01-27-2021, 10:13 PM
The MSM calls it "the Big Lie"--Trump's claim that he won the election by millions of votes, but it was stolen from him by massive, Dem-coordinated voter fraud, especially in swing states. Deep, cult-like belief in this lie motivated thousands to march on the Capitol building when Trump urged them to “Stop the Steal,” and to storm it to take their country back when Mike Pence betrayed the Dear Leader.
For a brief moment, on Jan. 7, it seemed as if many Congressional Republicans and all Democrats were united in condemnation of the attempted coup, and in assigning Trump major responsibility for it. Before the week was out, however, the old divisions returned, and responses to the Capitol insurrection have divided into very different narratives which authorize very different consequences.
On the one hand, Dems continue to see the Lie as the primary motivation of the insurrectionists. Given this immense shock and immediate threat to the peaceful, democratic transfer of power, most Dems approved (at least as short term measures) when Facebook and Twitter banned Trump and some supporters and Parler was de-platformed and still agree that Right Wing Domestic Terrorism is still a threat.
For Dems, the Big Lie is still a problem. It may have originated with Trump, but it was amplified by powerful Republican lawmakers and a Right Wing Media Machine, including especially but not only Fox News. And it has not gone away, but continues to animate Trump’s base, who accordingly continue to influence their Congressmen. Given this fear, some have gone so far as to analogize the Capitol rioters to cultists and speculate whether anything short of de-programming could turn them from the Big Lie. There is a danger that the Republican party is becoming an openly illiberal one, ready to openly negate democratic norms and challenge rule of law to maintain minority power, as the historian of fascism Timothy Snyder warns in his NYT essay, "The American Abyss." https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/09/magazine/trump-coup.html
On the other hand, for Trump supporters in Congress and the media the Big Lie is not a Big Issue, and for many of the rank and file it is not even a lie. Rather, the issue is the “threat to our freedoms” now posed by censorship of conservative ideas on social media in response to the Capitol insurrection. E.g., Fox’s Maria Bartiromo, who lost 10% of her Twitter followers, warned that the MSM press has morphed into “state media,” signaling we are falling under totalitarianism. “It feels like Communist China” with a "left-wing mob" which is "unhinged and hysterical and spewing lies." https://www.mediaite.com/news/it-does-feel-like-communist-china-maria-bartiromo-complains-about-losing-twitter-followers-josh-hawley-facing-donor-book-deal-pullouts/. This appears to flip traditional conservative defenses of free speech as the right to freedom from government, not private-sector censorship.
My take: the political and media machinery which disseminated and amplified the Big lie is the same machinery which also folded the Russia Investigation into a “witchhunt” and Trump’s first impeachment into a “hoax” narrative. Since long before Benghazi, the credibility of that machinery has depended upon negating the credibility of the MSM. The people operating it to maintain power cannot very well undercut its credibility by clearly affirming that the election was legitimate--as the MSM had all along maintained.
This is a structural incapacity, and that is why for the last two weeks Fox News has not offered segments and commentators explicitly addressing the Big Lie. Discussion of Trump's culpability has been limited to the words of his rally speech, which clearly do not include "I hereby incite you to violence." The speculative comments about "deprogramming" the most fanatical of the Capitol insurgents have been generalized to an attack on all Trump supporters/Republicans, as the ban on seditious speech has been generalized as a threat to all Conservative speech.
And there has been a cascade of creative equivalence regarding "censorship" and Dem hypocrisy: Maxine Waters urging Dems to “get in the face” of Republican lawmakers equates to Trump’s “Stop the Steal” message to an angry mob; Dems, “silent” about ANTIFA and BLM violence, are now hypocritically upset that rioters broke into the Capitol, whereas Republican conservatives always and unequivocally condemn all violence; Rand Paul says no Republicans called for Sander’s impeachment when his rhetoric incited a supporter to shoot Scalise; Tulsi Gabbard told Tucker that Facebook, Twitter, John Brennan and Adam Schiff are "domestic enemies" and a greater threat to our democracy than the insurrectionists. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/tulsi-gabbard-brennan-schiff-domestic-terror-capitol-rioters
Hannity assures us that the second impeachment trial, like the first, is a “hoax.” After all, Dems have been calling for his impeachment since his election. Once again Trump hate is substituted for Trump actions as the "real" motivation for criticizing Trump.
So now it seems quite possible that material/political conditions which gave rise to and sustained the Big Lie through out 2020 will remain pretty much in place. There will be real consequences only for those acted on the Lie by breaching the Capitol. The threat of right wing political violence continues to be a very real one, if the prominent Republicans active in promoting the Lie can denounce "violence" but not the message that inspired it.
The Right to Free Speech in the U.S. has, over the course of U.S. history, been shaped and defined sometimes in response to perceived threats to individual freedom and sometimes in response to public safety. Now that private sector efforts to combat seditious speech are conflated with state control to rouse a defense of "our freedoms," I am wondering whether or what contested conceptions of free speech may eventually settle into U.S. law. Whose rights most need to protection now--the individual's or the public's?
For a brief moment, on Jan. 7, it seemed as if many Congressional Republicans and all Democrats were united in condemnation of the attempted coup, and in assigning Trump major responsibility for it. Before the week was out, however, the old divisions returned, and responses to the Capitol insurrection have divided into very different narratives which authorize very different consequences.
On the one hand, Dems continue to see the Lie as the primary motivation of the insurrectionists. Given this immense shock and immediate threat to the peaceful, democratic transfer of power, most Dems approved (at least as short term measures) when Facebook and Twitter banned Trump and some supporters and Parler was de-platformed and still agree that Right Wing Domestic Terrorism is still a threat.
For Dems, the Big Lie is still a problem. It may have originated with Trump, but it was amplified by powerful Republican lawmakers and a Right Wing Media Machine, including especially but not only Fox News. And it has not gone away, but continues to animate Trump’s base, who accordingly continue to influence their Congressmen. Given this fear, some have gone so far as to analogize the Capitol rioters to cultists and speculate whether anything short of de-programming could turn them from the Big Lie. There is a danger that the Republican party is becoming an openly illiberal one, ready to openly negate democratic norms and challenge rule of law to maintain minority power, as the historian of fascism Timothy Snyder warns in his NYT essay, "The American Abyss." https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/09/magazine/trump-coup.html
On the other hand, for Trump supporters in Congress and the media the Big Lie is not a Big Issue, and for many of the rank and file it is not even a lie. Rather, the issue is the “threat to our freedoms” now posed by censorship of conservative ideas on social media in response to the Capitol insurrection. E.g., Fox’s Maria Bartiromo, who lost 10% of her Twitter followers, warned that the MSM press has morphed into “state media,” signaling we are falling under totalitarianism. “It feels like Communist China” with a "left-wing mob" which is "unhinged and hysterical and spewing lies." https://www.mediaite.com/news/it-does-feel-like-communist-china-maria-bartiromo-complains-about-losing-twitter-followers-josh-hawley-facing-donor-book-deal-pullouts/. This appears to flip traditional conservative defenses of free speech as the right to freedom from government, not private-sector censorship.
My take: the political and media machinery which disseminated and amplified the Big lie is the same machinery which also folded the Russia Investigation into a “witchhunt” and Trump’s first impeachment into a “hoax” narrative. Since long before Benghazi, the credibility of that machinery has depended upon negating the credibility of the MSM. The people operating it to maintain power cannot very well undercut its credibility by clearly affirming that the election was legitimate--as the MSM had all along maintained.
This is a structural incapacity, and that is why for the last two weeks Fox News has not offered segments and commentators explicitly addressing the Big Lie. Discussion of Trump's culpability has been limited to the words of his rally speech, which clearly do not include "I hereby incite you to violence." The speculative comments about "deprogramming" the most fanatical of the Capitol insurgents have been generalized to an attack on all Trump supporters/Republicans, as the ban on seditious speech has been generalized as a threat to all Conservative speech.
And there has been a cascade of creative equivalence regarding "censorship" and Dem hypocrisy: Maxine Waters urging Dems to “get in the face” of Republican lawmakers equates to Trump’s “Stop the Steal” message to an angry mob; Dems, “silent” about ANTIFA and BLM violence, are now hypocritically upset that rioters broke into the Capitol, whereas Republican conservatives always and unequivocally condemn all violence; Rand Paul says no Republicans called for Sander’s impeachment when his rhetoric incited a supporter to shoot Scalise; Tulsi Gabbard told Tucker that Facebook, Twitter, John Brennan and Adam Schiff are "domestic enemies" and a greater threat to our democracy than the insurrectionists. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/tulsi-gabbard-brennan-schiff-domestic-terror-capitol-rioters
Hannity assures us that the second impeachment trial, like the first, is a “hoax.” After all, Dems have been calling for his impeachment since his election. Once again Trump hate is substituted for Trump actions as the "real" motivation for criticizing Trump.
So now it seems quite possible that material/political conditions which gave rise to and sustained the Big Lie through out 2020 will remain pretty much in place. There will be real consequences only for those acted on the Lie by breaching the Capitol. The threat of right wing political violence continues to be a very real one, if the prominent Republicans active in promoting the Lie can denounce "violence" but not the message that inspired it.
The Right to Free Speech in the U.S. has, over the course of U.S. history, been shaped and defined sometimes in response to perceived threats to individual freedom and sometimes in response to public safety. Now that private sector efforts to combat seditious speech are conflated with state control to rouse a defense of "our freedoms," I am wondering whether or what contested conceptions of free speech may eventually settle into U.S. law. Whose rights most need to protection now--the individual's or the public's?
![[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]](https://i.imgur.com/4CV0TeR.png)
