinent difference with respect to the differing police response between the two riots. Even if the police simply leaned right, that would provide a non-racial explanation. Of course, we can't have a politicized police force, but that's a non-racial explanation. Similarly, BLM spent the entire summer campaigning aggressively against the police (whether or not their campaign was righteous is immaterial for this conversation) while MAGA was consistently "Back The Blue" right up until the Capitol Hill riots. Again, it's not acceptable for police to act on such biases, but it's a very different problem with a very different solution than a racial motive. > Some people don't want peace, just wars. Sadly, I agree. I get the distinct feeling that people want to crush their political opponents these days, and they're happy to use any post-facto reasoning to rationalize their anger, hatred, etc. It seems like we as a society no longer value peace, mercy, forgiveness, or grace; there is only vindictiveness masquerading as "justice".

DudeInBasement 6y ago

Do you remember the shooter who shoot congressmen at a congressal ball game? The difference, he had a gun these people didn't

sixothree 6y ago
You really think these people weren't armed? edit: to be clear, there were a number of people pictured and arrested carrying firearms.
abakker 6y ago
Someone brought pipe bombs that he made himself...
- tomp 6y ago
  To the Capitol? Or are you spewing fake news?
  - abakker 6y ago
    I mean, I’m going off of this: https://www.fbi.gov/wanted/seeking-info/suspected-pipe-bombs-in-washington-dc https://www.fbi.gov/wanted/seeking-info/suspected-pipe-bombs... https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-joe-biden-inaugurations-capitol-siege-8828a6a920198d0ea1ee0c73a49d8847 https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-joe-biden-inaugurati... https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.al.com/news/birmingham/2021/01/lonnie-coffman-alabama-man-arrested-in-dc-ordered-held-without-bond.html%3foutputType=amp https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.al.com/news/birmingham/2021...
    - tomp 6y ago
      Fake news, then. Pipe bombs and RNC/DNC headquarters, not the Capitol. Typical motte and bailey. “They bombed the Capitol building” except they actually didn’t.
      - abakker 6y ago

imgabe 6y ago

> Some members of the mob were actively looking to kill the people who were 2nd and 3rd in line for the presidency. Let's not pretend that there was zero danger to democracy. Do you realize that numerous times throughout history people have successfully killed the actual president and it didn't end democracy? What these people did was a serious crime and it should absolutely be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, but no it was never going to destroy the country or end democracy. This is hyperbole people are using to grab and consolidate power. Democracy is not a single person that can be killed and taken over. It's all of us acting in concert to uphold those values. It doesn't end by this person or that person being killed, it ends by all of us collectively agreeing to give up the values that make it work. That's the real threat here.

SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
Your description of democracy is on the nose, but that's exactly why I think it's reasonable to be concerned. One of the critical values that makes democracy work is the peaceful transition of power, and if there'd been just a bit more violence, it would be impossible to maintain even a polite fiction that this transition was peaceful.
- smichel17 6y ago
  We've still survived worse. The civil war comes to mind (although in some ways, current tensions are an extension of that conflict).
  - SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
    "Survived" is just a very low bar. I'm not scared of the US becoming Mad Max - I'm scared of something like the Troubles, where democratic institutions still exist but struggle to maintain the peace against large, powerful groups who don't consider them legitimate.
vharuck 6y ago
>Do you realize that numerous times throughout history people have successfully killed the actual president and it didn't end democracy? I'm no historian, so was there ever a time the killing was instigated by a sitting politician who then was not punished? (Yes, the Senate has yet to decide, but chances are they won't vote for removal or banning from office). Because politicians trying to have their political opponents harmed or killed is basically all one needs to have fake democracy.

roland35 6y ago

I think you should read this blog (popular on HN), he explains it in a historical context better than I could. Basically this type of thing happened a lot in ancient democracies and even then it often seemed silly and harmless, until it wasn't. https://acoup.blog/2021/01/15/miscellanea-insurrections-ancient-and-modern-and-also-meet-the-academicats/ https://acoup.blog/2021/01/15/miscellanea-insurrections-anci...

haram_masala 6y ago

In 1983 a group of people actually did bomb the Senate, which seems much more severe than just a bunch of rednecks roaming the halls and yelling stuff. Democracy endured just fine.