Trump and his far-right allies have stoked a dangerous climate that increases the likelihood of violence far beyond midterms, extremism experts warn
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Trump and his far-right allies have stoked a dangerous climate that increases the likelihood of violence far beyond midterms, extremism experts warn
-
Political violence experts warn that Trump and his allies are fomenting a dangerous climate.
-
They're normalizing "aggression and violence" against political opponents, an extremism researcher said.
-
"Republican campaign ads have been riven with violent language and imagery," an expert on political violence said.
A home invasion and violent attack against House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's husband prompted renewed concerns about the contentious political climate in the US and the potential for more political violence surrounding the midterm elections.
Pelosi is one of the Democrats most vilified by former President Donald Trump and his far-right allies. Experts on extremism and political violence warn that Trump and his MAGA compatriots are fomenting a dangerous climate that increases the likelihood that opponents of the GOP will be targeted with violence, underscoring that the threat extends well beyond midterms.
"I am quite concerned about violence surrounding the midterms, but I think it would be a mistake to assume that the threat of violence stops after the midterm elections," Kurt Braddock, a professor of public communication at American University who studies far-right extremism, told Insider. "Regardless of the outcomes of the elections, certain beliefs and norms have been cultivated (particularly among the far-right elements of the Republican party) that tacitly approve of aggression against targets on the left."
Since Trump entered the White House in 2017, far-right politicians and pundits have "grown increasingly emboldened to use language that — purposefully or incidentally — normalizes aggression and violence against political enemies," Braddock said, emphasizing that the effects of that normalization don't end with the midterms.
"It's an issue we will be contending with for some time," Braddock said.
Shannon Hiller, the head of the Bridging Divides Initiative at Princeton University, told Insider that she's confident US elections will remain safe and secure — including the midterms.
"What I'm more concerned about is the post-election period, when these persistent, unfounded claims of election fraud and calls for violence could intersect to spur individuals to violent action," Hiller added, "This is part of what our research showed following the 2020 election — where local officials of both parties faced really awful threats and harassment especially in states where leaders pushed these unfounded claims. It's one reason why we call on all officials and leaders across the country to reject this type of rhetoric."
'Millions of Americans believe violence is justified'
An explosion caused by a police munition is seen while supporters of President Donald Trump gather in front of the US Capitol Building in Washington DC on January 6, 2021. REUTERS/Leah Millis
Throughout Trump's presidency, top experts on democracy and political violence offered routine warnings that he was stoking a dangerous climate in the US that could spiral out of control. The fatal riot at the US Capitol on January 6, 2021, which was largely provoked by Trump's lies about the election, offered ample evidence that their concerns had been well-founded. Nearly two years after the Capitol riot, they haven't stopped ringing alarm bells — particularly as Republicans continue to target their opponents with incendiary rhetoric.
"Republican campaign ads have been riven with violent language and imagery," Rachel Kleinfeld, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for Peace and expert on political violence, told Insider. Kleinfeld emphasized that pro-Trump Republicans have not just been going after Democrats, but also anyone in the party perceived as disloyal to Trump (often referred to as RINOs, or "Republicans in name only").
Republicans like Reps. Adam Kinzinger and Liz Cheney, who refused to embrace Trump's effort to overturn the election and sit on the House January 6 select committee, have faced levels of demonization similar to prominent Democrats like Pelosi, as well as death threats .
"It's actually hard to get regular people to commit violence, but it's made easier when people are made to seem less than human, they are turned into threats, and violence is posited as defensive. MAGA politicians have been doing all three," Kleinfeld, who testified before the House committee investigating January 6, said.
David DePape, the man accused of attacking Paul Pelosi with a hammer, allegedly broke into the couple's San Francisco home looking for the House Speaker and intended to take her hostage. DePape allegedly told police he was "sick of the insane fucking level of lies coming out of Washington, DC" and that he wanted to have a little chat with the speaker. San Francisco's District Attorney Brooke Jenkins said the attack was "politically motivated."
Kleinfeld said the attack Pelosi's husband was an example of stochastic terrorism , or an act of violence in which the perpetrator is inspired by language or rhetoric that dehumanizes and demonizes the targeted group or individual. As one of the most powerful Democrats in Washington for years, Pelosi has been one of the biggest targets of violent far-right rhetoric and conspiracy theories.
Prominent far-right figures, including Trump and Fox News' Tucker Carlson, have spread conspiracy theories about the Pelosi attack — suggesting, without evidence, that there's more to story. It's part of a broader trend.
DePape had shared an array of conspiratorial content on social media, including posts that echoed Trump's false claim the 2020 election was stolen.
"We are now at a point where millions of Americans believe violence is justified as a defensive measure, and are convinced by movements such as Q that their enemies are satanic or inhuman," Kleinfeld said, adding, "A religious revival of Q imagery has been traveling the country with General Michael Flynn, Trump's son, and other supporters in advance of the midterms, spreading this belief that a fight between good and evil is underway. This is dangerous stuff."
'Political violence is here to stay'
A member of the Proud Boys wearing a t-shirt that reads "death to liberals" stands with other Proud Boys in Freedom Plaza during a protest on December 12, 2020 in Washington, DC. Stephanie Keith/Getty Images
Braddock, the far-right extremism researcher at American University, said it's clear that the attacker was targeting the House Speaker and that the perpetrator was "motivated by ideas that are often amplified by elements of the far-right," which includes elected officials and pundits.
Trump devotees treat Pelosi — the highest-ranking Democrat in office during Trump's presidency — as the "prime villain in far-right disinformation and conspiracies," Braddock said, adding that this was especially clear on January 6 when "right-wing extremists" stormed the Capitol building and sought her out. The attack on Paul Pelosi followed the same track, but on a smaller scale.
By sowing doubts about the integrity of US elections and lashing out at people tied to his legal woes — and warning that there will be "big problems" if he's indicted — Trump continues to speak to "a part of his constituency who are looking for a reason to become violent," Braddock warned.
Trump has a massive audience and millions of people listening to what he says. Even if he doesn't mean to incite violence, when Trump uses provocative language it's "likely that at least a few of his devoted followers will interpret what he says as actual calls to violent action," Braddock said.
"This form of political violence is here to stay. It is clear that many parts of the right-wing have no problem amplifying information that paints political adversaries to be 'dealt with,'" Braddock said, "Until those parts of the right-wing disavow manifest violence and abandon rhetoric that normalizes it, we will continue to see these kinds of attacks."
Read the original article on Business Insider
Tags
Who is online
321 visitors
"Republican campaign ads have been riven with violent language and imagery," Rachel Kleinfeld, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for Peace and expert on political violence, told Insider. Kleinfeld emphasized that pro-Trump Republicans have not just been going after Democrats, but also anyone in the party perceived as disloyal to Trump (often referred to as RINOs, or "Republicans in name only").
Republicans like Reps. Adam Kinzinger and Liz Cheney, who refused to embrace Trump's effort to overturn the election and sit on the House January 6 select committee, have faced levels of demonization similar to prominent Democrats like Pelosi, as well as death threats .
"It's actually hard to get regular people to commit violence, but it's made easier when people are made to seem less than human, they are turned into threats, and violence is posited as defensive. MAGA politicians have been doing all three," Kleinfeld, who testified before the House committee investigating January 6, said.
David DePape, the man accused of attacking Paul Pelosi with a hammer, allegedly broke into the couple's San Francisco home looking for the House Speaker and intended to take her hostage. DePape allegedly told police he was "sick of the insane fucking level of lies coming out of Washington, DC" and that he wanted to have a little chat with the speaker. San Francisco's District Attorney Brooke Jenkins said the attack was "politically motivated."
Kleinfeld said the attack Pelosi's husband was an example of stochastic terrorism , or an act of violence in which the perpetrator is inspired by language or rhetoric that dehumanizes and demonizes the targeted group or individual. As one of the most powerful Democrats in Washington for years, Pelosi has been one of the biggest targets of violent far-right rhetoric and conspiracy theories.
Prominent far-right figures, including Trump and Fox News' Tucker Carlson, have spread conspiracy theories about the Pelosi attack — suggesting, without evidence, that there's more to story. It's part of a broader trend.
DePape had shared an array of conspiratorial content on social media, including posts that echoed Trump's false claim the 2020 election was stolen.
"We are now at a point where millions of Americans believe violence is justified as a defensive measure, and are convinced by movements such as Q that their enemies are satanic or inhuman," Kleinfeld said, adding, "A religious revival of Q imagery has been traveling the country with General Michael Flynn, Trump's son, and other supporters in advance of the midterms, spreading this belief that a fight between good and evil is underway. This is dangerous stuff."
Paranoid propaganda and partisan bullshit.
Yep, it’s beginning early.
Usually propaganda like this hits after their butt inflammation is severely exasperated by getting their clocks cleaned in an election.
C’est la vie ...
They try to act like the Summer of Love and Democrats approval of it never existed
Like they didn't have one of their demented loons make an attempt on Justice Kavanaugh and his family at their home. That they all didn't take glee when Rand Paul's neighbor assaulted him causing 5 rib fractures, including 3 displaced fractures, and later required medical attention for pneumonia. That they completely ignored the Republican candidate for Governor of NY being assaulted with a box cutter by ex vet leftist loon.
How quickly they forget Schumer threatening Justices Kavanaugh and Gorsuch.
How they can completely ignore Brandon's two Fascist hate mongering speeches trying to paint anyone who opposes Democrats as terrorists and threats to Democracy.
But all the hate is on the right. [deleted]
I see who has a problem with President Biden speaking the truth.
You mean like when he said gas was $5 a gallon when he took office? Or that the border is secure? How about being raised by Puerto Ricans? How about "inflation is temporary / Putin's fault"?
You mean THAT kind of truth?
The truth in the last 30 days includes:
FUCK OFF
Speakers of truth are not well liked by our friends on the left.
Y'all have no clue as to what truth is along with reality.
Liberal = Truth/Reality
[deleted]
It's NOT paranoia when Pelosi's husband gets a fractured skull by a White-wing nut job.
Butt yes, the violence is definitely bullshit.
The election results are not in yet.
Reporting on actual violence (Jan. 6th and the attack on Pelosi) is NOT "propaganda".
They know they don't stand a chance today. So they are starting early.
Sorry, the electorate is about indicate what they think of the narrative Dems have been pushing the last four years. And yes. We know today is election day and results aren’t in yet.
But keep pushing Jan 6th and the attack on Pelosi. The propaganda isn’t the incidents but rather how it’s presented and emphasized. If still confused the results from today should be good empirical evidence.
...says the guy with the 'KILL YOU' avatar.
Clearly the comedic satire of his avatar eluded you...
... yet at every turn, the left makes exactly the same mountain from a molehill.
Can't handle the truth?
A reckless version of free speech is spreading across America, partly because of unchecked rhetoric by Elon Musk, Kayne West, and Kyrie Irving. We can't be complicit.
Elon Musk and Ye are among multiple notable figures embracing a misguided notion of free speech.
They feel free speech includes spreading hate and misinformation, and it's having consequences.
Hate speech on Twitter recently spiked, and human-rights leaders are on edge.
Local politicians are getting physically assaulted . Libraries are closing because of bomb threats . Poll workers are fearful in the wake of death threats targeting election staff .
This is the influence of violent rhetoric and misinformation in the US. And it's likely to get worse amid a growing, misguided movement for free speech.
Twitter CEO Elon Musk , Ye (previously known as Kanye West ), and the basketball star Kyrie Irving have become strange bedfellows in a growing fight for so-called free speech. Their rhetoric — which has, in recent weeks, outright spread or nodded to misinformation , bigotry , and hate — is a reckless understanding of the First Amendment. It's pushed many to spread racist , antisemitic , or false statements .
We might scoff, laugh off, or roll our eyes at their comments. But then we move on with our lives because we've become desensitized to them — and because we have other things to worry about.
The fatigue is real. After Musk's takeover of Twitter, for example, Chris Stedman, a professor at Augsburg University in Minneapolis tweeted, "Probably not leaving Twitter just like I didn't move to Canada. I'm used to living in hell."
But Musk's and others' schoolyard interpretation of the First Amendment is damaging our democracy. We can't just turn away. Their speech-before-responsibility approach is making life more dangerous for those whom diversity advocates seek to protect.
"The impact that these individuals are having is really a breakdown of our society and making folks feel like they're being gaslit," Lessa Kanani'opua Pelayo-Lozada, a California librarian and the head of the American Library Association, said, referring to Musk and other notable figures who have spread falsehoods. "They're doing nothing but a disservice to our society."
Americans are on the precipice of accepting hate speech as free speech, and nobody is stepping up to say, "This is wrong." Instead, most of the public — and users of public forums like Twitter — looks away, a form of complacency. The collective silence harbors a form of agreement, which is making hate speech and extremism the new norm. Even human-rights organizations are on edge.
"Free speech is not a free pass," Volker Türk, the UN high commissioner for human rights, wrote in an open letter to Musk published Saturday. "There is no place for hatred that incites discrimination, hostility or violence."
The UN leader noted Twitter's role in the spread of COVID-19 falsities , adding that he was writing with "concern and apprehension about our digital public square and Twitter's role in it."
But we have options, especially if we feel celebrities or authority figures are pushing the envelope too far. We could consider speaking up and challenging opinions that are based on little more than hate. We could consider not sending our dollars to brands whose famous frontmen amplify hate and unfollowing provocateurs on social media.
In "Letter from Birmingham Jail," Martin Luther King Jr. wrote, "We will have to repent in this generation not merely for the hateful words and actions of the bad people, but for the appalling silence of the good people."
Right now, the silence is pretty stark. Meanwhile, violence in America is increasing.
Of course, free-speech absolutists have the right to say most anything they want on any street corner, but in doing so, they might expect some pushback. Racist screeds, for example, would likely stir up a crowd of incensed witnesses. But put that same person behind a keyboard, and the threat of real retaliation gets watered down.
Hate-mongers are quick to point out their right to say whatever they want but not nearly so quick to ask whether they should say such things. They tend to ignore that free-speech protections apply to government censorship of speech — not what private actors like Twitter deem acceptable within its community.
Platforms from Twitter to newspaper op-ed pages are entitled to implement and enforce standards of decency. If Elon Musk doesn't want white supremacists, for example, on his platform, he has every right to kick them off.
But too often those with abhorrent views — not just unpopular ones — get an implicit green light to keep going. Ye has leveled numerous antisemitic statements in recent weeks . Irving apologized for his actions but failed to say he was not antisemitic . Extremist groups are taking note .
There are limits to hazardous speech in this country. The trope about how it's illegal to falsely yell fire in a crowded theater isn't true; it's legal . But rather than getting caught up in distracting debates, we might be wiser to demand better speech from those around us.
Alone we have little hope, but together, we can stop the spread of hate. CEOs and business executives care about their reputation and, at the very least, their company's profits. Speaking out on social media against unbound free speech, or withholding your business from a company, sends a message to executive board rooms.
"Why do we continuously 'cancel' those who spew toxicity and division? It's because by allowing those who have a voice to spread their words, it enables others to do the same," one professional named Christopher Lin wrote on LinkedIn.
"Not even 12 hours when Elon took over Twitter, we saw hateful, bigoted, racist tweets spark up," he added. "This is why we have to hold those in power accountable for their words."
Read the original article on Business Insider
My avatar is intended to be humorous
humorous
You seem to lack a sense of humor but I'm guessing you'll claim that your rely was a joke.
A joke about violence? Just like Trump's jokes? The molehills that become mountains?
Trump wasn't joking.
Yet you're holding both ends of the turd.
Also, projection, deflection, and denial, so typical and boring
Speaking of turds - you are holding both ends of whatever turd you're referring to and the biggest turd of them all - trumpturd - your hero.
Get a thesaurus - you'll appear more pleasant.
Nothing would do that for you
Bless your heart.
[deleted]
[deleted]
Five Proud Boys are members of the Miami Dade Republican Party Executive Committee and one is a member of the Sarasota Republican Party Executive Committee.
So? They are American citizens aren't they?
Assuming that the Republicans win today, it may temporarily slow down MAGA blood lust. But once the Democrats start demonstrating that the right wing led witch hunts of Biden, Hunter Biden, Pelosi, Fauci, Schiff, etc are loony tunes , the blood lust will return.
[deleted]
Just like if the men and women protesting for women's rights in Iran just went home and shut up, it would temporarily slow down the Muslim extremist blood lust. Giving in to extremism is merely a temporary fix that just makes the extremists bolder. We should be ready for the next two years of religious conservatives here in America trampling on civil rights across the nation while trying to solidify their supposed religious conservative moral superiority as the American ideal.
It will be temporary and is just swinging the pendulum their direction for a short time, but it will swing back in their faces and a few years from now they'll be screaming about being the victims once again when people turn away from their hypocrisy and corruption in disgust.
The pattern that has played out for decades is Republicans gain control, they give tax breaks for the rich while placating their gullible religious conservative base telling them how righteous and great they are while running the government into the ground. Then Democrats take over and start cutting the deficit, raising taxes on the rich and funding the government again to make it start working for the people. Republicans then run on how within a year and a half of Democrats taking power, everything isn't fixed yet and thus the gullible morons once again come out and vote for their Republican masters who keep promising them if they just cut enough taxes for rich people the trickle down to rural conservatives will come flowing like milk and honey in the promised land. Sure, the only trickle they've ever actually gotten has been a warm yellow down the leg of the rich into their rural communities, but they got their low paying dirty dangerous coal jobs back! Woo Hoo!...
It is even weirder when Democrats expect to be reelected after creating the mess we are in.
See 1.1.6
Oh please! Any investigation of any of them will be at least as legitimate as any of those we have seen in the last six years and will definitely be fairer.
Fairer? I hope so but I've lost a lot of hope for our leadership in Washington. One would think that with the recent election results, leadership from both parties would look at what they are doing and realize that the citizens are not looking favorably at what they have been doing and they need to change course and start working for the people. But I don't expect any real change, it will be more of the same I'm afraid. All self-serving in order to maintain their power and money.
There are some investigations that need to be done, but I'm rather concerned they will turn into witch hunts similar to what has gone on the past six years.
That T-shirt does represent the current rift in America.
Liberals ask Christian conservatives to keep their religion out of our government, courts, schools and public spaces and Christian conservatives declare "Death to Liberals!". It's not unlike how Muslim conservatives in Iran and Afghanistan have reacted to the liberals in their countries who simply want to have a government that functions for everyone and not just a government for religious conservatives, by religious conservatives who claim they 'know best' for their country. It's a common trait for those who believe themselves morally superior.
And we liberals and Democrats are the problem.
YES!
Oh...they aren't gonna like being compared to the Muslims in Iran and Afghanistan!
"We don't beat our women!"
"We don't throw gays off rooftops!"
"We let women drive!"
What I also find interesting is that the white Christian conservatives were all about protecting our government, courts, schools and public spaces from Muslim religious conservatives trying to inject their brand of faith into our society. I recall how they were freaking out about how Muslim's were bringing their 'sharia law' to the US.
Fears of Sharia Law in America Grow Among Conservatives - CBS News
So rightwing Christian conservatives demand the right to shove as much of their religion into our government, schools, courts and public spaces reserved for everybody, but attack any attempt from any other religion from doing the same. Is that not the very definition of 'establishment'? A 'special' position in our nation, one where they demand rights denied to others?
All any liberals and progressives are asking, many of whom are practicing Christians themselves, is that the laws of our nation apply equally to all religions and all citizens alike where no religion gets a 'special' position, where no one would consider this just a "Christian Nation" but recognizes it as one of the only nations that welcomes those of all faiths and none. Where everyone can worship, or not, as they like without fear of some religious group trying to force what they see as 'faith based moral superiority' stripping them of their rights to privacy and bodily autonomy.
Ohio man fatally shoots neighbor ‘because he thought he was a Democrat’
This guy is just as typical for Republicans as Hodgkinson was typical for Democrats.
Nobody (including Kavika) said that idiot is a "typical Republican".
Nobody said the guy who beaned Cruz with a beer can was a Democrat
Cruz did NOT get hit by the beer can.
Please don't call Cruz a "beaner".
If the can changed direction after hitting him - it hit him - no matter what the alternate reality machine attempts.
It didn't hit the turd. Gee nobody seems to like Cruz except folks like you. LOL.
Did you see his reception in NY recently?
A Trump run in '24 insurers Biden's second term!
I hope Biden retires.
I think a lot of Dems and Independents hope Biden retires. That of course carries it's own issues with no incumbent running.
Gavin Newsom is counting on that.
It's always great to retire while you're still on top.
That's what Tom Brady should have done. Well, he did retire butt then he didn't (his comeback looks sad).