750
submitted 11 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

Just because Republicans choose unreality doesn’t mean the media should ignore the facts of January 6.

On January 6, 2021, I watched CNN as thousands of Donald Trump supporters stormed the US Capitol. As someone well-versed in watching tragedy on television, I was struck by just how indisputable the facts were at the time: violent, red-hat-clad MAGA rioters, followed by Republicans in Congress, tried to stop democracy in its tracks. Trump had told his followers that the protest in Washington, DC, “will be wild,” and in the assault that followed his speech, some rioters smeared feces on the walls of the Capitol. Hundreds of them have since been convicted on charges ranging from assault on federal officers to seditious conspiracy. These are stubborn facts, the kind that do not care about your feelings. These facts include the inalienable truth that Trump is the first president in American history to reject the peaceful transfer of power.

It never occurred to me that these facts could somehow be perverted by partisanship. But three years later, we are seeing just that, as Republicans cling to the lie that the 2020 election was “stolen” by Joe Biden and are poised to make Trump their 2024 nominee. And perhaps even more dangerous than the GOP ditching reality is the news media’s inability to cover Trumpism as the threat to democracy that it very much is.

...

But the problem is, when all you have is conventional political framing, everything looks like politics as usual. One candidate makes a claim; the other disputes it. Two sides are divided, etc. This framing only works if both parties operate within the frameworks of a shared reality. But Trumpism doesn’t allow for the reality the rest of us inhabit. Trump’s supporters believe their leader’s reality and not, say, the reality the rest of us see with our eyes. As Trump once told a crowd: “Don’t believe the crap you see from these people, the fake news. What you’re seeing and what you’re reading is not what’s happening.”

Journalists may be well-intentioned in trying to be “objective,” or they’re simply afraid of being labeled partisan. Either way, coverage of January 6 that gives equal weight to both sides—one based in reality, one not—is helping pave the road for authoritarianism.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Rhoeri@lemmy.world 69 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Try telling this to the “gEnOciDE jOe” clowns, because they are the ones that need to understand this- not the trumpers. Trumpers are too far gone. They won’t listen to reason.

But these ‘single issue’ kids that are grassrooting the ideology that not voting is better than a vote for “genocide” are going to fuck around and find out the hard way when they get Trump installed as a permanent fixture in the White House.

[-] VikingHippie@lemmy.wtf 48 points 11 months ago

Ok, let me preface this by OF COURSE Biden is by far the lesser evil compared to Trump, OF COURSE single issue voting is some Republican style bullshit and OF COURSE Trump would be even more supportive of a fascist government committing genocide, being a fascist war crime fanboy himself.

That being said, people who are outraged by Biden's continued support of and thus enabling of genocide DO have a point. He's supposed to represent the interests of every American who's not a fascist, not those of a fascist apartheid regime currently committing the worst genocide since the Balkan wars in the 90s.

Just because the other guy is a much greater evil doesn't mean that you can't hold your own guy accountable for supporting evil. With Trump the only alternative, voting for him is a given, but giving him a free pass shouldn't be.

[-] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 27 points 11 months ago

Uh, what we are talking about is people who are already saying they won't vote for Biden. I run into this a lot. It's terrifying to know a significant part of the electorate are so myopic they would install Trump forever to "make a point".

It truly doesn't matter if they have a point, if the only end result is not voting or throwing their vote away on a third party. If Trump wins, they will be a big part of how.

[-] TheAlbacor@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

"voting is the only way to create change" is the mentality that got us here.

You know why George Floyd's murderer was the only one who got the sentence he deserved? Because the people demanded it by threatening capital.

[-] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

So what are you suggesting?

load more comments (56 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Witchfire@lemmy.world 23 points 11 months ago

Criticizing Biden's handling of the war is not just allowed, but encouraged. His handling of it is dog shit.

What's naive and stupid to do is refuse to vote for him because of it, when the threat is a person who bragged about becoming a dictator and retaliating against anyone he dislikes.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Rhoeri@lemmy.world 9 points 11 months ago

All well and good, but these idiot kids are actually refusing to vote for him over this single issue. I agree that It’s fine to be bothered how he’s handling things- even if they’re a bit misunderstood on how things actually work- I mean, sure…it’s bothering.

But this is the biggest “I’m cutting off my nose to spite my face” America will EVER see.

[-] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago

Single issue lmao. "Yeah Hitler did genocide but that's just a single issue"

OK dude.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (78 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago

Yep. If donnie gets back in there, do these purity ponies think unquestioning support of Israel will stop?

load more comments (14 replies)
[-] GoodbyeBlueMonday@startrek.website 59 points 11 months ago

Hunter S. Thompson reflected on the problems with Objective Journalism throughout his career: summarized well in a section of his obituary for Nixon.

Some people will say that words like scum and rotten are wrong for Objective Journalism — which is true, but they miss the point. It was the built-in blind spots of the Objective rules and dogma that allowed Nixon to slither into the White House in the first place. He looked so good on paper that you could almost vote for him sight unseen. He seemed so all-American, so much like Horatio Alger, that he was able to slip through the cracks of Objective Journalism. You had to get Subjective to see Nixon clearly, and the shock of recognition was often painful.

[-] blazeknave@lemmy.world 10 points 11 months ago

Oh God.. even back then it was called out jfc we're doomed

[-] mineralfellow@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago

On the other hand, that was a while ago, and we are still going…

[-] violetraven@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 11 months ago

While dealing with the same fucks that were behind Reagan

[-] Furbag@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

That doesn't mean much. It took centuries for Rome to fall, and all the while they spoke as if they were the greatest civilization to ever exist.

I see it clearly in this country too. The performative fealty to patriotism - God Bless America, USA! USA! USA!, Greatest Country on Earth, and so on... it's the same as the Romans who thought their empire would carry on into eternity as the columns crumbled around them.

We are all frogs in a pot of tepid water, slowly being brought to a boil.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] 4grams@awful.systems 51 points 11 months ago

Why sober, thoughtful conversation like this is not happening is beyond insane to me. Like I just do not know how to deal with a reality that treats this as normal.

Well said, I agree with every word.

[-] anarchyreloaded@lemmy.world 39 points 11 months ago

The downfall of American democracy, like all democracies is lack of protection for its principles. If democracy becomes so radical about the principle of freedom of expression that there is no utterance that isn''t worthy debating, no matter how debased it is while at the same time anything and everything is up for debate and nothing enshrined in principle democracy becomes its own worst enemy. Freedom of expression becomes the tool with which it destroys itself.

The crux however lies in the fact that if institutions exist that protect democracy from itself, like the Austrian "Verfassungsschutz" , that watch the radical ends of the political spectrum and hamper their political efforts, sometimes trying and convicting individuals as members of a criminal organisation they could easily be accused as stifling democracy.

Ultimately the democratic principle rests upon its subjects willingness to practise it and to participate in it. If enough people are unhappy or uneducated enough to believe in the statements of demagogues and radicals its downfall cannot be stopped by institutionalized violence, political will, or anything else. Democracy cannot defend itself against its own worst enemy: People that for some reason or other have given up on that idea. Democracy therefore will always come with its own 5th column.

What makes a working democracy is that everyone is actively participating in the dicourse and does what they can to stop the 5th column from rising to the top. A working democracy depends on a working educational system that produces strong critical minds. It relies on making sure everyone gets their share and that each and every subject has a stake in a system. Then the 5th Column is small enough to not really damage democracy and there is no instituion necessary to protect it.

These days however the world is far beyond that tipping point. There are enough people unhappy enough with democracy that collective supression no longer works. And its troublesome to watch. I am terrified that someone like Donald Trump could even get to the point where he is the presidential candidate for a major party, let alone serve a term as president of the United States.

Usually these sentiments are met with endless barrages of whataboutism... Literally no one, no matter what they have done with their emails or how many lobal conflicts they started in their term could be a worse president then someone whose aim is to just aimlessly wield power like a European monarch whose mind is impaired by the hereditary conditions that come with generations of incest.

[-] jaxxed@lemmy.world 10 points 11 months ago

Modern European Monarchs are all significantly better than Trump.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] macarthur_park@lemmy.world 30 points 11 months ago

To demonstrate the inability of conventional media to cover an extremist like Trump, this article points out that the New York Times once ran an article titled “Hitler Tamed By Prison”. The article, published in 1924, starts off with a disturbing parallel to recent events:

Adolph Hitler, once the demi-god of the reactionary extremists, was released on parole from imprisonment at Fortress Landsberg, Bavaria, today and immediately left in an auto for Munich.

[-] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

Look no further than the New York Times falsifying an entire article about Hamas raping women to manufacture consent for israel's Genocide.

[-] macarthur_park@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

So I’m unfamiliar with mondoweiss.net. The Media Bias Factcheck page on this source rates it as questionable. Is there another credible source for these claims?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] VikingHippie@lemmy.wtf 23 points 11 months ago

Damn right! It's about time a publication in (the outskirts of) the main stream points this out!

The establishment media and the Dem politicians insisting on pretending that the GOP is a legitimate party of regular conservatives rather than a fascist movement is how it was allowed to get this far in the first place!

[-] FunkyMonk@kbin.social 12 points 11 months ago

But facism gets such great short turn proffits before we blow ourselves and the rest of nature to shit. /s

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

Calling out the false "both sides" thing (h/t to The Professional Left, by the way!) is something that should be common currency in the "liberal media".

Thanks to the silliness of false "objectivity" and, let's be honest, corporatism, it is hardly ever discussed. But thank goodness Vanity Fair did here...however, they still called these treasonous insurrectionists (really: terrorists) "rioters", FFS.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 09 Jan 2024
750 points (96.6% liked)

politics

19239 readers
2638 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS