An Invitation to Triumph Over Insurrection
My fellow American:
Before you continue, I ask you to set aside political predilections, doctrines of faith, and interpretations of recent and current events. I am not asking that you forego your convictions. I am asking that you be willing to evaluate the basis of those convictions as you proceed.
It is with reluctance that I have written this piece; it is not subject matter I envisioned posting on my blog. However, I am compelled to publicly address the appalling, reprehensible breach of the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021, and the developments preceding this tragic event. I have invested considerable time and thought in preparing this piece and ask that you forego “skimming.” For the next 20 minutes, please read with focus and without interruption. It will be time well spent.
I am not advocating a political stance in the paragraphs that follow. I have family, friends, and colleagues spanning the socioeconomic and political spectrums in America. Some of the beliefs they represent are at odds with each other, as some with my own. These are people I respect, and who are deserving of respect. I had a professor that once said, “If two people see eye-to-eye on everything, one of them is unnecessary.” I’ll refrain from commenting on “Cancel Culture,” but I promote diversity of thought and its benefits.
It is essential that I establish an understanding of key constructs before addressing the siege on the U.S. Capitol.
Values
We all conduct our lives by a hierarchy of values; of which we have various levels of awareness. Our value hierarchies often differ. Do not confuse values with the constructs of ethics and morals. The constructs of ethics and morals are outside the scope of this article; I’ll simply note that all ethics are contextual and there are moral absolutes. It is critical that we understand what values actually means. The term is frequently employed in the context of applauding or condemning others; the lack of understanding is a primary contributor to the division in our country.
It is impossible to live according to the entire spectrum of human values without prioritizing those values; this prioritization results in a hierarchy of values which govern our beliefs, choices, and behaviors. Consider the values of effectiveness and efficiency. These values apply in many contexts, including business, parenting, learning, and personal health. Efficiency is using only necessary resources to attain maximum output. Effectiveness includes whether and the degree to which an activity contributes to a desired outcome. While these two values complement, they also compete for resources and time. If I consider efficiency to be of more import, and you consider effectiveness to be of greater import, we will approach the same task differently. Our differences might lead to disagreement. This is common and expected. If it results in disrespect, we have then crossed into immaturity. If it culminates in hostilities, we have descended into stupidity. If it erupts into warfare, we have become lunatics.
A Dose of Mathematics
Bear with me; this is a short paragraph. There are three key concepts that apply to the following discourse: equality, equivalence, and probability. If you’re a mathematician, forgive the latitude I take in these definitions. Equality is the determination that two or more things are the same in all aspects. Equivalent represents things are similar in a particular aspect and context. When comparing two items, they may not be equal but could be equivalent. For example, an apple and orange are not equal. But their benefit to one’s health could be equivalent. With the risk of further assault on your intellect, probability is the likelihood that something could occur, or that something contributed to the cause of an event.
Worth, Rights, and Opportunity
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
From the Declaration of Independence, July 4, 1776
The Declaration of Independence affirms the truth that all people are created equal; everyone has equal worth (with the arguable exception being the person who has bankrupted their worth due to their heinous actions). Unfortunately, the phrase “equal opportunity” has pervaded our national conversation and obscures the meaning of equal worth.
Many assume the phrase “equal opportunity” is in the Constitution, Bill of Rights, or an Amendment; it is not. There is an agency named the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) which is responsible for enforcing federal laws that make it illegal to discriminate against a job applicant or an employee. This is an unfortunate name in two respects. First, the laudable role of the agency is to ensure discrimination does not occur in employment, but the absence of discrimination does not translate to equal opportunity; there are other factors involved. Secondly (with reference to the aforementioned math terms), equal opportunity is impossible to achieve whereas equivalent opportunity is a feasible goal.
Nearly 100 years ago the Equal Rights Amendment was proposed. Although this amendment was approved by the Senate 50 years later, it failed to achieve ratification by 38 states and is not protected under the U.S. Constitution. The point is not to discuss its history or current state. I do assert that the name is regrettable. “Equal rights” suggests there are two or more sets of rights that exist and need to be applied in tandem. In reality, there is one defined set of fundamental (unalienable) rights that all should have.
We must all assent, and truly believe, that all people have equal worth. Without this, fundamental rights will never be available to all and there will never be equivalent opportunity.
Equal worth. Equivalent opportunity. Fundamental rights. For every person.
The Problem with Tolerance and Acceptance
It is assumed that tolerance and acceptance are evidence of acknowledging the fundamental rights of others and their equal worth. In reality, these two facets do little to promote appreciation of each other’s rights and cannot be assumed to reflect the level of our success in ensuring fundamental rights and equal worth.
At its best, tolerance denotes an underlying friction. Tolerance with regard to people is to endure their presence while being subjected to their existence. There will always be people in your life that you tolerate; such is the dynamic of human personality. Sometimes tolerance becomes the only reasonable expectation in the interaction between two people. So, while it is reasonable to expect that tolerance will always be a normal human dynamic, promoting it as a measure is both unreliable and limiting.
Acceptance might improve our relations with others, but it is not an accurate gauge for assessing health in relationships or society. Acceptance can be the outcome of various factors, some of which are deficient. One might accept another out of duress or resignation; quite different from acceptance based on affection or good will. Acceptance is also murky; how does one delineate between accepting the person while rejecting specific behaviors? This is challenging to accomplish with someone who is close to you; expecting acceptance as a universal response given our differences in culture and values and beliefs is unrealistic. We all need acceptance by some, but acceptance by all is an absurd expectation.
What we must aspire to if we desire a society and nation better than it is today is respect and understanding. A collective commitment and the corresponding effort to advocate and afford these two fundamental human needs yields a strength greater than the cowardice of coercion and threat of violence. Respect and understanding promote an environment for broad differences and individual expression while greatly reducing the hurt and hostility that can fester when only tolerance is sought.
Freedom is Not Liberty
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, ensure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
Preamble of the U.S. Constitution
The word “freedom” is used only once in the U.S. constitution, with respect to freedom of speech. (Note that government is not allowed to censor speech; this does not apply to companies and organizations). The word “liberty” is used in the preamble and elsewhere in the Constitution to denote what many confuse with “freedom.” This distinction is critical to understand. Freedom represents the unrestrained ability to act in whatever manner is desired, whereas Liberty is the responsible use of freedom under the rule of law without depriving anyone else of their freedom or damaging their well-being.
Freedom permits you to accelerate to any speed you desire on a highway. As you accelerate above a certain threshold, the probability exponentially increases that you could significantly damage someone else’s well-being. The premise of Liberty is why there are speed limits.
Critique
My upcoming commentary on the insurrection of January 6th includes frank observations concerning President Trump’s role and that of others. It is not a biased rant. I have conducted a comprehensive examination to inform my claims. First, however, I want to highlight some of Trump’s accomplishments and the shared failures with prior administrations to illustrate the objectivity I have endeavored.
President Trump’s Accomplishments
If you identify as Democrat, Liberal, Progressive, or any other corresponding term, set aside partiality and consider that President Trump has accomplished some good. When Obama was president, I admonished the Republicans and Conservatives in my world to consider the same. Acknowledgement of positive outcomes is not condoning or accepting egregious behavior. The healing we need as a nation, and will hopefully seek, requires that we acknowledge the good that has resulted from the actions of others; even those we oppose. Refusing to recognize any of the good, and worse, demonizing those we strongly oppose, contributes to divisiveness and makes one complicit in spreading the social diseases that plague our society. What follows are some of the accomplishments of the Trump Administration.
In 2019 the Trump Administration announced a goal to end the HIV epidemic in the United States within 10 years. As part of this initiative, they secured billions of dollars in corporate donations for the next 11 years (at no cost to taxpayers) to provide prevention medication at no cost to at-risk individuals lacking insurance coverage.
There is debate regarding the effectiveness of Trump’s approach to dealing with China, but there is no reasonable doubt that he exposed the real China whereas the policies of prior administrations were based on an imagined China. Previous U.S. policy “greased the wheels” for China’s unfettered ambitions. Under Trump, the brakes have been applied and China’s ambitions and relentless assault on human rights have come to the forefront.
The Trump Administration’s response to the pandemic has many disappointments. However, the Operation Warp Speed initiative is unprecedented and that it has proved to be reasonably successful is amazing. Launched on May 15, 2020, the goal to produce and deliver 300 million doses of safe and effective vaccines to Americans by January 2021 was considered by many scientists and medical professionals to be unattainable. The benefits extend beyond the actual vaccines that have been produced; the landscape for the development of vaccines and medicines has been radically improved. Future medicines that would have taken decades to develop will now take a handful of years, safeguarding and improving the health of millions.
Shared Unconscionable Policies
I will highlight one unconscionable policy that has brought me to tears. Without delving into the subject of immigration, it a travesty that our government has separated infants and children from their parents and housed them in facilities that in some cases resemble low-security prisons. This has occurred under the Trump Administration and has been condemned by many as inhumane. I agree and would add it is immoral. However, the same occurred under the Obama administration, and in the Bush administration. I implore you to contact elected officials and raise your voice for the plight of these children.
We must seek to hold all leaders accountable. Vacating this responsibility by excusing the actions of the leaders we vote for and expressing outrage for those we oppose is hypocrisy. The things that outrage us should be based on principles, not personality. We must guard against participating in the charade of concern and the drama of indignation; when we do so without creed and true conviction, we dishonor ourselves and more so those who need true advocates.
Present Realities
My tone up to this point might seem clinical; the intent has been to establish a foundation for the following observations while refraining from language that might trigger sentiments that would obstruct the message I am hoping to convey. My subsequent tone is direct and unapologetic. I am not regurgitating the commentary and opinions of others. I do not constrain myself to the ideology of a single political party. I do advocate the defense of democracy. Please read the entirety of this article before constructing a vindication of a different perspective.
There are various topics I address; some might seem random or immaterial. I assert they are collective contributors to what culminated on January 6th.
What occurred on January 6th in our nation’s Capital is disturbing. I am not shocked. The terms insurrection, coup, and sedition are valid terms to describe the event. Each person who breached the Capitol is responsible for their participation in this travesty. I commend those demonstrators who remained outside and conducted themselves peacefully.
For those who voted for Trump, I do not question or condemn your vote. My objective is not to foster cynicism, hatred, or despair; ultimately it is to promote healing.
Naked Faces
The Trump Administration’s cumulative management of the Covid-19 virus is beyond disappointing. I recognize this was uncharted territory and would allocate some latitude if ongoing discovery had resulted in meaningful policy changes. It is pathetic that both Democrats and Republicans politicized the pandemic. In the midst of this, it would be comical that not donning a mask has become an expression of freedom if the consequences were something less severe than illness and death.
In 2012 the city of San Francisco passed an ordinance prohibiting public nudity, which had been acceptable up until that time. The prohibitive ordinance was challenged in court and ruled to be constitutional in 2017; the premise being it was for the public good. The visual assault of naked people on the minds of those nearby was deemed likely detrimental to the observers’ emotional and mental health. Elsewhere in the nation, the fact that public nudity was a plausible consideration simply affirmed the debaucherous nature of the city.
Given the high probability that the lack of a face covering hastens and increases Covid-19 infections, it is an easily defensible argument that wearing a face mask is for the public good. I wager that many who insist on not covering their faces in public would be appalled at someone not covering his Johnson. I have no doubt the President would call this person a pervert and scumbag had he attended a Trump rally. Yet, in spite of the plausible consequences of illness and death, not wearing a mask during this pandemic is a badge of honor in some circles, including the President’s. This is not evidence of leadership or freedom. It is blatant disregard for fellow Americans.
Don’t be a dick. Wear a mask.
Black Lives Matter
Irrespective of your views regarding the BLM demonstrations, President Trump’s rhetoric contributed to deeper division and increased chaos. The instances when some protestors destroyed property are inexcusable and the demands by some elected officials to “defund the police” reveal their immaturity and raise reasonable objections to their ability to govern. (Yes, policing reform is needed.) However, the majority of the demonstrators conducted respectful protests. Participants spanned the race, age, gender, and socioeconomic spectrum. Their concerns are valid, and the cause is relevant.
The opportunities to ensure order and recognize the legitimacy of the BLM movement were not mutually exclusive. Rather than capitalizing on these opportunities, President Trump forged ahead with disproportionate shows of force and inflammatory bombast. Dispatching the police and National Guard to remove peaceful demonstrators before taking a casual walk to the nearby cathedral to conduct a self-aggrandizing photo-op was not a display of leadership. It did portend the despot undeniably exposed on January 6, 2021.
Stop the Steal
Much has been written about the legitimacy, or lack thereof, of the election. I have followed this topic in depth and with an open mind. I have invested the time to locate and read the raw sources of information as much as feasible, avoiding punditry and opinionated commentary. I have done research on the Dominion Voting Systems, the processes, and procedures in the states with contested election results, the modifications to voting rules to accommodate the Covid-19 virus, and the 59 post-election court challenges. Yes, there were instances of fraudulent activity, voter impersonation, and suppression, and not only by Democrats. But there is no evidence of systemic fraud or coordinated subversion of voting on a scale that would change the outcome that was confirmed by Congress at 3:44 AM on January 7th, 2021. Joe Biden is the legitimately elected president.
Math theory and rules, such as Benford’s Law, have been used by some to assert that there was fraud. These claims were propagated, masquerading as legitimate scientific proof that fraud occurred. Upon inspection these claims were found riddled with the invalid application of rules and were not at all scientific. The Texas Attorney General misrepresented a study by a Ph.D. economist, as the basis for the lawsuit filed in the Supreme Court to contest the results in battleground states. Aside from misrepresenting the study, the study’s statistical methods failed multiple peer reviews by respected academics. The Supreme Court rejected the lawsuit for procedural reasons, but had it been proceeded, there is high probability it would have still failed, given its basis. The lawsuit was another act of political posturing; something both Republicans and Democrats continue to engage in at great expense and substantial detriment to U.S. citizens.
With regard to statistical probability…
We have all heard the incessant hype that a consortium of Democrats masterminded a voter fraud strategy that spanned multiple states, involved the compromise of both electronic and paper-based voting systems, hacked government databases to extract the records of dead people and generate mail-in ballots on their behalf, and employed covert personnel to vaporize legitimate votes for Trump. Pardon the hyperbole, but to assert that such a group exists and successfully executed such a strategy is beyond preposterous, much less in the realm of probability. If such a theory is posited, it is reasonable to question why more vote margin wasn’t secured. Surely a syndicate capable of this achievement would ensure such details were addressed to avoid dispute. With regard to the DNC and elected Democrats, given their track record for effective execution, such a theory is simply laughable.
Many of the Republican officials who supported challenging the election results highlighted that 39% of Americans believe the election was rigged. Aside from the scientific legitimacy of the survey instrument used for this poll, and the subsequent latitude taken by pundits and some Republicans to interpret the results, using this as an argument to challenge the election results is at best ignorance and, at worst, intentional deception. Many who believe the election was rigged are more expressing the possibility than actuality. And the amount of disinformation is a factor. About 85% of children in the U.S. believe in Santa Claus based on the stories they are told.
Four years ago, in 2016, Trump claimed there was widespread voter fraud, and that was for an election he won. However, he had lost the “popular vote.” This fact was inadmissible to him and he concocted and disseminated the notion of fraud. Four years later, in an election he lost, it is certainly no surprise he has insisted that voter fraud resulted in the election being stolen from him.
Included in Trump’s historical behavior is his repeated and frequent use of the term “loser” to describe anyone he dislikes or seeks to demean. He despises losers. Ergo, his psyche cannot accommodate the attribution of “loser” to himself, and his intellect cannot distinguish between losing and loser. This conclusion does not require a degree in psychiatry; his repeated public behavior sufficiently supports it.
What is more shocking than the copious amount of evidence exposing Trump as a pathological liar are the number of educated and intelligent people excusing or dismissing his behavior as immaterial, or simply refusing to acknowledge the plethora of evidence. The thinking of a pathological liar is rooted not in denial, but in delusion. It is not that Trump is unwilling to admit he lost the election; he is psychologically incapable of recognizing the reality that he lost the election. The danger of delusion warrants alarm.
If blame is sought for Trump’s loss, that blame lies squarely with Donald J. Trump. The increased toxicity of his rhetoric and behavior in the 2 months preceding the election reached a level that a substantial number of Republican voters would no longer tolerate; they voted for Joe Biden. Trump’s comments regarding John McCain over the past 4 years lost him voters in the state of Arizona. Trump’s assault on mail-in voting resulted in many seniors who supported him not voting at all, given their concerns with exposure to Covid-19 and their heightened risk. His blatantly divisive responses to matters of concern for large segments of society motivated many voters to vote against him; voters who would not have typically made the effort to vote.
The 2020 Presidential election was not stolen.
Insurrection and Inexcusable Behaviors
Those who breached the Capitol building on January 6th represent a myriad of motivations. No doubt, some were caught up in the moment. Others had a pre-determined agenda. Each person is responsible for their choice. While motive has some relevance, the act must be met with material consequence.
The personal responsibility of rioters does not alleviate the responsibility of people in power whose words and actions incited a mob to engage in criminal activity.
President Trump was a catalyst for this insurrection. Given his position as arguably the most powerful leader in the world, he bears indisputable responsibility for the sedition that occurred on January 6th. His incendiary language and conduct cannot be dismissed as poor judgement. There would be severe punishment for any other person who engaged in Trump’s type of prolonged conduct, culminating in the riot and insurrection. A dismissive response of “He did cross a line” or “He spoke in poor judgement” is more than a slap-in-the-face of one’s fellow citizen. It is an affront to our democracy. We must resurrect an expectation that has eroded after decades of derision by elected officials: our leaders must be held accountable to a higher standard.
The President’s insistence that the election was stolen from him is a fabrication. The relentless promotion this delusion across multiple channels supplied his supporters with a steady stream of deceptive information. Some are wrestling with reconciling what they presumed as fact with the undeniable realities revealed in the events of the past week. Others simply continue in denial, manufacturing plausible explanations to support the deception. In the extreme, the President’s rhetoric has fostered in those intent on hostility and destruction the perception of a presidential mandate vindicating their violence.
The actions of those in the Republican party that have bolstered the delusion of widespread, systemic voter fraud are complicit. The two at the forefront are Josh Hawley and Ted Cruz. Much commentary has been written regarding these two; I’ll keep my observations succinct. Before proceeding, I’ll note that incongruent behavior by congressional representatives and senators of both parties is so prevalent that we expect our “leaders” to be duplicitous and sanctimoniousness. Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer epitomize these behaviors in the Democratic party; I have no doubt they would mirror the behaviors of Hawley and Cruz if the tables were reversed.
Josh Hawley claims he was representing his constituents in the state of Missouri by contesting the electoral votes from battlegrounds states. I have friends and family who live in Missouri, several of which voted for Trump. While anecdotal, based on my observations and conversations, there is no prevailing demand by Missouri citizens to contest the certified electoral results of other states. Hawley’s ambitions for a 2024 presidential run are no secret and it is reasonable to assume his conduct was to curry the favor of Trump’s current base. Alleging representation of his constituents as the reason for challenging the Electoral College tally was disingenuous and cowardly. Actively publicizing his intent to challenge the election provided additional fuel that contributed to the insurrection. Raising his fist in solidarity with the demonstrators an hour before the riot is an iconic symbol of his intent to rouse the emotions of a crowd.
Ted Cruz is the archetype of incongruence. In 2016, Cruz said: “I’m gonna tell you what I really think of Donald Trump: This man is a pathological liar. He doesn’t know the difference between truth and lies. He lies practically every word that comes out of his mouth, and in a pattern that I think is straight out of a psychology textbook, his response is to accuse everybody else of lying. … I say pathological because I actually think Donald, if you hooked him up to a lie detector test, he could say one thing in the morning, one thing at noon and one thing in the evening, all contradictory and he’d pass the lie detector test each time. Whatever lie he’s telling, at that minute he believes it, but the man is utterly amoral.”
Four years later and Cruz is one of Trump’s foremost enablers. Regardless of whether you agree with his positions, Ted Cruz is astute and highly intelligent. Whereas Trump is delusional, Cruz is devious. More than strategic maneuvering, he has demonstrated his willingness to win at all costs, even if it requires compromising his core. Similar to Hawley, his echoing of Trump’s delusions regarding the election outcome was intended to acquire the support of Trump’s base. His largess in the U.S. Senate and support for challenging the Electoral College tally lent credence to Trump’s claims of election fraud. Ted Cruz bears substantial responsibility for his contribution to the insurrection.
The President’s Rose Garden rally the morning of January 6th was the match that lit the fuse. The President did not explicitly call for violence. He did not open advocate that the Capitol be breached. However, the context of the rally and his speech, the tweets and preceding rhetoric, the comments made at the rally by Rudy Giuliani and Trump Jr. — these coalesced as a mandate for those in the attendance to “fight” and “take back our nation.” To assert the culmination of Trump’s rhetoric and behavior, augmented by his enablers, was not a contributor to the sedition that occurred an hour later at the Capitol is naïve or disingenuous.
Trump’s intended influence on the mob is further corroborated by reports of Trump’s initial response when made aware of the siege. He did not call in the National Guard; that decision was orchestrated by others. Some White House staff described Trump as “pleased” when informed about the riots. Trump’s belated video response to the siege was tepid and pandered to the infiltrators. The video he released the following day in which he condemned the rioters and acknowledged the new administration for the first time required considerable coaxing from his advisors. He ultimately agreed to record the video after White House counsel warned that he could face legal jeopardy for inciting the riot. Others suggested it might suppress talk of impeachment or execution of the 25th Amendment. What is evident is his absence of any concern for the outcome of the siege on congressional leaders, Mike Pence, the D.C Capitol Police, or the country. Trump’s self-delusion allows for no acknowledgement of his contribution to the sedition; remorse will never be a contention.
The argument against dereliction of duty by Trump on January 6th is untenable.
The most troubling and frightening observation is the demonstrable allegiance to a man, seemingly over country, by a significant percentage of the population. I would like to assume that the prevalence of dedication to Trump rather than our democracy is overstated and the antics of a nervous mind. The evidence compels me to consider otherwise. I do believe democracy will prevail. However, there are massive fissures that will eventually cause our democracy to crumble if we are not intent and determined to eliminate them. I am not succumbing to histrionics; we have work to do.
An Invitation
In the days to come we will be subjected to the toxic rhetoric of some Republicans and of some Democrats. We will hear some celebrities pontificate, and the proliferation of pundits will become suffocating.
For those that agree with my observations, I exhort you to do more than nod assent. For those that disagree, I hope you’ll take pause. We all need to reflect. Otherwise, we simply mirror the behavior of Malcolm Crowe, Bruce Willis’s character in the movie The Sixth Sense. Cole Sear, the boy, reveals in his classic line “I see dead people…they only see what they want to see.” We only see what we want to see when we refuse to self-inspect.
Together, we can triumph over the insurrection of January 6th. At the beginning of this piece, I emphasized the constructs of values, worth, opportunity, rights, and liberty; all of which are foundational for democracy to succeed. Over the next few days, rather than invest your valuable time and energy consuming soundbites, propaganda, and meaningless “news,” I invite you to question your assumptions, to seek out real truth, to inventory and affirm your values, to invest time and thought to understand those you disagree with and ensure your respect for fellow citizens.
I commit to join you in the same endeavor. Together we can protect and advance liberty for all, and for future generations, in the beacon of democracy known as the United States of America.
It is rather for us to be dedicated to the great task remaining before us — that this nation shall have a new birth of freedom; and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.
Abraham Lincoln
Excerpt from the Gettysburg Address
