The news and media would have you believe the violence in America was incited and only began on Wednesday with the storming of the Capitol building. But to say that, would simply be untrue. Even with impending media censorship, when looking for the start and finish dates of the George Floyd riots, Wikipedia will provide only one of those dates: May 26, 2020 – Present, because it’s still happening.
So, in the midst of these peaceful protests (you know, the ones with arson, theft and murder) the left finds time to shift blame to a small group of violent people and suggest they represent the whole of centre to right wing politics after the Capitol Hill destruction.
Deleting the evidence
Before the Capitol Hill violence ceased, Twitter had already threatened to deactivate Donald Trump’s account under the guise of “further incitement of violence”. Anyone who followed Trump before the suspension would’ve noticed several posts about the organisation of a “peaceful march” and the condemnation of the violent acts of participants on Capitol Hill.
With the knowledge that it was never intended to be a violent protest and that the president publicly disowns the acts from his movement, where did Twitter’s “further incitement of violence” come from?
If by “violence” they mean ‘an opinion that disagrees with their agenda’ then I suppose many have broken the service’s code of conduct. On the same token, this means that the violent riots incited using Twitter in 2020 must be in alignment with the Twitter community standards? Violence, thievery, arson and bullying are only okay if it benefits those who Twitter agree politically with.
It’s clear Twitter and the left don’t actually care about “violence” so the benefit to removing Trump’s account must have the purpose of preventing others from seeing the truth to the narrative the media want to tell. Possibly, the left have been looking for a noose to hang Trump since his inauguration and it’s much easier to hang a man who can’t defend himself.
Activist and lawyer Rogan O’Handley pointed out that by suspending Donald Trump’s media accounts, the tech companies have “declared they have more power than the President of the United States”.
If one word could vocalise the state of American politics and the manner that their leaders conduct themselves, the word ‘hypocrisy’ might find itself escaping the mouths of many on-lookers. Naturally, storming Capitol Hill isn’t the genius idea of any sound minded conservative, but rather the bastardisation of a peaceful march organised by Republican party leaders.
You might ask the question, why have none of the Republican leaders claimed responsibility for ‘inciting violence’ or allowing extremists to terrorise sacred buildings in Washington DC? Maybe a better question is: why did Democratic leaders jump at the opportunity to claim Black Lives Matter Riots as their own?
As alt-right political activist, Lauren Southern posted to Facebook during the event: “Watching Pelosi talk about the trauma of staffers – that’s been every street in Minneapolis for a year. Reality breached the ivory tower.”
There is no party that is in the right, both are to blame for violence. But the truth is, violence has been seeping through the cracks of the democratic party from the top down and somehow benefits their re-election. It wasn’t seven months ago that the riots broke out over George Floyd’s death, and democratic leaders such as Alexander Ocasio Cortez had endorsed the mayhem of June 2020.
Whereas the Republican party (as a whole) condemns it whether it’s their own followers or not. Congressman Madison Cawthorn spoke on behalf of republicans in a speech on the house floor on Friday, “It’s not the party of destruction”, and expressed his passion for a new generation of “radicals for freedom and for liberty. But not radicals for violence.”
It comes down to, if one type of violence is wrong, then isn’t all of it? If the Capitol building attack is violence, then shouldn’t the Black Lives Matter riots also be considered violent and worth condemning?
The final question to ask ourselves is why, after seven months of left-incited violence, does the democratic party finally want to condemn it? Martin Iles observes that the concern has never been about violence, even in the aftermath of George Floyd’s murder, it has always been about politics and pointing the finger.
Jesse Moore draws from the Bible and classical literature for insight into life’s tough questions. He is currently studying at university to become a film-maker.
Jesse Moore’s previous articles can be viewed at: https://www.pressserviceinternational.org/jesse-moore.html