American Revolution and January 6th 2021

[BH]

Years ago I read a book about the American Revolution of 1776-1783. In this book the author stated that the revolutions had been planning and putting out feelers for this twenty years before actually revolting.

I'm just curious how long our present day wanna be revolutionaries might have been planning things out. Anyone got any ideas?

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

I few days at most. You don't really plan for a protest to get out of control and turn into a riot.

 

[Politesse]

Ye Olde Wikipedia has started gathering some information on this, and there was an abundance of discussion about the matter during the recent Congressional hearings. There's evidence for planning of this specific incident all through the precedent December, mobilizing a social network that was already in existence and tied to various other incicents over the past 6-7 years. If you want, you could trace the lineage back further. WaPo reporter Dana Millbanks has written an interesting book on the subject, titled The Destructionists, in which he draws the current political trend of increasingly violent right wing rhetoric and occasional terrorist activity all the way back to the mid 1980's. If you don't want to read the whole book, NPR's Terri Gross interviewed him about it last week in this podcast.

I do think there are some parallels to the situation in Boston and Connecticut during the decades leading up to the American Revolution. That said, our political arena is so different now that even superficially similar acts cannot be said to be direct parallels to current events. Crucially, there was no meaningful avenue for representation of colonial interests at that time, whereas Republicans and their allies have numerous means of legally pursuing their political prerogatives, up to and including the case of Mr Trump himself, who was indisputably the president of the entire nation for four years. Samuel Adams and his friends did not have such advantages, and that being the case, I'm not sure I would be comfortable evaluating their decisions by the exact same rubric I might employ in considering my own times and political situation.

 

[Politesse]

I few days at most. You don't really plan for a protest to get out of control and turn into a riot.

That is not what happened, though; this attack was premeditated by at least a month. Even if the testimony of some of the participants is to be believed, that they had no idea what would happen until it happened, the same is not true of the organizers of the event, as anyone who has been watching or listening to the news for the last few weeks will readily tell you.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I few days at most. You don't really plan for a protest to get out of control and turn into a riot.

Two plus weeks. Clock started counting December 18th.

 

[Ford]

Years ago I read a book about the American Revolution of 1776-1783. In this book the author stated that the revolutions had been planning and putting out feelers for this twenty years before actually revolting.

I'm just curious how long our present day wanna be revolutionaries might have been planning things out. Anyone got any ideas?

Minor quibble...the revolutioning started before 1776.

My mother spent many years researching her family history - her father (my grandpa) was adopted and she wanted to fill in the blanks, so to speak - and discovered that we're directly descended from a rebel soldier who fought at Breed's Hill...which later became famous as the "Battle of Bunker Hill." June 17th, 1775.

I wonder what he'd think about our current crop of people claiming to be just like him. He and the others who took up arms against the British had a long list of long-standing grievances. Today's "revolutionaries" are basically pissed off that Trump lost. This latest dust-up? They're torqued off because the FBI "raided" "The President's home." They act as if a golf resort in Florida is somehow synonymous with the republic, and that any action against "The President" is an attack on the nation itself.

On a deeper level, the current cries for "revolution" are a rejection of the very ideas upon which this nation was allegedly founded. Quite a lot of folks on the religious right have claimed that Trump was "chosen by God" to lead the country, and if you couple that with the idea they're floating that even when he's out of office he (or one of his residences) is unassailable, it starts to sound very much like they want a king.

 

[Bomb#20]

Years ago I read a book about the American Revolution of 1776-1783. In this book the author stated that the revolutions had been planning and putting out feelers for this twenty years before actually revolting.

I'm just curious how long our present day wanna be revolutionaries might have been planning things out. Anyone got any ideas?

Forty years.

How Conservatives Won the Battle Over the Courts

The right has demonstrated that winning this kind of institutional fight takes years, even decades, and requires a ruthless disposition.

www.theatlantic.com

Oh, sorry, you probably meant the revolutionaries who failed.

 

[steve_bank]

It has been around since the revolution.

The American Revolution was a minority revolution. There were issues but economically it did not make sense. The colonials had one of highest if not the highest standard of living in the empire. Except of course the slaves.

The radicals were not impoverished rebels. Franklin was rich.

If Trump rins and looses there is the possibility of open warfare in the streets. It is not just me, analysis in the media. Trump has a large armed following.

Look at conditions that led to Mussolini. Hitler, Stalin and modern Putin.

There are repbcans in congress calling for getting rid of the FBI calling it Gestapo. There are clearly republicans in congress who wnated Trump's coup to succeed.

Were ripe for an authoritarian leader. Trump was cearly attempting to corrupt and overthrow the system. A republcan control of congress plus Trump could mean getting rid of term limits. Pretty much what Putin did.

 

[Elixir]

A republcan control of congress plus Trump could mean getting rid of term limits.

A sure bet actually. Why the Dem Party isn’t blowing that whistle is beyond me.

 

[prideandfall]

A republcan control of congress plus Trump could mean getting rid of term limits.

A sure bet actually. Why the Dem Party isn’t blowing that whistle is beyond me.

Why would they? It serves them just as well, so I can't imagine a scenario where they would care unless their base went into a sufficient froth over it, and even then they would just pay lip service to caring like they do with abortion, but never actually *do* anything about it.

Don't forget: Ds and Rs are not enemies, they are rival teams - Republicans are like the Packers, and Democrats are the Bears.
The teams don't hate each other, their *fans* hate each other and the other team. But to the teams themselves, this is just their job.*

*Which is not to "both sides" the issue because that's bullshit, I'm just saying that politically it doesn't serve the Dems in any way to react to something the Rs are doing in the instances where the thing the Rs are doing would also benefit the Dems.

 

[steve_bank]

The old paradigm of the left and right as rival teams is long gone. Progressives and concsevatives have radically different views of whatth e country should be and there is no middle or common ground. There is no common view o what America is and should be. That goes down to individual citizens.

The republican rhetoric in congress right now is disturbing to say the least.

In his rise to power Hitler maintained a public image of legality. When e courts and the legislature got on board it was over.

With Trump enough pole in the courts, the states, and in his administration did the right thing. Most notably VP Pense. Republicans in congress still claim the election was stolen.

As I see it we are ouo f control and the end of it all is unpredictable.

Add to it the growing income disparity and cost of housing issues.

 

[prideandfall]

The old paradigm of the left and right as rival teams is long gone. Progressives and concsevatives have radically different views of whatth e country should be and there is no middle or common ground. There is no common view o what America is and should be. That goes down to individual citizens.

Culturally I agree, but that doesn't change the fact that to Democrats and Republicans themselves (as in, elected officials in the Senate and Congress) it still holds true.

Elected representatives don't behave like bitter enemies waging an ideological war over the future of the human race - to them, it's just business-as-usual... as long as the plodding of American Empire continues apace and they are enriched, they don't really care what the other side is doing.

 

[steve_bank]

I disagree. Biden is a throwback. A left of center centrist. GWB was a right of center centritst.

Biden would say lets sit down, talk, and work it out. Neiter conservatives nor progressives whant to hear that. The level of hateful speech and anger is new in congress.

After hours Tip O'Neill and Reagan would have drinks and swap stories in the WH. Could you imagine tht today?

Progressives want what amounts to a revolution. The purpose of govt is to take care of people. Here in Wa progressives want to fund inducing minorities to use national parks. Conservatives would say that is not the role of govt. On that I agree.

There are progressives who want to give the right to vote to illegal immigrants with little education and little or no English. Conservatives see that as a fom of revolution. They would likely vote for democrats. Conservatives have a point.

It is both the radical left and radical right.

Before Trumpthjere was a battle for the future of America. Radical progressives vs radical conservatives.

We have a radical progressive on our city council who has identified in the past as communist who said on camera she wnats to tear down the system and replace it with 'true democracy'. She s not alone on the council and in her district.

In the interest of progessive views of soical justice the Seattle police department was destroyed and may never recover. Some argued the police caused crime.

Now conservatives in congress are saying deund the FBI.

I am not a studied historian, but looking at history Trump may have put us on the path to failure.

 

[Elixir]

A republcan control of congress plus Trump could mean getting rid of term limits.

A sure bet actually. Why the Dem Party isn’t blowing that whistle is beyond me.

Why would they? It serves them just as well, so I can't imagine a scenario where they would care unless their base went into a sufficient froth over it, and even then they would just pay lip service to caring like they do with abortion, but never actually *do* anything about it.

Don't forget: Ds and Rs are not enemies, they are rival teams - Republicans are like the Packers, and Democrats are the Bears.
The teams don't hate each other, their *fans* hate each other and the other team. But to the teams themselves, this is just their job.*

*Which is not to "both sides" the issue because that's bullshit, I'm just saying that politically it doesn't serve the Dems in any way to react to something the Rs are doing in the instances where the thing the Rs are doing would also benefit the Dems.

Well, the ‘pugs are not doing anything, nor will they unless they get control of the government. But the credible specter of Trump’s lifetime reign followed by Junior or (god forbid) Eric for his lifetime, is something Dems should use to their advantage. Obviously having a Trump government is NOT to their benefit, even if their clownery is.

 

[prideandfall]

Obviously having a Trump government is NOT to their benefit, even if their clownery is.

I dunno, I kind of feel like it actually is.
Fundamentally, there are things that the Dems and Repugs agree on: predatory capitalism, the maintenance of the status quo that all the money and power are in the hands of an elite few, that government exists largely as a grift to give attention and money to whores who seek that sort of thing, and that human rights and the forward progress of human civilization should be avoided unless absolutely necessary.

Where they disagree is pretty much just in the details of how to placate the teeming masses.
Democrats seem to follow the notion that giving just the barest minimum to keep enough of them quiet and complacent so that they don't rise up is the best way to run things.
Republicans seem to think shock-and-awe and authoritarianism is the way to go.
They both want the same thing ultimately, but one of them goes about it in a way that is generally more destructive to the people.

The big (and really, only) difference in the last 40 years or so is that the Republicans have drank a bit too much of their own kool-aid and forgot how this game works.
For example, abortion has been an incredible political football the Rs and Ds have been kicking back and forth for decades - it was a dream scenario, everyone on both sides is incredibly passionate about it, and it's a huge driver of voting and fund raising.
Rs would pretend to try to ban it, Ds would pretend to not want them to do that, and everyone benefited massively from it.
But they fucked up and *actually* did something about it, and now it's going to end up being decided with finality and they killed their golden goose. It's utter political stupidity.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Years ago I read a book about the American Revolution of 1776-1783. In this book the author stated that the revolutions had been planning and putting out feelers for this twenty years before actually revolting.

I'm just curious how long our present day wanna be revolutionaries might have been planning things out. Anyone got any ideas?

Most things in life are multi-variate, spectra and/or continua. In this case, I don't believe there is a single group of "wanna be revolutionaries," but multiple factions present on Jan 6th that had different interests and goals. I think that some of the paramilitary groups probably were planning for months specifically for taking the Capitol, but others particularly within Trump's sphere were probably trying to apply political pressure from the presence of the Q-crazies so that Ted Cruz and others' suggestions to pause the confirmation and form a committee would succeed, ultimately politically subverting democracy rather than with direct violence. Still others were very impressionable jackasses who got caught up in the moment and few others probably didn't know of the violent nature of the coup right next to them.

Recall the timeline is that results of the vote are known in November. Even before that, they were creating fictitious stories to overturn results in districts and states but that failed in courts. Up to the last minute, Trump was being presented with options, his favorite of which was martial law. Meanwhile, various paramilitary groups such as Proud Boys and 3 percenters scoping out and making plans post-November results. The Stop the Steal movement itself was more political based on the Big Lie than it was violent but the membership had a wide distribution of crazy, making the coup attempt an inevitability.

 

[steve_bank]

Everyday is an ex[experiment to see if we keep going another day,

I think part of the problem is our myth that we are indestructible. The idea we can tolerate multiple extremes at the same time with no effect on stability.

Part of it is probably the Christian belief America is ordained by god.

In the 19th century people went west where there was little government. There is no outlet today.

For England the colonies were a place to send young healthy men with noting to do potentially causing trouble.

I grew up with the word melting pot. Immignats assimilated, culture chnaged, and we were all Amercans. Now it is diversity meaning an almost worshiping of individual subgroups with eth or oter boindariesc boundaries. Each group is a victim. No unity .

 

[Elixir]

I grew up with the word melting pot. Immignats assimilated, culture chnaged, and we were all Amercans.

Yeah, me too.

Now it is diversity meaning an almost worshiping of individual subgroups with eth or oter boindariesc boundaries. Each group is a victim. No unity .

I think that what we need is preservation of the individual cultures within the "melting pot", and unity in the desire for such preservation. It's when we are only concerned with preserving OUR culture at the expense of all others, that democracy becomes impossible.