In this Where We Stand series, I am examining democracy and its wounds, many of them with a long American history, many of them intensified during the Donald Trump Administration. This post is about violence that is designed explicitly to influence values and politics.
American political violence is hardly new: One has only to think of the Ku Klux Klan, anti-union violence of the early 20th century, or 400 years of state-sanctioned violence against African Americans. The years before the Civil War saw more than 70 incidents of violence between lawmakers on the floors of Congress. But after anti-war protests and the police response, violence again went mostly underground. But the acceptability of political violence is growing again. As I wrote in the introduction to this series,
Openly carried assault weapons are legal and frequently visible, militia [come into the open], threats of violence against political “enemies” are not unusual. Then-candidate Trump suggested violence against protesters at campaign rallies. A peaceful demonstration across from the White House was violently suppressed. Our political language is ever-more violent. Incredibly, some members of Congress fear violence from their congressional colleagues. With such violence comes fear, and fear inhibits democracy.
Unfortunately, American political violence exists within the larger American culture of violence: guns on the streets; far-right white-supremacist groups and (to a lesser degree) far-left groups espousing violence; openly carried military assault weapons; and so on. It is not surprising that this culture spills over into politics. Even before the January 6 insurrection at the US Capitol, the sight of armed militia at marches and protests had become common. In April of last year, a handful of people in camouflage armed with semiautomatic rifles stood in the Michigan Senate Gallery as the lawmakers went about their work. Heavily armed with assault rifles, a group “guarded” the door to the office of Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer in protest of the governor’s Covid-mask requirement.
 |
|
Heavily armed protesters outside Michigan governor’s office |
The pictures still stun me. Take a moment to consider those images of assault weapons in the political context. What have we become when people armed with those weapons are a normalized part of our politics?
They call themselves “peacekeepers,” but legitimate peacekeepers are sent to areas already engaged in violence to keep the violent combatants apart. These “peacemakers,” however, are combatants themselves and they enter into peaceful protests, intentionally threatening violence.
It is not surprising, then, that even legislators have begun to carry guns in the Capitol (and clandestinely, into the congressional chambers).
The state of national politics has resulted in near-complete partisan divide on any disputed issue. Worse, these battles are accompanied by accusations of “bad-faith”. The other side is not just wrong but un-American, a threat to our way of life that must be opposed at any price … including threats of violence and, increasingly, violence itself.
Unless we manage to de-escalate the wider culture of violence, the only solution to the problem of political violence is gradually to turn down the temperature in our politics. This is certainly most difficult and, as the Civil War demonstrated, not always possible where core values are threatened. But it is not impossible: Previous times of extremism and political violence have eventually resolved … usually, however, requiring years.
As the Republican Party retreats into ever-more extremist positions (see my last post), there is a possibility that the conservative point of view will, with time, find expression in a new, less extreme, party (or repurposing of the current Republican Party) comprising conservative Democrats, independents, business interests, and at least some libertarians. The major challenge, then, may simply be to hold the country and our politics together long enough, a difficult but not impossible task.
The "boring" first months of the Biden Administration may be a beginning.
