[claw_howitzer]

The insurrectionists were there because they falsely believe the election was stolen, and half of that video was him saying "yep, you guys are correct". He's done this shit before where he vigorously fans the flames but then gives a half-assed concessionary call for peace that his followers know to ignore.

They were there in the first place because of his message

[claw_howitzer]

Also the video wasn't the only thing removed either; the other was this tweet:

> These are the things and events that happen when a sacred landslide election victory is so unceremoniously & viciously stripped away from great patriots who have been badly & unfairly treated for so long. Go home with love & in peace. Remember this day forever!

[roenxi]

That message is self-inconsistent, but not actually that unusual. A key plank of religious tolerance is people peacefully accepting they are governed by, potentially, literal heretics. Or religious crazies in the case of the atheists.

It is possible to simultaneously believe that the election results are illegitimate and to live peacefully in society. It requires a bit more mental flexibility than I like to give myself, but there is precedent.

The call to action (go home with love & in peace) trumps the frame.

[enkid]

But that's not what he's saying. He's not making any sort of transition or explanation for why people should go home. It's clearly tacked on afterwards, and the protestors know it. Then they can blame it on "the deep state." He's sandwiching go home with two statements legitimizing what the protestors are doing.

[roenxi]

Even if you believe it to be true, starting the conversation by telling people that their opinions are illegitimate is a bad first step when asking them to do something.

[jschwartzi]

This actually shows a difference in how fascists and nationalists use words versus how the rest of us use words. For most people words are a truthful declaration of intents and ideas. But fascists often use words for a different purpose. They don't use them in their common meanings, but rather as tools to inflame and to denigrate others.

Take use of the word "socialism" or "nationalism." I've seen a disturbing tendency on the right to call anything they don't like "socialist." Nothing makes that clearer than Trump's call to the Cuban expatriates in Florida to vote against the "communist" Joe Biden.

If you know anything about Biden's policies you would recognize them as pretty standard Progressive policies. I have never once heard him discuss taking private property and distributing it as a public good. He's not once talked about erasing private enterprise. He is manifestly not communist. So the only conclusion I can draw is that Trump is using "communist" to mean "person you don't like" so he can fan the flames.

Given that, I don't think we can take anything he says at face value. This is actually a common tendency on the right, and it's why they're so good at fanning the flames. They see what our words mean and they disregard that meaning.

[IkmoIkmo]

I recall one pundit on TV saying he was taking a log off the fire while simultaneously pouring gasoline on with his messages, that was pretty apt.

[dandanua]

>they falsely believe the election was stolen

Or they know the truth, but respect and follow the forceful power, which Trump wants to represent.

Edit: I guess people misinterpret what I mean. The truth is that Biden has won honestly, but insurgents just don't respect that.

[engineeringwoke]

It appears that the Americans woke up, mods

[AzzieElbab]

The people he was talking to did not need more convincing about election being stolen, they needed to be told to go home. That is what Trump did. That video alone had more historical value than 99.99999 content on Twitter.

[davidcollantes]

I think you meant to write "treasonous, brainwashed terrorists," instead of insurrectionists. Right?