Political violence is a feature of the Republican platform
Make no mistake, the political violence in this country is not the result of anger and division among our political parties, but specifically, the result of a divisive former president and his party.
I was deeply disturbed by the attempted assassination of Donald Trump in Bristol, PA on Saturday. As much as I loathe the man, the attempt may well lead to the worst possible outcomes of his legacy. Not only would he be seen as a martyr, it would embolden his (violent) followers to perpetrate more acts of violence. I am worried that, as it stands, it may improve his chances of winning the election (so far, there is no polling bump), and it certainly will increase his funding.
Thomas Matthew Crook, Trump’s would-be assassin, is a largely apolitical 20-year-old. (He was a registered Republican, but hadn't voted in a presidential election). At this point in time, law enforcement has not concluded that politics motivated Crook (though a neighbor spotted Trump signs on his lawn). For that, we might experience a bit of relief. In an unusual turn of his rhetoric, Trump is calling for unity and has asked all parties to “tone it down.” But in my observation of the RNC—nothing is toned down, and Biden is being senselessly blamed for the assassination attempt.
In addition to any new violence that this assassination attempt may spur, I am troubled at the argument one hears that what happened is the result of our polarization, that both sides are angry, and violence is bound to happen. I take issue with this comment published in the Washington Post, for example:
The tenor of the campaign trail had been transformed long before the shots rang out Saturday in Butler, Pa. Gone are the soapbox saws about “our children’s future” and “the most important election of our lifetime” that punctuated U.S. elections for decades. In their place have been dire warnings of doom should the other side prevail.
“Donald Trump is a genuine threat to our nation,” Biden’s campaign announced weeks ago, before a Supreme Court decision on immunity that the president’s campaign declared would allow Trump to “become the dictator that he promised to be on day one.”
Trump has encouraged violence against protesters at his own rallies and calls those who were convicted of participation in the 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol “hostages.” He has described his political opponents as “vermin” and warned that the nation would face terminal decline during a second Biden term. “If he wins this election, our country doesn’t have a chance,” Trump said at the June debate with Biden.
Biden is right—Donald Trump is a threat to democracy and to our nation. How do we know that? The next paragraph tells us. Trump has encouraged violence against protesters, calls insurrectionists hostages, and vilifies political opponents!
Political violence isn’t a problem on both sides. Democratic elected officials consistently rebuke all forms of violence. Joe Biden, in particular, has offered sympathy to the victims and to the president. In contrast, Donald Trump has not reached out to the family of the bystander who was killed, as of this date.
On the other side, when Nancy Pelosi’s husband was attacked, Donald Trump, Jr., acted without decorum, to say the least. Furthermore, Trump and his supporters have glorified violence against their opponents, justified an insurrection, and have promised further violence if they were elected. More than that, the Supreme Court, filled with Republican appointees, have granted the president immunity if he does indeed commit acts of violence “while in office.”
There is obviously no justification for the attempt to kill Donald Trump, but it does seem that the violence he has encouraged in his speeches, and the assault rifles he condones, were turned against him. Trump is the one who is polarizing us, and causing us to hate one another. The only thing that Trump cares about seems to be himself— and some feel that he doesn’t even care about the people voting for him.
There is nothing romantic about violence as a means for revolution or reform. As much as activists want to pretend that a violent revolution, by any means necessary, is what we need to liberate ourselves, violence begets more violence and is not a precise way to offer reform. No, violence will not save us, and an assassinated Donald Trump is far more dangerous than a defeated one.
So it is far better to ensure that Donald Trump pays for his numerous crimes (including the ones surrounding classified documents that were recently dismissed) and does not get re-elected.
My conviction against violence is fundamentally rooted in my own faith tradition. Jesus calls me to another way of living. I don’t act nonviolently because of its political expediency or effectiveness. But faced with violence against the President, I find myself reassured, that nonviolent resistance and activism are a far more effective way of enacting change than a violent response is. And finally, when I am tempted t believe that a violent response might be effective, I am reminded that I am acting like my own enemies and my own political opponents when I do that. I am acting like the MAGA Republicans who praise and purvey that very violence and I feel called to act in another, holier and more effective, way.