Political Violence and the Response of U.S. Politicians
A bipartisan sampling of the world’s greatest perpetrators and enablers of political violence has rushed to condemn political violence following the shooting attempt on former President Donald Trump on Saturday.
Politicians swiftly coalesced around the language of “political violence,” rather than terrorism, to describe the assassination attempt, carried out by Thomas Matthew Crooks, who was shot dead at the Western Pennsylvania rally. Taken together, the outpourings of condemnations betray a clear agreement on what constitutes political violence, and in whose hands the monopoly on violence should remain.
President Joe Biden, the backer of Israel’s genocidal war against Palestine, expressed his shock at the incident, emphasizing that such political violence is unheard of in America. While deadly attacks on the American ruling class are rare, other forms of political violence, such as organized abandonment, poverty, militarized borders, police brutality, incarceration, and deportation, are unfortunately commonplace.
The chorus of condemnation from Democratic politicians was predictable, with figures like Sen. Bernie Sanders, former President Barack Obama, and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez all denouncing political violence. However, the issue arises when the concept of “political violence” is stripped of meaning when condemned by those who have been complicit in state-sanctioned violence.
The problem lies not in the hypocrisy or insincerity of these condemnations but in the normalization of state and capitalist monopolized violence. The messaging around condemning political violence while perpetuating other forms of violence at home and abroad only serves to maintain the status quo.
While Trump and the Republican Party may continue to push a narrative of apocalyptic race war and tribalism, Democrats must be cautious not to fall into the trap of performing civility without addressing the root causes of political violence. Calls for civility while funding police departments and engaging in violent repression of dissent only perpetuate the cycle of violence.
The response from Rep. Mike Kelly, R-Pa., who was present at the rally, highlights the partisan nature of assigning blame for political violence. The suspected gunman’s ideology remains unclear, but his actions have sparked a blame game between Republicans and Democrats.
As centrist Democrats and Republicans engage in finger-pointing over who is responsible for Trump’s far-right extremism, it becomes evident that any actual leftist organizing against fascist forces may face challenges in a climate where both sides are quick to criminalize dissent.
In a world where bipartisan condemnation of violence is reserved for attacks on political figures, the true meaning of peace and justice is lost. The normalization of state-sanctioned violence while condemning isolated acts of political violence only perpetuates a system where violence is tolerated as long as it serves those in power.
In conclusion, the response of U.S. politicians to political violence highlights the need for a deeper examination of the root causes of violence and a commitment to addressing systemic issues that perpetuate harm. Only by challenging the normalization of state violence can we hope to create a more just and peaceful society for all.