January 6, 2021: Lessons Learned?
Image
Even at our best, we humans often botch the job of identifying what’s true and right. The important thing is to recognize what went wrong, learn the lessons, and aim to do better.
If I could gather every American who self-identifies as conservative and deliver one message to them right now, that would probably be the bottom line: Face the facts of January 6 and start identifying how to do better and be better.
Facing Up
There’s much we still don’t know about what went wrong leading up to, and on, January 6, 2021. But many points are already known. Here’s a baker’s dozen.
- Large numbers of Trump supporters gathered to protest a stolen election that had not been stolen.
- A significant number of these supporters were radical enough to make a violent attempt to prevent Congress from completing the transition our Constitution requires.
- Some of these radicals were willing to carry weapons, and some were willing to assault and murder.
- Hundreds more were fanatical enough to join these radicals in illegal trespassing of the Capitol exterior, or in damaging government property, in defiance of police on the scene attempting to control the situation.
- Thousands more were fanatical enough to remain in the throng outside, lending visible and sometimes vocal support as these events took place (example).
- Some of those gathered prominently displayed Christian symbols and slogans, linking their identity as Christians with their identity as Trump supporters. (See photos here, here and here, for example.)
- For two months, the Republican President of the United States actively encouraged Americans to believe that “massive fraud” occurred in the election and that the election had been stolen from him.
- Many popular pundits on the right echoed these claims, along with some members of the U.S. House and Senate, as well as state and local Republican leaders across the country.
- Other influencers in politics and conservative media indirectly added legitimacy to the stolen election hoax by emphasizing “fraud” in ways that muddied the distinction between isolated local incidents and a coordinated effort altering the outcome of the election.
- Months before his post-election propaganda campaign, Trump planted seeds of doubt in the integrity of the election in public statements. The narrative, even before November, was Trump wins or it’s rigged (quotes and many references).
- Trump’s political career has emphasized populist emotional appeals focused on fighting and winning. He has framed his politics as a war with enemies, rather than as persuasion of fellow citizens. He has frequently expressed support for conspiracy theories.
- Trump had multiple opportunities to act to prevent the predictable events of January 6. As a leader, it was his responsibility to steer his followers toward accepting his defeat and acknowledging the rule of law—beginning in December, at the latest. (Post-riot, he has remained true to his never-apologize ways, even continuing to try to use the risk of his supporters’ anger to his advantage.)
- Congressmen and Senators loyal to Trump encouraged Americans to believe that the scattered cases of election irregularities and/or fraud could be addressed properly by objecting to the electoral college count, which they could not. These leaders knew that, but chose to pander to Trump-loyal constituents rather than telling them the truth.
Doing Better
In the wake of this disaster, the questions for conservatives are simple: what went wrong, and how can we do better?
The answers are not simple. We didn’t get here overnight. Nothing that happened on January 6 was actually “sudden,” though it seemed that way. But though the problems that led to the capitol attack are many, complex, and long-brewing, there is a path to a better future for conservatives in the U.S.
I can’t do much to fix conservatism in general or the Christian piece of it in particular. But I can pray. Some things I’m praying for:
I’m praying that the Republican Party/conservative influencers will …
- Nurture a culture of responsibility vs. a culture of victimhood, blaming, and resentment (rejecting this kind of populism), acting intentionally and patiently to shift the balance much further from “what’s wrong with Them” toward “what can be better with Us.” (We’ll know we’re making progress when whataboutism becomes the exception on the right rather than the rule.)
- Start regaining the moral high ground we’ve lost. Though conservative appeals to high morals have long met with skepticism, we’ve reached the point where we can’t even believe those claims about ourselves. I’m praying that leaders who still believe in high moral ideals will gain influence and insist that actions follow principles. We need our ethos back.
- Shift emphasis away from winning tactical fights to winning hearts and minds. If abortion is so important to conservatives, I’m praying more of us will see what winning on abortion would look like: millions of Americans changing their minds and concluding that killing an unborn baby is morally wrong, because they listened to people who spoke with moral authority.
- Recover genuine commitment to constitutionalism and rule of law vs. selective appeal to these when convenient—refusing to appeal to the basest instincts of the most uninformed and foolish citizens. I’m praying that conservatism and the GOP will become an increasingly uncomfortable place for the likes of the Proud Boys, “boogaloo boys,” QAnon supporters, and other conspiracy theory promoters.
- Refocus on educating people on conservative principles (vs. slogans and clichés) and their historical roots until most conservatives know what conservatism is supposed to be conserving and why—that it’s not a set of policies, much less an individual leader.
I’m praying that Christian churches and ministries in the U.S. will …
- Begin a new focus on building discernment and wisdom among Christians, especially to develop skilled, thoughtful, disciplined consumers of media (mainstream, social, and right wing).
- Increasingly reject a vision of Christians’ relationship to their country that blurs the distinction between loyalty to Christ, truth, and Christian principles vs. loyalty to political party, political agenda, or political leader.
- Recover an emphasis on character in leaders, both within churches and ministries and outside them in society and government. I pray that may will come to believe that character matters more than agenda.
- See that colleges and seminaries train ministry leaders in civics and government from a biblical perspective, so they can teach and influence their congregations and ministries. Davenport is probably wrong about how to solve our national problem, but he’s right that America “suffers from a pandemic of civic ignorance and a deep deficit of civic respect.” I pray that Christians will stop being as ignorant and lawless as most unbelievers.
- Many more Christians will develop an integrated worldview—one that rightly relates and values theology, Christian living, the arts, and the sciences. I pray for a day when conservative pastors commonly understand and teach that being a Christian plumber, pathologist, poet, or politician is as much a calling and a service to God as being a Christian pastor.
- Do a better job of teaching and preaching a biblical view social ethics, government, and our role as citizens. If there’s ever another right wing, stolen-election hoax protest at the U.S. capitol, I pray that zero Christians will attend. I also pray conservative evangelicals will grow out of thinking they have to elect unprincipled, third-rate candidates just to beat the other guys.
Teach believers the difference between “the world” (in the John 15:18-19 sense) and “the Left.” Maybe it used to be good enough to loosely identify “the Right” with biblical ways of thinking about society and “the Left” with secular/anti-Christian ways of thinking. The last five years have proved that will no longer do. I pray that more conservative Christians will come to understand that they must greet the claims and agendas of “the Right” with just as much critical thinking as they do those of “the Left.”
Aaron Blumer 2016 Bio
Aaron Blumer is a Michigan native and graduate of Bob Jones University and Central Baptist Theological Seminary (Plymouth, MN). He and his family live in small-town western Wisconsin, not far from where he pastored for thirteen years. In his full time job, he is content manager for a law-enforcement digital library service. (Views expressed are the author's own and not his employer's, church's, etc.)
- 61 views
[Larry]Joe, Feel free to dislike Trump and disagree with him. But don’t say things that aren’t true. Lying is no better from us than it is from Trump.
You’re struggling with the same thing many of us are struggling with - gaslighting. They tell us we’re crazy and that we’re never right. They throw out lies that cause us to constantly have to defend reality. They cause us to research to find the evidence that our position is accurate, and then they deflect or topic-shift when we prove their accusations against us were wrong. It is abusive behavior, and it does not deserve to be entertained. Yet some of us still do entertain them because we love them enough to try to help them see their sinful ways. How many of them still believe Trump colluded with Russia to win in 2016? How many of them still believe Trump incited the Capitol riot? How many of them agree with Ben Sasse’s statement that “Trump lost 60 straight court challenges?” These things and many more are talking points of leftists, and they aren’t truth.
Truth is a very elusive thing these days. Politicians, in general, are largely to blame, but the leftist media machine is far worse. Sources that were, until fairly recently, pretty well respected for their intellectual honesty, including WaPo and NYT, have lost almost all credibility. CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, NPR, PBS, and MSNBC constantly feed the masses garbage. Fox News is a little better than those, but not much. National Review used to be reliable - until they almost entirely turned against Trump and made themselves look like a bunch of hypocrites; they’re safer now with Biden as President because they have a never-ending supply of things to complain about. But their decisions in 2020 have significantly marred their credibility. From a media standpoint, we are limited to finding headlines and then researching out the various angles ourselves to try to figure out what the truth really is. For legal situations, thankfully there are public repositories of how cases were actually decided.
The combination of leftism and the information age has ruined access to truth, and, sadly, it has ruined many Christians.
Ashamed of Jesus! of that Friend On whom for heaven my hopes depend! It must not be! be this my shame, That I no more revere His name. -Joseph Grigg (1720-1768)
I watched the video the House impeachment managers showed, along with some of the presentations. I also watch portions of the muddled presentation by one of Trump’s lawyers. I say impeach him again.
Actually they did impeach him over what the Senate is debating today. The impeachment took place in the House of Representatives and occurred before Trump left office. What is going on now is the debate on whether or not to convict him on the impeachment charges and then remove him from office - that portion takes place in the Senate. (Typically this is only used for an office holder not a former office holder- that is why Chief Justice Roberts refused to preside over it)
I am glad to see that comments are still open so others can correct misinformation.
The impeachment question is an interesting one to me.
I watched very little of the hearing. The only part I saw was Trump’s lawyer pointing out that the goal of impeachment (removing from office) had already been achieved by the ballot box.
It seems unconstitutional since there is no constitutional ground for impeaching a private citizen. Impeachment is for “President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States.” Former presidents are not include in that list. Furthermore, the case can be made that the penalty is “removal, and disqualification,” not “removal, or disqualification.” Since Trump has already been removed, he cannot be “removed and disqualified.” This is an interesting article: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/byron-yorks-daily-memo-five-…
It seems rather undemocratic since, for all the talk of voter suppression, the Dems want to suppress the votes of those who would like Trump to be president. On a related note, for all the talk of the will of the people and not overriding it, the Dems (and some Repubs) didn’t mind overriding the will of the voters in Georgia by depriving them of representation on certain committees. (The Congresswoman is a disgrace to be sure.)
It also seem rather fearful since they are presuming that Trump would be a credible candidate in 2024 which might say something of their expectations for Biden. Unfortunately, he might be, which says an awful about Biden.
It also seems to set a bad precendent—that of impeaching someone for political speech if you don’t like the outcome of it. Unless there is some behind the scenes evidence we don’t know about, Trump quite clearly talked about a peaceful protest and the language used to argue for “incitement” is common political language that has been used by politicians from all sides, none of which are being impeached.
It seems rather hasty since the House didn’t call one witness in their rush to impeach and then held the articles of impeachment for longer than it took to pass them so as to wait for a Democratic Senate presumably. Last time around, they blasted the GOP for not calling witnesses, but this time, it appears that they will not be calling witnesses.
All in all, it is quite the political spectacle and barring some unforeseen evidence, a complete waste of time. There will be at least 35 Senators who will not vote to convict and thus nothing will be done. The upside is that the Senate is not passing bad legislation.
[Joeb]Again, you expose your ignorance on the conditions Evangelicals face in Russia.SNIP
If the White Evangelicals don’t like it again move to Russia
SNIP
Hoping to shed more light than heat..
Joeb’s statement: “Biden won fair and square that’s the truth to.” … Although Republicans have not conclusively demonstrated sufficient voter fraud to any court’s satisfaction, voter manipulation does seem to have occurred. Biden did not win “fair and square”. The recent TIME magazine article, media and social apps shutting down people and organizations they consider “wrong” - - manipulation happened. Yet voter manipulation, in a broad sense, is what all political campaigning is about. I doubt any Presidential election campaign is completely “fair”. But inappropriate voter manipulation is much harder to regulate because you encounter First Amendment considerations. Biden was a weak candidate, and Trump should have easily won. Yet Trump’s own personality was Biden’s best political weapon.
Impeachment itself is not a legal issue but a political issue/process. Normal court rules do not usually apply. The House & Senate set their own rules under the very limited guidelines which the Constitution provides. A credible argument can be and has been made that the Senate does not have the authority to try a President once he leaves office. Those who do not like Trump are using impeachment as a political weapon, a very dangerous precedent. If this were a legal issue with normal court rules, the Democrats would lose. But since this is political, impeachment is used to inflict maximum political damage. I would categorize Trump’s behavior and comments on Jan 6 as reckless, unwise, and stupid. But impeachment conviction? No.
Wally Morris
Huntington, IN
Truth is a very elusive thing these days. Politicians, in general, are largely to blame, but the leftist media machine is far worse. Sources that were, until fairly recently, pretty well respected for their intellectual honesty, including WaPo and NYT, have lost almost all credibility. CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, NPR, PBS, and MSNBC constantly feed the masses garbage. Fox News is a little better than those, but not much. National Review used to be reliable - until they almost entirely turned against Trump and made themselves look like a bunch of hypocrites; they’re safer now with Biden as President because they have a never-ending supply of things to complain about.
This is not the right way to look at information sources. There are sources that are so extreme and/or low-quality/unthoughtful that they’re rarely worth the time to consult. But all the rest are at various points along the scale of dependability. National Review, for example, has long had a tradition of being intentionally non-univocal. That is, they go out of their way to publish conservative perspectives that disagree with one another. The idea, is to have healthy debate within conservatism.
If we accept the current zero-nuance polarizing of everything, then every source looks unreliable because they don’t speak in 100% agreement with our set of litmus test views 100% of the time.
This results in thinking truth is extremely elusive in our times.
It’s not.
It takes some work, but finding truth has never consisted of finding sources that affirm 100% of what we’ve already decided 100% of the time. The best sources look “hypocritical” because
- they’re not oversimplifying
- they have writers who are not sock puppets… so they don’t agree with each other on everything
- they believe in giving readers different perspectives to consider
So, the most “hypocritical” sources, as the term tends to be used in this hyperpolarized hyper-simplified time, are probably the best sources.
The impeachment question…
It is a bit complex because impeachment is for sitting presidents. It’s also clear, though, that the purpose of impeachment is to hold presidents accountable, and the framers probably didn’t intend that things they do in the last few weeks of office should be outside the scope of that accountability.
So I think we probably need legislation to either state that presidents are impeachable after their term ends or explicitly requiring that they be tried in the criminal courts without any kind of presidential immunity.
Trump’s dereliction of duty is abundantly evident. He should have been banned from future office, which was almost the only way he could be prevented from continuing to influence the GOP in damaging ways. At this point, we can only hope clear thinking leaders on the right will find more courage to continue to chip away at the diseases in the party.
Manipulation vs fair and square
voter manipulation does seem to have occurred. Biden did not win “fair and square”.
There are two clauses here and they’re two very different claims. Voter manipulation would be anybody trying to do something dishonest with votes. This always happens in elections— and it usually happens on both sides. “Fair and square” means he didn’t cheat. There is no evidence that he or his campaign tried to mess with votes. It’s definitely a reasonable claim that he won “fair and square.”
… about as fair and square as anybody ever has.
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
Once again, the “fraud” that was perpetrated in the 2020 election was the changing of election rules that allowed many people to vote and turn in ballots that would never have been accepted in any previous election. That was the fraud. No recount is going to catch that.
In any previous election the rejection rates of absentee and mail0in ballots is high. This year they were almost all accepted. That was the fraud.
[Aaron Blumer]This is not the right way to look at information sources. There are sources that are so extreme and/or low-quality/unthoughtful that they’re rarely worth the time to consult. But all the rest are at various points along the scale of dependability. National Review, for example, has long had a tradition of being intentionally non-univocal. That is, they go out of their way to publish conservative perspectives that disagree with one another. The idea, is to have healthy debate within conservatism.
If we accept the current zero-nuance polarizing of everything, then every source looks unreliable because they don’t speak in 100% agreement with our set of litmus test views 100% of the time.
This results in thinking truth is extremely elusive in our times.
It’s not.
It takes some work, but finding truth has never consisted of finding sources that affirm 100% of what we’ve already decided 100% of the time. The best sources look “hypocritical” because
- they’re not oversimplifying
- they have writers who are not sock puppets… so they don’t agree with each other on everything
- they believe in giving readers different perspectives to consider
So, the most “hypocritical” sources, as the term tends to be used in this hyperpolarized hyper-simplified time, are probably the best sources.
Long before Trump and long before Red State, Gateway Pundit, One America News Network, Newsmax, The Federalist, The Epoch Times, American Thinker, and many other far right-wing sources ever existed, it has been universally agreed upon by those on the right that mainstream media (The Big 3, CNN, PBS, NPR, etc.) were highly left-biased to the point of twisting facts to set a pro-left, anti-right narrative. They only got worse through the Trump administration and are where they are now, communicating not only twists of truth, but, frequently, complete lies. Why anyone on the right would consider these sources as credible in any way is illogical. The truth about them is that they will never communicate anything that supports conservatism, and they regularly lie in their efforts to discredit Donald Trump. They hate him as much as the DC and Elitist Left, and will stop at nothing to destroy him – just as they have tried to do since 2016. They don’t hate Donald Trump because he is a bully, they hate Donald Trump because he is a fighter, and refused to compromise with leftism. In case some of you haven’t noticed, American Leftism and Constitutional Conservatism cannot possibly coexist. They are, at their foundations, diametrically opposed. America is polarized because people are learning just how much the leftists hate conservatives, and Trump stood up against the left – and, overall, had a victorious 4 years of conservative governance. The left hates him for this, and they want the GOP to return to Romneyism so they can continue their march toward progressivism that the compromising GOP has become known for over the past 15 years.
But back to the media.
I still like National Review enough to read it from time to time, despite what they did in 2020 that made it obvious that they were purposefully distancing themselves from anything that was pro-Trump to the point of having virtually nothing published by anyone pro-Trump, even though the first few years of the Trump presidency saw several of their writers on Trump’s side. Those writers are gone. But, like SI, they have a business to run, so I get the economic aspects, too. But their decisions in 2020 made it clear that they aren’t interested in any “healthy debate within conservatism.” Their interests used to be almost exclusively to speak out against progressivism and leftism, but they have now also adopted an anti-Trump position.
I used to read The Atlantic regularly, because, unlike NYT or WaPo, their writers at least were intellectually honest in their pro-left / anti-right arguments. But they’ve slid down the NYT/WaPo road and it is becoming increasingly difficult to read The Atlantic any longer. In other words, it’s the media themselves who are creating their own “zero-nuance polarization.” They have drawn the line in the sand of for or against Trump. The leftist media has succumbed to everything anti-Trump and anti-Conservatism. Some formerly reliably right-wing media have taken a Romnian approach of calling themselves conservative, and being vocally against leftism, but refusing to give any positive acknowledgment of the triumph of conservative policy that was the Trump presidency: it is they who cannot find a way to criticize Trump’s many obvious faults while still acknowledging it is Trump’s policy that the GOP must adopt if they have any hope of being relevant in 2022 and beyond.
As to Truth, find me any major news media source that has truthfully communicated the post-election, pro-Trump legal battles. If you point me to CNN, BBC, ABC, Fox, NR, NYT, or WSJ, you’ll find they all have failed to communicate the truth. But I’ll concede the point if you are able to come up with anything useful, I just know that I have not found anything other than the typical leftists and Ben Sasse talking points that Trump didn’t win a single post-election court battle or other such nonsense that the mass media has been feeding Americans since the election. (For the record – Trump has actually won a majority of any cases that were decided on their merits; the majority of cases were dismissed on procedure, meaning the judges didn’t even see the cases in the first place. Such procedural dismissals are NOT Trump-case failures. Do your homework, and you’ll discover the same thing.) That is why I say truth is elusive. The majority of Americans lack one or all of the combination of time, resources, or intellect to really learn what the truth is, and those who are responsible for communicating truth to the public – politicians / leaders and the mass media, either twist the facts beyond recognition or flat out lie in order to set narrative: they create the reality they want people to believe, and the first person to argue with them is then gaslighted by being labeled a “conspiracy theorist” because he disagrees with the narrative, despite having actual facts on his side. Once being labeled a CT, those who set the narrative have won. It doesn’t matter what actually comes out later; it doesn’t matter if Fauci tells Americans that he knew he wasn’t telling the truth about masks earlier on, it doesn’t matter if Peter Daszak admitted months later that he purposefully lied about the natural origin theory of coronavirus to protect Chinese scientists when he proclaimed “we stand together to strongly condemn conspiracy theories suggesting that COVID-19 does not have a natural origin;” those kinds of things don’t matter, because people have short memories and the explanations of those setting the narrative just get explained away. American politicians and the mass media (both sides of it, but, specifically, the leftist media for far many more years and with far more power) hate logic and truth, because it rarely helps their agenda, which is to support the march away from God into secularism in the form of progressive leftism.
At the bottom of all of this is Satan, of course…
Ashamed of Jesus! of that Friend On whom for heaven my hopes depend! It must not be! be this my shame, That I no more revere His name. -Joseph Grigg (1720-1768)
Out of curiosity, are you saying here that Donald Trump is a constitutional conservative?
“They don’t hate Donald Trump because he is a bully, they hate Donald Trump because he is a fighter, and refused to compromise with leftism. In case some of you haven’t noticed, American Leftism and Constitutional Conservatism cannot possibly coexist.”
[josh p]Out of curiosity, are you saying here that Donald Trump is a constitutional conservative?
There’s no need to change the subject. Different conversation for a different thread.
Ashamed of Jesus! of that Friend On whom for heaven my hopes depend! It must not be! be this my shame, That I no more revere His name. -Joseph Grigg (1720-1768)
[JNoël]There’s no need to change the subject. Different conversation for a different thread.
Fair enough. It seems like you were arguing from that position. Maybe it was more of a passing comment.
Featured Resource
Discussion