This report reveals fairly clearly that the ruling class strategy in response to last year’s uprisings was to co-opt rather than suppress the rebellions and weaponize them against Trump, hoping for a reverse Nixon ’68 effect, while knowing perfectly well they could subsequently purge sectors they can’t use or don’t want. Meanwhile, the January 6 incident creates a perfect pretense for not only suppressing opposition from the radical right while simultaneously weaponizing the event against their primary mainstream opposition, which is Trumpism.
The consensus of the ruling class in response to the Trumpist populist insurgency was to create a euphemistic “new popular front” (ranging from neocons to the far left) against Trumpism with accusations of “fascism,” “Russian interference,” yadda, yadda. When the riots happened, they were weaponized by the ruling class with the protests being co-opted as part of the messaging. Meanwhile, the ruling class was able to successfully rig the primaries to keep the reformist left under control by maintaining ridiculous requirements for participation in the debates, shutting off the mics of disfavored candidates, pulling back house candidates, and putting Biden out in front as their anointed when Sanders started doing well and keeping Warren in as a spoiler until the last minute.
The ruling class strategy was first to defeat Trumpism electorally, and then use the legal system to repress Trumpism more extensively (January 6 created a pretext for escalating that approach). The ruling class is more worried about right-wing insurgents than leftist ones because the radical right as they define it is larger, better armed, and tends to engage in more extreme violence. But they’re also reserving the tactics they’ve used to repress Islamists and the radical right for use against the radical left when it serves their purposes as the Center for Strategic and International Studies reports on domestic terrorism indicate.
Most interesting of all has been the neocons’ response to Trumpism, which has been to wage a 3-front war: embed themselves in Trumpism and try to co-opt it (the Podhoretz, Prager, Horowitz approach), lead the anti-Trump faction of the GOP (the Shapiro, Lincoln Project approach), recolonize the Democrats from where they came and attempt to assume the leadership of the center-left opposition to Trumpism (the Kristol, Will and now Bolton approach).
By Matt A. Mayer, The Federalist
The sheer similarities and differences between the treatment of the 2020 rioters compared to the treatment of the January 6 riot rioters are shocking.
One would think a major report from a group representing America’s top law enforcement leaders analyzing the widespread riots of 2020 would have garnered significant media attention. One also would think such a report would garner widespread discussion after the January 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capital due to the parallels between it and the 2020 riots. Given our hyper-partisan environment, however, one would be woefully wrong.
Specifically, back in October 2020, the Major Cities Chiefs (MCC) released a comprehensive report full of data from dozens of cities that provides deep insights into the 2020 riots that plagued America after George Floyd’s death in Minnesota. The MCC’s “Report on the 2020 Protests and Civil Unrest” served as an excellent after-action report that cities, states, and the federal government could use to reform their practices and, equally importantly, to prepare for future riots.