Walling up the people's house this summer and violating the rights and bodies of peaceful protestors was rightly condemned, too.
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2021/01/better-...
- Exterior doors that can't be rammed open with portable fences
- Interior doors with shatterproof glass windows
- Facade walls that don't function as ladders [0]
[0] https://www.chron.com/news/nation-world/article/photo-capito...
It takes a large number of people to pull off what they pulled of on Tuesday.
And no need for tear gas unless and until an attack is mounted.
* “U.S. Capitol security needs a total overhaul. The physical breaching and desecration of our temple of democracy must never happen again,” Senator Brian Schatz, a Democrat from Hawaii, said on Twitter. The thing is, he is right, but physical security improvements alone will not protect the Capitol from another insurrection.*
So, how did the author make the leap that Senator Schatz meant physical security improvements?
I think alot of Senators are thinking more along the lines of this article:
https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-attempted-coup-federal...
How do they ensure law enforcement are not complicit in the coup?
I would argue that those trying to secure the structure against invasion by the People are the ones desecrating the Temple. Like it or not what many hear call an insurrection, I call an unequivocal vote of no confidence by the governed and a call to action aimed at Representatives. Not to hide away behind locked barriers, but to listen, and take to heart the fact that people are pissed enough to mobilize in the first place. A call and voice message to the Rep is one thing. Repeated letters another. Putting in a physical appearance at an office yet another.
Pushing your way into and disrupting Legislative business is an unmatched attention grabber, and to be frank, I'm not willing to deprive anyone willing to drive to D.C. of the opportunity to have an impact, nor am I willing to accept only the well heeled should be capable of regularly exercising the advantage of exploiting proximity to Federal Representatives.
A person exercising Liberty, especially to the disdain of the majority, is the quintessential act of American patriotism and civil spirit. That foreign actors may have made use of the chaos is regrettable, but nevertheless, this is American government by design. It doesn't exist and rule by it's own right or ability to trounce all comers. It exists and rules because we all let it. Something I think a lot of people do not quite grasp.
That Trump of all people is the one to bring all this out makes me want to vomit a bit, but it is what it is. So it goes.
edit:
"to call that a "quintessential act of American patriotism" is open advocacy for violence, and I don't think I can ethically participate in a forum which permits such a terrible thing."
Correct me if I am misreading this, but you are making this an ethical issue the same way your opponent does. Note that the comment you replied to appears to view his position the same way. He, apparently, sees it as not only ethical, but a mandatory subset of being an American; a virtue.
May I suggest that all of us participate freely in this exchange of ideas. You are free not to the same way he is free to. Ethics have little to do with this.
It does fit FBI definition ( https://www.fbi.gov/investigate/terrorism ), but that definition is rather broad to begin with. To me attack suggests some level of planning, forethought, end game even it is just to terrorize. FBI definition also does not seem to indicate that terrorist attacks are typically directed towards civilians ( government buildings are not civilians ).
But if we accept FBI definition then what political end was achieved by this? Clearly not the intended one.
Again. I think this is just another Patriot Act moment. We can calm down or go down another rabbit hole. Only this time, we will have to TSA every time we want to talk to a government official.
Folks turned up the protest armed and carrying zip-tie cuffs. Improvised explosive devices were planted in multiple locations. There can be no argument that there wasn’t a segment of protestors that turned up to commit acts of terror.
okay, but you can say that about pretty much any sufficiently large protest. most people show up to be heard. a few arrive with bricks, molotovs, etc. it's always hard to tell whether the violent elements are aligned with the greater cause, false flags, or just people who saw an opportunity to create mayhem.
I do agree that we need to calm down rather than going down the rabbit hole of making 100% sure it can never happen again. But one of the critical ways in which a society calms down is by reinforcing its commitment to nonviolent norms of communication, and that involves a collective recognition that glorification of violence is incompatible with norms of kindness and respect. Reading a comment on how neat it was to watch people break into the Capitol is like reading someone's detailed story of how they'll kill burglars who break into their home - I get it, I really do, but it's incredibly poisonous to polite discourse.
"Complicit in the coup" makes it sound like they're on the side of the Trump morons. This is certainly possible, but does having comically understaffed security when it was extremely well known that there was going to be a huge crowd serve Donald Trump, or someone else? Like, when you turn on the news, or read forums, do you get a feeling that this is playing out in favour of Trump and his supporters?
I am going to be paying close attention to how this story is spun over the next few weeks, including the type of language they use, and we'll see if an investigation that can be taken seriously is ever performed. And going forward, how often this event is used as "proof" of how dangerous "right wing extremists" (or populists) are.
You’re not the first to make this comparison :)
This isn’t sophistry, it’s a vitally important point because the legitimacy and accountability of government are the individual responsibility of every citizen. You and I are responsible for complying with government because we consent to be ruled due to our recognition of its legitimacy. Equally, we are responsible when we vote in a leader or representative. The guy in Starship Troopers is right, a vote is an act of force.
I am not certain to overt separation of 'little people' and 'non-little peopple' is that good of an idea, overall.
But they did exacrtly that during the BLM protests, where people had no weapons. They've even physically ejected disabled people from protesting at the Capitol.
So it seems they have no qualms about doing it to certain groups of people.