On the ‘Sacredness’ of Our Institutions

 

Let me get the disclaimer done with: I don’t support rioting or invasions of government buildings. They should be stopped with whatever force is necessary.

But I’m not buying that there was some sort of desecration going on in the invasion of the Capitol Building. What is sacred in this nation is not institutions or buildings, but individual rights, liberty, and life. Whatever sacredness our institutions have is derivative of their core purpose in securing individual liberty. That’s a peculiarity of this nation we sometimes forget. The king is sacred in England, or the party in Communist China, but in a constitutional republic like ours, our government has only derivative sacredness.

We wave the flag, celebrate the Fourth of July, and have monuments in Washington DC as a way of holding individual liberty sacred. We should feel a sense of desecration when those core individual rights are violated, and only in a lesser sense when there is some attack on the institutions that protect them. George W. Bush expressed this in the wake of 9/11 when he said that “freedom had been attacked.” He understood that the significance of the attack on the Pentagon Building wasn’t that the building itself was really threatened, but that the real target was the individual liberty for which this nation stands. That is the thing to be concerned about.

Actual desecrations of individual rights and liberty have been occurring most of this year. To have secure individual rights means that one can trust that your rights won’t be violated by the government, and that the government will protect your rights from others who wish to violate them. Yet for most of this year, the government routinely stood by while BLM and Antifa rioters looted and burned private property, harassed citizens in their homes and at restaurants, blocked intersections, or set up “autonomous zones.” How many ordinary people’s lives were destroyed in these events? That is the desecration I am worried about. It happened when Joe Sixpack lost his livelihood when his hardware store was looted and burned, while police watched and did nothing.

By contrast, how many lives were destroyed in the Capitol Building invasion? I’m not talking about the rioters themselves. You get involved in a riot, you take your chances. I’m talking about ordinary, innocent people who go home from work and show up the next day to find their store looted. As far as I know, the number is zero. Whatever damage was done to the Capitol Building will be quickly repaired. In a few weeks, you won’t even be able to tell it ever happened. You can still see the boarded-up businesses in Portland and other cities, however.

Capitol Buildings, Congresses, Presidents, and Senates are not sacred. It is the individual liberty they are supposed to secure that is sacred.

Published in General
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 69 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Snirtler Inactive
    Snirtler
    @Snirtler

    J Climacus:

    But I’m not buying that there was some sort of desecration going on in the invasion of the Capitol Building. What is sacred in this nation is not institutions or buildings, but individual rights, liberty, and life. Whatever sacredness our institutions have is derivative of their core purpose in securing individual liberty. <snip>

    Actual desecrations of individual rights and liberty have been occurring most of this year. To have secure individual rights means that one can trust that your rights won’t be violated by the government, and that the government will protect your rights from others who wish to violate them. Yet for most of this year, the government routinely stood by while BLM and Antifa rioters looted and burned private property, harassed citizens in their homes and at restaurants, blocked intersections, or set up “autonomous zones.” How many ordinary people’s lives were destroyed in these events? That is the desecration I am worried about. It happened when Joe Sixpack lost his livelihood when his hardware store was looted and burned, while police watched and did nothing.

    The argument that what’s sacred in this nation is not buildings is redolent of BLM partisans’ claims that no harm is done burning buildings. (Insurance will pay for it. No harm, no foul.) I haven’t actually read anyone seriously claim that the biggest problem with Jan 6th was the hurt done to buildings and physical structures. It was the hurt done to persons and constitutional processes.

    Why would that be an either/or? We ought to reject violations of both individual rights and of constitutional processes. The trespassers, protesters, and rioters that stormed the Capitol, at minimum, disrupted Congress’s exercise of its duty to tally electoral votes and, at worst, sought to cause physical harm to persons conducting that business. To denounce the Jan 6th riot is not to minimize the destruction caused by the BLM riots.

    By contrast, how many lives were destroyed in the Capitol Building invasion? I’m not talking about the rioters themselves. You get involved in a riot, you take your chances. I’m talking about ordinary, innocent people who go home from work and show up the next day to find their store looted. As far as I know, the number is zero. Whatever damage was done to the Capitol Building will be quickly repaired. In a few weeks, you won’t even be able to tell it ever happened. You can still see the boarded-up businesses in Portland and other cities, however.

    One life lost to murderous mayhem: Officer Brian Sicknick. And if this isn’t murderous mayhem against a different police officer, I don’t know what is.

     

    • #31
  2. J Climacus Member
    J Climacus
    @JClimacus

    Snirtler (View Comment):

    J Climacus:

    But I’m not buying that there was some sort of desecration going on in the invasion of the Capitol Building. What is sacred in this nation is not institutions or buildings, but individual rights, liberty, and life. Whatever sacredness our institutions have is derivative of their core purpose in securing individual liberty. <snip>

    The argument that what’s sacred in this nation is not buildings is redolent of BLM partisans’ claims that no harm is done burning buildings.

    Notice that in my quoted words I said that “Whatever sacredness our institutions have is derivative of their core purpose in securing individual liberty.”

    My point is that individual rights and liberty are what is primarily sacred in our nation; the institutions and government buildings are only secondarily or derivatively sacred since they only exist to secure individual liberty (and, yes, to secure the common good, understood in the context of liberty).

    Yet when individuals rights and properties were routinely violated all year, I did not hear a general hue and cry about desecration of the sacred. I’m talking about the mainstream; I know many here on Ricochet appreciated at the time that something vital was being lost when mobs were permitted to loot and burn private property. Worse, many constitutional officers in the Federal Government cheered on the rioting.  Now these same constitutional officers are yelling “desecration” when their offices were invaded. Well, I think they are too late with their outrage.

    It used to be that people had the sense that individual rights and liberty are what is truly sacred in this country. They felt outrage – yes, a sense of desecration – when someone’s rights were violated. “I disagree with what you say but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it.” I remember when that was a sentiment common to liberals and conservatives as an almost religious principle. Those days are long gone now.

    I don’t like rioting in any context. But am I more outraged that Nancy Pelosi’s desk was “violated” than that Joe Sixpack had his hardware store looted and burned while the police stood aside and watched? No. And I think the latter events are far more dangerous to liberty than the former.

    • #32
  3. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    Snirtler (View Comment):

    J Climacus:

    But I’m not buying that there was some sort of desecration going on in the invasion of the Capitol Building. What is sacred in this nation is not institutions or buildings, but individual rights, liberty, and life. Whatever sacredness our institutions have is derivative of their core purpose in securing individual liberty. <snip>

    Actual desecrations of individual rights and liberty have been occurring most of this year. To have secure individual rights means that one can trust that your rights won’t be violated by the government, and that the government will protect your rights from others who wish to violate them. Yet for most of this year, the government routinely stood by while BLM and Antifa rioters looted and burned private property, harassed citizens in their homes and at restaurants, blocked intersections, or set up “autonomous zones.” How many ordinary people’s lives were destroyed in these events? That is the desecration I am worried about. It happened when Joe Sixpack lost his livelihood when his hardware store was looted and burned, while police watched and did nothing.

    The argument that what’s sacred in this nation is not buildings is redolent of BLM partisans’ claims that no harm is done burning buildings. (Insurance will pay for it. No harm, no foul.) I haven’t actually read anyone seriously claim that the biggest problem with Jan 6th was the hurt done to buildings and physical structures. It was the hurt done to persons and constitutional processes.

    Why would that be an either/or? We ought to reject violations of both individual rights and of constitutional processes. The trespassers, protesters, and rioters that stormed the Capitol, at minimum, disrupted Congress’s exercise of its duty to tally electoral votes and, at worst, sought to cause physical harm to persons conducting that business. To denounce the Jan 6th riot is not to minimize the destruction caused by the BLM riots.

    By contrast, how many lives were destroyed in the Capitol Building invasion? I’m not talking about the rioters themselves. You get involved in a riot, you take your chances. I’m talking about ordinary, innocent people who go home from work and show up the next day to find their store looted. As far as I know, the number is zero. Whatever damage was done to the Capitol Building will be quickly repaired. In a few weeks, you won’t even be able to tell it ever happened. You can still see the boarded-up businesses in Portland and other cities, however.

    One life lost to murderous mayhem: Officer Brian Sicknick. And if this isn’t murderous mayhem against a different police officer, I don’t know what is.

    These aren’t pro-Trump protesters.  They’re wearing masks.

    • #33
  4. James Lileks Contributor
    James Lileks
    @jameslileks

    National symbols matter, and should stand above the passions of the moment. They communicate things from generation to generation. One may not respect its current occupants, but shrugging because some yahoo behaved like a chimp and soiled a room is like an atheist laughing when Notre Dame burns. Lol @ yr sky dad

    • #34
  5. J Climacus Member
    J Climacus
    @JClimacus

    Let’s take a moment to discuss the BLM justification that “property doesn’t matter” in their riots, and in the context of the Capitol Building attack.

    One difference between the recent events and the riots over the summer is that the Capitol Building attack was not an attack on private property. It was an attack on a government building. Now while I disapprove of the attack, I definitely prefer that citizens attack government buildings when they riot rather than other citizen’s property. At least they are attacking a political target. Nancy Pelosi’s desk got attacked, but her private home in Georgetown (or wherever she lives) was never targeted. Whatever the faults of the MAGA riot crowd, it didn’t occur to them to burn down the houses of Democrat Congressional leaders. 

    But that is what BLM means when they talk about property not mattering. They mean private property. It’s an excuse to burn and loot other citizen’s property, or just violate it at will. The couple in Missouri that got in trouble for brandishing guns only did so because a BLM mob kicked in the gate to their property and marched in. There was no desecration here in Nancy Pelosi’s mind. What do the rights of that white couple mean compared to the grievances of BLM? They mean nothing. Well, I for one am not shedding a lot tears that the papers on Nancy’s desk got shuffled. Her desk means nothing because she has no respect for the liberty her office is supposed to protect.

     

    • #35
  6. J Climacus Member
    J Climacus
    @JClimacus

    James Lileks (View Comment):

    National symbols matter, and should stand above the passions of the moment. They communicate things from generation to generation. One may not respect its current occupants, but shrugging because some yahoo behaved like a chimp and soiled a room is like an atheist laughing when Notre Dame burns. Lol @ yr sky dad

    I’m not shrugging. I keep repeating that I reject rioting in all its forms, but to no apparent effect.

    My objection is to the shrugging that went on all year as individual property and rights were violated, that now becomes “desecration” when some windows in the Capitol Building are broken. 

    What exactly are our national symbols now communicating? Not the defense of individual property and rights. If they were, there would have been national outrage at the desecration of individual rights that has been going on for months. But there wasn’t. Who cares if Joe Smith in Portland got his diner burned out? He’s nobody. But that our overlords in Washington might have had their desks overturned – the sacrilege!

    • #36
  7. Snirtler Inactive
    Snirtler
    @Snirtler

    J Climacus (View Comment):

    Snirtler (View Comment):

    J Climacus:

    But I’m not buying that there was some sort of desecration going on in the invasion of the Capitol Building. What is sacred in this nation is not institutions or buildings, but individual rights, liberty, and life. Whatever sacredness our institutions have is derivative of their core purpose in securing individual liberty. <snip>

    The argument that what’s sacred in this nation is not buildings is redolent of BLM partisans’ claims that no harm is done burning buildings.

    Notice that in my quoted words I said that “Whatever sacredness our institutions have is derivative of their core purpose in securing individual liberty.”

    My point is that individual rights and liberty are what is primarily sacred in our nation; the institutions and government buildings are only secondarily or derivatively sacred since they only exist to secure individual liberty (and, yes, to secure the common good, understood in the context of liberty).

    I understood that. I agree.

    Yet when individuals rights and properties were routinely violated all year, I did not hear a general hue and cry about desecration of the sacred. I’m talking about the mainstream; I know many here on Ricochet appreciated at the time that something vital was being lost when mobs were permitted to loot and burn private property. Worse, many constitutional officers in the Federal Government cheered on the rioting. Now these same constitutional officers are yelling “desecration” when their offices were invaded. Well, I think they are too late with their outrage.

    It used to be that people had the sense that individual rights and liberty are what is truly sacred in this country. They felt outrage – yes, a sense of desecration – when someone’s rights were violated. “I disagree with what you say but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it.” I remember when that was a sentiment common to liberals and conservatives as an almost religious principle. Those days are long gone now.

    I don’t like rioting in any context. But am I more outraged that Nancy Pelosi’s desk was “violated” than that Joe Sixpack had his hardware store looted and burned while the police stood aside and watched? No. And I think the latter events are far more dangerous to liberty than the former.

    Right. But any denizen of Congress who’s more offended by the invasion of his office (work space) than at the disruption of his office (duties) is a fool. Probably the same sort of fool who couldn’t see the destruction of private property during the BLM riots as a desecration.

     

    • #37
  8. J Climacus Member
    J Climacus
    @JClimacus

    At the risk of falling afoul of Godwin’s Law, let’s talk Nazis.

    The Nazis attempted a government takeover in 1923 in Bavaria. If we’d like we can make that the analogy of the Trumpist assault on the Capitol. The Nazis, like the MAGA crowd, were soundly defeated.

    The lesson Hitler took from this was that an overt attack on the government wouldn’t succeed. Instead, he resolved to capture the government through legal means – the ballot box.

    Well, mostly legal. The Nazis spent the rest of the 20’s beating up their political enemies in the street and harassing Jews, while at the same time pursuing electoral success. Hitler courted rich financiers and the social elite in private, presenting a sober and charming face, convincing them they knew the “real Hitler” rather than the rabble rousing agitator of his public speeches. The Nazis (and others) disregard for individual rights, and the failure of the Weimar Government to protect those rights, lead to a gradual loss of respect for Weimar and its institutions. In 1933, the Nazis gained enough seats in the Reichstag to get Hitler appointed Chancellor by Hindenburg. After Hindenburgs death and a few more machinations, the Nazis had full control of the state.

    What of that 1923 Beer Hall Putsch? It was long forgotten and of no significance. Far more significant was the daily violation of individual rights perpetrated by the Nazis in the following decade, and the gradual demoralization that produced. That was the real undermining of Weimar

    I submit that the MAGA assault on the Capitol is similarly an event of only temporary and fleeting significance. Whatever desecration happened will be soon forgotten. It’s the daily desecration of individual rights and property that is the real threat to our Republic.

    • #38
  9. Ammo.com Member
    Ammo.com
    @ammodotcom

    By definition, something that is sacred is connected to God and worthy of veneration. The government would love to have you believe it is sacred while simultaneously believing your God-given rights are not.

    • #39
  10. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    James Lileks (View Comment):

    National symbols matter, and should stand above the passions of the moment. They communicate things from generation to generation. One may not respect its current occupants, but shrugging because some yahoo behaved like a chimp and soiled a room is like an atheist laughing when Notre Dame burns. Lol @ yr sky dad

    National symbols don’t matter at all compared to free, fair and honest elections.  Without the latter, you the former are a farce.

    • #40
  11. lowtech redneck Coolidge
    lowtech redneck
    @lowtech redneck

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio&hellip; (View Comment):

    I do not agree with the elevation of liberty above all else. Liberty is an important value. There are other important values, often in conflict with liberty.

    Even the Declaration does not limit itself to liberty. It does not say that we have an unlimited right to liberty, nor does it say that individual liberty is the only right that is given by God. (Technically, it says that we are endowed with rights by our “Creator,” but I don’t think that there’s a candidate for a Creator other than God.)

    I may be misinterpreting the OP. I am growing increasingly hostile toward libertarianism, which I find to be lacking in nuance with respect to many issues. I am mindful of the danger of becoming a grumpy old man, though I may not police myself well in this regard.

    The Capitol, like other monuments and like the flag, are tangible symbols of our ideals, history, and traditions. A violent assault on such symbols is a manifestation of hostility to those ideals, history, and traditions. It is more significant than similar violence, however wrongful, directed toward an ordinary building.

    I am quite concerned about this. Over the summer and fall, we saw a number of violent and often riotous attacks on public monuments, and I think that most of us were appalled. It is more significant to tear down a statute of George Washington than to tear down one of the statues at Bob’s Big Boy (if any such still exist). Both acts are wrongful, and both should be subject to prosecution, but the former is a symbolic attack on the Republic itself.

    The Capitol is one of our most important monuments, along with the White House, the Jefferson and Lincoln Memorials, the Washington Monument, the Statute of Liberty, and Mount Rushmore. I think that those are the top 7.

    So I disagree with the suggestion that an attack on the Capitol is not a very big deal.

     

    Most of these guys were staying within the velvet ropes, and I haven’t heard of any statues being toppled.  Prosecute them for trespassing and, where appropriate, breaking and entering, vandalism, and assault on police officers; anything more is nothing but a gross injustice perpetuated for the purpose of facilitating a political witch hunt.

    • #41
  12. lowtech redneck Coolidge
    lowtech redneck
    @lowtech redneck

    JoelB (View Comment):

    tigerlily (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    The Capitol should be treated with respect, but it’s interesting that small businesses that are the lifeblood of communities and those who own them are not considered as sacred as a building that’s housed any number of scoundrels.

    Although you’ll be happy to know that small businesses owned by minorities will be sacred to the incoming Biden-Harris administration at least with respect to small businesses owned by white people.

    This reminds me of the Rabbi’s blessing in Fiddler on the Roof. -May God bless and keep the Tsar (far away from here).

    And just like Fiddler on the Roof, the pogroms are coming, and even many Republicans will justify, excuse, or ignore it because they don’t like or care about those who are immediately targeted.

    • #42
  13. lowtech redneck Coolidge
    lowtech redneck
    @lowtech redneck

     

    James Lileks (View Comment):

    National symbols matter, and should stand above the passions of the moment. They communicate things from generation to generation. One may not respect its current occupants, but shrugging because some yahoo behaved like a chimp and soiled a room is like an atheist laughing when Notre Dame burns. Lol @ yr sky dad

    A soiled room can be quickly and cheaply cleaned up with no lasting damages, a destroyed Cathedral is quite a bit worse.  I’ve been piously lectured at all year that the destruction of monuments is no big deal, and that longstanding cultural icons are subject to Cancellation to appease a rabid minority no matter how many millions are hurt and made to feel like officially designated ‘deplorables’ by the act. I’m not about to freak out now that a janitor at Capital building, which now symbolizes nothing more than a techno-fascist, illiberal regime, has to work overtime.

     

    • #43
  14. Midget Faded Rattlesnake Member
    Midget Faded Rattlesnake
    @Midge

    J Climacus (View Comment):

    Midget Faded Rattlesnake (View Comment):

    Attack on Capitol? Not desecration, even though the real target was what the Capitol building was hosting at the time, a step in the peaceful transfer of power after what many Americans quite reasonably believe was a free and fair election, a step whose ultimate purpose is to secure our liberties from one election cycle to the next (as well as to ensure we’ll even continue to have election cycles that let us kick out the bums inimical to our liberties).

    The stance that outrage over the Capitol attack couldn’t be motivated by what J describes as the motive for outrage over the Pentagon attack, namely the understanding that such attacks make “the individual liberty for which this nation stands” the real target, is at best naive, missing an obvious — and oft-stated — reason for outrage over the Capitol attack. It is at worst dishonest.

    You disagree with me about whether the attack involved desecration. Fair enough.

    I never said outrage over the attacks couldn’t be motivated by a perceived desecration. I argued that there was no desecration in fact; or, more precisely, that whatever desecration happened is less serious than the violations of individual property and rights that have been happening all year. I think it’s a little late to start talking about desecration.

    You disagree with me and we could have a friendly discussion about which interpretation is more accurate to the situation. Or you could just call me naive and dishonest. The latter is probably easier.

    That is uncalled for. Labeling a stance as deficient is different from labeling a person (like you) who may or may not actually take that stance (after all, perhaps you don’t, and the failure was in communication) as deficient, as you should well know.

    Regarding,

    I never said outrage over the attacks couldn’t be motivated by a perceived desecration. I argued that there was no desecration in fact; or, more precisely, that whatever desecration happened is less serious than the violations of individual property and rights that have been happening all year.

    I already have an OP draft starting, “I agree with J Climacus that the contempt shown for property rights when small business are looted is more inimical to liberty than contempt for property the American people hold in common, like the Capitol, is.” Which just goes to show, I suppose, how motivated I must be to not engage your ideas, but rather brush you off as naive or dishonest? Or, possibly, it shows I respect you and your ideas enough to engage them.

    There are plenty of Americans who see both small businesses looted and peaceful transfers of power disrupted after (what they believe to be) free and fair elections as desecrating. I am not sure whether I’d have chosen the language of desecration to describe it myself, but that language seems to resonate with you and many Americans, especially on the right. As Haidt observered, conservative moral foundations tend to especially emphasize the sanctity/degradation axis, particularly on patriotic matters. So I’m game to use the language of desecration, as I see you using it.

    • #44
  15. MarciN Member
    MarciN
    @MarciN

    James Lileks (View Comment):

    National symbols matter, and should stand above the passions of the moment. They communicate things from generation to generation. One may not respect its current occupants, but shrugging because some yahoo behaved like a chimp and soiled a room is like an atheist laughing when Notre Dame burns. Lol @ yr sky dad

    There is a long line from shrugging it off as insignificant to branding the people who attended the demonstration as domestic terrorists and the demonstration itself as act of insurrection. 

    Parents learn not to overpunish. What I’m seeing as the response to what the people in the Capitol did is overpunishment. One demonstrator was killed by one of the guards. Isn’t that enough?

     

    • #45
  16. Hoyacon Member
    Hoyacon
    @Hoyacon

    MarciN (View Comment):

    James Lileks (View Comment):

    National symbols matter, and should stand above the passions of the moment. They communicate things from generation to generation. One may not respect its current occupants, but shrugging because some yahoo behaved like a chimp and soiled a room is like an atheist laughing when Notre Dame burns. Lol @ yr sky dad

    There is a long line from shrugging it off as insignificant to branding the people who attended the demonstration as domestic terrorists and the demonstration itself as act of insurrection.

    Parents learn not to overpunish. What I’m seeing as the response to what the people in the Capitol did is overpunishment. One demonstrator was killed by one of the guards. Isn’t that enough?

    There’s “scale” of justice here.  I’d say, at the bottom, are the people who were admitted by officers and kind of wandered around as if on a tour.  Their presence doesn’t fit the narratives, but they exist.  Next in line are the people who broke in and wandered around.  Next up are those in the previous category who broke stuff, and intruded deeply into areas where they did not belong, like Pelosi’s office.  They should do time.  The final group is anyone carrying a weapon who intruded into areas where they were a legitimate threat to Congresspersons.  They need to do more time.

    • #46
  17. Midget Faded Rattlesnake Member
    Midget Faded Rattlesnake
    @Midge

    J Climacus (View Comment):

    Let’s take a moment to discuss the BLM justification that “property doesn’t matter” in their riots, and in the context of the Capitol Building attack…

    But that is what BLM means when they talk about property not mattering. They mean private property. It’s an excuse to burn and loot other citizen’s property, or just violate it at will.

    A common argument on the left is that small business owners’ property isn’t really theirs, but belongs to the banks and insurers servicing them, making small business ownership a kind of debt peonage. This argument is so incandescently imbecile — not to mention belittling toward small business owners’ pride of ownership — that it’s easy to suspect it’s just rationalization. On the other hand, rioters tend to be incandescent imbeciles.

    The couple in Missouri that got in trouble for brandishing guns only did so because a BLM mob kicked in the gate to their property and marched in.

    Barged in through the gate of the HOA property, not the couple’s individual property. Indeed, the HOA had a longstanding complaint that the couple was in violation of the HOA for treating common HOA areas as their own personal property. That couple was not particularly invested in others’ property rights, it seems, denying others’ easement rights and repeatedly claiming squatter’s rights over property owned by others, including but not limited to the common property of the HOA. It’s possible the HOA in question, Portland Place, had a board rife with its own dysfunctions and petty tyrannies. Many HOAs do. Nonetheless, the McCloskey’s were hardly innocent victims where property was concerned, as The American Conservative notes:

    The Post-Dispatch has documented a decades-long record of over-aggressive territorial claims and irrational hostility toward perceived offenders. This has most often manifested in a profligate slew of frivolous lawsuits, but at least once before Mark McCloskey has pointed a gun at a neighbor who stepped on a plot of grass which (get this) McCloskey didn’t even own, but claimed by squatter’s rights.

    Some may consider threatening at gunpoint to take property not already belonging to oneself attempted robbery.

    • #47
  18. James Lileks Contributor
    James Lileks
    @jameslileks

    Flicker (View Comment):
    National symbols don’t matter at all compared to free, fair and honest elections. Without the latter, you the former are a farce.

    Or compared to unconstitutional actions like internment. Or slavery. Or any number of things that fail to live up to the standards we’ve set for ourselves. I don’t think one can graph out when the Capitol matters as a national symbol. If the 9/11 hijackers had hit it as planned, it would have been the activist left and comfy red professoriat that said we got what was coming to us, and the Capitol was a symbol of our national sins. (Some on the crazy right would have cheered because the Capitol was the symbol of ZOG, but they wouldn’t have been offered Slate / Salon think piece space.) 

    • #48
  19. James Lileks Contributor
    James Lileks
    @jameslileks

    lowtech redneck (View Comment):
    I’ve been piously lectured at all year that the destruction of monuments is no big deal, and that longstanding cultural icons are subject to Cancellation to appease a rabid minority no matter how many millions are hurt and made to feel like officially designated ‘deplorables’ by the act. I’m not about to freak out now that a janitor at Capital building, which now symbolizes nothing more than a techno-fascist, illiberal regime, has to work overtime.

    The Capitol building bombers of 1983 felt the same. 

    • #49
  20. lowtech redneck Coolidge
    lowtech redneck
    @lowtech redneck

    James Lileks (View Comment):

    lowtech redneck (View Comment):
    I’ve been piously lectured at all year that the destruction of monuments is no big deal, and that longstanding cultural icons are subject to Cancellation to appease a rabid minority no matter how many millions are hurt and made to feel like officially designated ‘deplorables’ by the act. I’m not about to freak out now that a janitor at Capital building, which now symbolizes nothing more than a techno-fascist, illiberal regime, has to work overtime.

    The Capitol building bombers of 1983 felt the same.

    If these rioters had bombed the capital, no one would be arguing with you.  Incidentally, didn’t one of the perpetrators get pardoned, and is now working for BLM?

    • #50
  21. J. D. Fitzpatrick Member
    J. D. Fitzpatrick
    @JDFitzpatrick

    Midget Faded Rattlesnake (View Comment):

    J Climacus (View Comment):

    Midget Faded Rattlesnake (View Comment):

    Attack on Capitol? Not desecration, even though the real target was what the Capitol building was hosting at the time, a step in the peaceful transfer of power after what many Americans quite reasonably believe was a free and fair election, a step whose ultimate purpose is to secure our liberties from one election cycle to the next (as well as to ensure we’ll even continue to have election cycles that let us kick out the bums inimical to our liberties).

    The stance that outrage over the Capitol attack couldn’t be motivated by what J describes as the motive for outrage over the Pentagon attack, namely the understanding that such attacks make “the individual liberty for which this nation stands” the real target, is at best naive, missing an obvious — and oft-stated — reason for outrage over the Capitol attack. It is at worst dishonest.

    You disagree with me about whether the attack involved desecration. Fair enough.

    I never said outrage over the attacks couldn’t be motivated by a perceived desecration. I argued that there was no desecration in fact; or, more precisely, that whatever desecration happened is less serious than the violations of individual property and rights that have been happening all year. I think it’s a little late to start talking about desecration.

    You disagree with me and we could have a friendly discussion about which interpretation is more accurate to the situation. Or you could just call me naive and dishonest. The latter is probably easier.

    That is uncalled for. Labeling a stance as deficient is different from labeling a person (like you) who may or may not actually take that stance (after all, perhaps you don’t, and the failure was in communication) as deficient, as you should well know.

    This reminds me of a show by a female comedian who referred to “Mr. Literal, my worst nightmare: “‘I didn’t say you were a b****; I said you were being a b****.'” 

     

    • #51
  22. J. D. Fitzpatrick Member
    J. D. Fitzpatrick
    @JDFitzpatrick

    For me, the bigger issue is that criticizing the attack on the Capitol (which seems to have been fomented in large part by enablers and agitators, not Trump supporters) by calling the building “sacred” sure does sound like sanctimony to me. 

    If mob action is wrong, it’s wrong. Don’t use quasi-religious terminology to dress your objections in shining robes. 

    • #52
  23. James Lileks Contributor
    James Lileks
    @jameslileks

    lowtech redneck (View Comment):

    James Lileks (View Comment):

    lowtech redneck (View Comment):
    I’ve been piously lectured at all year that the destruction of monuments is no big deal, and that longstanding cultural icons are subject to Cancellation to appease a rabid minority no matter how many millions are hurt and made to feel like officially designated ‘deplorables’ by the act. I’m not about to freak out now that a janitor at Capital building, which now symbolizes nothing more than a techno-fascist, illiberal regime, has to work overtime.

    The Capitol building bombers of 1983 felt the same.

    If these rioters had bombed the capital, no one would be arguing with you. Incidentally, didn’t one of the perpetrators get pardoned, and is now working for BLM?

    <edmcmahonvoice> You are correct sir </edmcmahonvoice>, at least on the first point. I’ve heard she was working with BLM but while googling around tonight could not find confirmation. Wouldn’t surprise me; there will always be those who tut-tut the means but applaud the zeal and conviction. I don’t think Bill Clinton, who pardoned her, approved of the bombing. It was done at the behest of Nadler, IIRC, who also didn’t approve of the specific bombing,  but understood the passions and motivations in context, you see, and the sentence was really too long, and mercy is a virtue, and so on. The violence of the left is inevitably sanctified over time, because of the long moral arc and all that: they had noble ideas, produced manifestos, and thus were no doubt tempered by time so they could be installed as college professors with a Unique Perspective. 

    The anarchist bombings of the 20s: forgotten. The 1954 attack on Congress by PR nationalists: forgotten, absolved. The 1983 bombing: whatever. Hell, the riots of 2020 are irrelevant now. Everything was reset on 1/6, which was inevitable. It would be nice to have a spokesperson who could make that point about the left’s hypocritical relationship to political violence with such eloquence and concision the media would have no answer, but we don’t have one. Yet. 

    • #53
  24. James Lileks Contributor
    James Lileks
    @jameslileks

    Bottom line, I guess this whole discussion reminds me of the story about the Clinton supporter on Inauguration Day who saw the jets fly over, and said “Those are our planes now.” Love of country and its tangible symbols does not depend on the passions of the day, and its manifestations do not belong to one side or the other. 

    • #54
  25. Randy Webster Inactive
    Randy Webster
    @RandyWebster

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio&hellip; (View Comment):
    I do not agree with the elevation of liberty above all else. Liberty is an important value. There are other important values, often in conflict with liberty.

    I was hoping you would suggest what you thought they were.

    • #55
  26. Randy Webster Inactive
    Randy Webster
    @RandyWebster

    Snirtler (View Comment):
    Right. But any denizen of Congress who’s more offended by the invasion of his office (work space) than at the disruption of his office (duties) is a fool.

    That would probably be pretty much all of them.

    • #56
  27. Hammer, The Inactive
    Hammer, The
    @RyanM

    Goddamn right, J.

    Great post.

    • #57
  28. Hammer, The Inactive
    Hammer, The
    @RyanM

    James Lileks (View Comment):

    National symbols matter, and should stand above the passions of the moment. They communicate things from generation to generation. One may not respect its current occupants, but shrugging because some yahoo behaved like a chimp and soiled a room is like an atheist laughing when Notre Dame burns. Lol @ yr sky dad

    You know what else matters? Minneapolis. When your city burned to the ground, Democrats celebrated. Those same democrats are now screaming bloody murder and “insurrection.” That’s a problem.

    When the only thing that determines whether a particular act constitutes “democracy in action,” or a grave federal offense, is your political opinion, we have entered into a whole new territory. Well known in Russia and Germany, historically… Let’s not insist on learning those lessons through experience. 

     

    • #58
  29. J Climacus Member
    J Climacus
    @JClimacus

    James Lileks (View Comment):

    Bottom line, I guess this whole discussion reminds me of the story about the Clinton supporter on Inauguration Day who saw the jets fly over, and said “Those are our planes now.” Love of country and its tangible symbols does not depend on the passions of the day, and its manifestations do not belong to one side or the other.

    My bottom line is that we are talking about the elevation of symbol over substance, of the material over the spiritual. Using the language of desecration only when the material symbols of our liberties are attacked, but not when their substance was violated, has been a masterful move of misdirection initiated by the left. It implicitly downgrades the seriousness of all the cancelling, property rights, and free speech violations that have recently occurred. After all, if it’s only when the Capitol Building is physically assaulted that our language rises to religious levels, then those rights violations can’t really be that bad, can they?

    Look what has happened in the wake of the Capitol Hill assault. In the name of preventing further “desecrations” the left has put the deplatforming and cancelling into overdrive. Heck, they’ve deplatformed the sitting President of the United States! That’s why the Capitol Hill assault was such a dumb idea. It gave the left the excuse to destroy our liberties even further in the name of protecting our institutions from some quasi-religious “desecration” understood in purely material terms. Like it’s OK to deplatform the President in the name of preventing someone from spray painting the White House. Don’t people get that it’s the deplatforming that is the real desecration?

    What the Right should have done is forcefully reject the Capitol Hill assault, but also reject the Left’s elevation of it to some uniquely serious, quasi-religious “desecration”. Instead they fell into the trap of accepting the left’s scale of values with respect to recent events. We are now seeing the results.

    • #59
  30. dukenaltum Inactive
    dukenaltum
    @dukenaltum

    True and splendid.   Imagine a nation where private property and innocent lives are considered the most valuable resource and patrimony.  

    • #60
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.