False Equivalencies
There’s a neat little trick that I’ve seen some conservatives make over the past few days to try and justify the bloody coup that left five of our fellow citizens dead. They use it all the time because it’s the easiest way to deflect from the indefensible (a position they find themselves in quite a bit during the Trump era). They bring up something that shares a vague commonality with whatever horrendous action they are trying to support. In some instances, I believe that it’s a matter of their small-brain, childlike logical thinking processes. Like a younger sibling complaining about how their older brother is allowed to stay out later, they can only see minute commonality because their worldview is simply too narrow. This brings about the absurd charges of reverse racism, “special treatment”, and the like.
This perspective is divorced from the reality that all things in life exist within a specific context. As a white man, I cannot say the n-word in polite society, even if my favorite rapper does. Is that equal, in the purest sense of the word? No. But since we’re adults we have to step outside of the vacuum of one singular thought and consider what comes along with it. Is it fair that our fellow Black citizens were dragged behind trucks and strung up in trees while being called that word? No. When has it EVER been acceptable for whites to use that word? Never. There is no alternate context for white people to use the n-word. If Black folks want to take a tool of their oppressors and transform it into a moniker of fraternity and community, so be it. It’s nothing to do with me or any other white person. And that isn’t to say all Black people are cool with it. I know a few who hate the word in any context and refuse to use it.
Instead of screaming “it’s not fair” like a spoiled child who didn’t get the flavor of ice cream they wanted, people can use their feelings of inequality to learn and grow, to gain a new perspective. On this particular topic, I’m not sure why a white person would WANT to be able to use that word without repercussion. I have never found myself in a situation where I was like “damn if only I could call this person a n—r!” Just hasn’t happened to me.
There have been two glaring instances of this deluded, false equivalence mentality over the past 48 hours that I think deserve a little look-see. The first came before the terrorist attack on the Capitol. It happened during Mitch McConnell’s speech before the ceremonial counting of electors that was to take place on January 6th. It was well-known beforehand that a number of congresspeople (60% of the republican delegation) were going to object during the procedure. This is a totally fine thing to do. It’s useless and doesn’t achieve anything but it’s fine to do. And as McConnell noted in his speech, Democrats have done the same thing before. They did it in 2000, 2004, and 2016.
So it’s totally fine that the Republicans do it too, right? Well, this is where we get into that tricky consider-the-context thing I mentioned earlier. The 2000 election was literally decided by the Supreme Court. It is one of the most contested and dubious elections in our history. I should also mention that the loser in that election, Al Gore, presided over the certification in 2001. He overruled all of the objections raised by his own party and the counting proceeded as usual. In 2016, people objected to the election because it was a PROVEN FACT that Russia had interfered with our elections. There were also numerous instances of voter disenfranchisement. And yet, what happened? Nothing. The motivation behind all these instances was to merely use the event as a chance to grandstand about a political concern. There was no genuine attempt or plan to try and overturn the election.
Context is important. In all these cases, the Democratic candidate had long since conceded and was actively participating in a transfer of power. That is not the circumstances we were faced with earlier in the week. That an insurrection occurred during the process is, frankly, pretty damn good evidence that there is a difference between the two. Republicans, in an effort to soothe the ego of their maniac leader, misled their constituents into thinking that there was something to be done about the 2020 elections. There wasn’t. And people like Josh Hawley and Ted Cruz knew full well that whatever stunt they pulled would have zero impact on Joe Biden becoming president. Instead, the fomented mistrust, anger, and division within the GOP ranks in an effort to gin up support for their future campaigns. Ted Cruz, WHILE THE CAPITOL WAS UNDER SIEGE, actually sent out a fundraising message!
It was a craven, disingenuous attempt to please Dear Leader and make money off the rubes who support Republicans. There was a frothing mob outside the building. The president had yet to concede and spent every minute since his loss trying to refute the results. What the GOP (again 60% of them!) did on Wednesday is nothing like what Democrats have done in the past.
And this brings us to the second example of false equivalency that I’ve heard bandied about this week. It goes a little something like this:
This is a wildly incorrect statement. For starters, any time that businesses were vandalized the leaders of the movements quickly spoke out against it. They didn’t hide in the White House and gleefully watch it unfold. Second, it completely ignores that a number of the “violent” episodes were caused either by MAGA supporters or extremely aggressive policing. If the Capital Police had done their jobs, we’d be looking at a much, much higher death count today. I am sure of that. Five is already WAY too many. It’s one more than BENGHAZI! in fact.
Let’s also consider what grievance the protestors/rioters were marching on. On one hand, you have the systemic racism that leads to Black people being killed by the police at a rate three times higher than their white counterparts. Not to mention all the other BS that has been endured by them at the hands of our racist police forces. On the other hand, you have a bunch of white people who are mad that they lost a free and fair election. Insurrection and the disruption of government was their aim. BLM just wants police to stop killing Black folk. EXACTLY THE SAME!
If anything, a comparison between the terror attack at the Capitol and how the police (the very SAME police force in some instances) treated the BLM protestors only goes to highlight how very correct we are when we say that policing in America is skewed to protect white people and oppress minorities. Imagine if Ilhan Omar had given a speech in which she encouraged a massive group of armed Muslims to march down Pennsylvania Avenue and engage in, as Rudy put it, “trial by combat”? Do you think they would have even reached the steps without the first shot being fired? Instead, the police on Wednesday allowed them to walk by, take over a government building for several hours, and then leave. A guy who broke into the House Speaker’s office stole mail and made it outside just fine. Someone took a damn podium with them!
So please, if you want to start comparing the two, let’s begin there.
The day before the attack in Washington, the DA in Kenosha, WI announced there would be no charges filed against Rusty Sheskey, the officer who shot Jacob Blake in the back seven times, leaving him paralyzed. In anticipation of the announcement, businesses boarded up their windows and the police increased their presence throughout the city. No one knew what the DA would announce but, just in case, people in the city were preparing for the worst. It never came. There was no rioting. Only a small protest that was entirely peaceful.
For weeks leading up to January 6th, Republicans made it perfectly clear what they intended to do. Trump announced in December that the day would be “wild” and encouraged his supporters to “fight” what he called “explosions of bullshit”. Louie Gohmert, a man who looks exactly as his name portends, said this:
There should have been no surprise in what was happening. It was all over social media.
The DC police knew about it. Again, people showed up wearing CIVIL WAR shirts! And yet, somehow, the Capitol Police were completely unprepared. I wonder why…
Make no mistake. What happened Wednesday was a terrorist attack. They brought bombs for goodness sake!
All you have to do is step out of one’s whiteness and privilege for a second to see how bad it is. Imagine thousands of men in turbans and women in hijabs running up the steps of the Capitol, armed with guns, knives, and handcuff zip-ties, smashing windows and forcing their way inside. (Note: I know that not all Muslim men wear turbans and women don’t all wear hijabs but I am trying to play to scary stereotypes so white people will gain perspective). Do you really think that the police would have stepped aside, and in one case, GAVE DIRECTIONS TO ONE OF THE TERRORISTS?
What if it HAD been BLM protestors? How would it have gone for them?
So go ahead and tell me how they’re the same thing. I beg you.
Creating false equivalencies is the easiest way to shift the argument from one topic to another. Instead of having to defend and justify a terrorist attack, we’re now talking about BLM. Instead of having to explain why a group of Republican congresspeople would seek to disenfranchise millions of voters and illegally overturn an election, we’re now talking about how the Dems started it. This behavior and method of debate is childish, narrow-minded, and reveals how limited conservatives are in their principles and ability to discuss difficult topics that require nuanced thinking.
Instead of engaging in this BS what-about-ism, I wish, for once, conservatives would actually examine their philosophies and principles and see if, perhaps, they’ve lost their way. If you can only justify your actions by pointing to another’s supposed sins, you’ve already lost.
The Capital Police need to be held accountable. The congresspeople who helped spread lies about the election need to be expelled from their positions. The president needs to be removed (and should have been a year ago). The news anchors and propagandists who provided a fertile ground for conspiracy theories should also be held accountable. If you think Al-Jazeera would still be on TV if they spread disinformation that led to a terror attack, I’ve got a bridge to sell you.
This has to stop. We have to stop acting like both sides are culpable for what happened. Republicans are wrong: in their policies, in their perspective on the world, and most importantly, about what happened this week. You cannot spend years engaging in violent rhetoric and making threats and suddenly wipe your hands when a terrorist attack takes place.
They begged for this. They voted for it. And they own it.