By Hannah Ziegler
The University of Maryland Libraries held an Interdisciplinary Dialogue event with five university departments on Friday to discuss the historic Jan. 6 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol.
Professors and scholars in history, journalism, communications and government and politics, as well as librarians, shared presentations during the 90-minute discussion to provide cross-departmental perspectives on the Capitol insurrection.
Event moderator and librarian Eric Lindquist opened the dialogue by describing the insurrection as shockingly visible. Lindquist emphasized that understanding the insurrection would require the perspective of many disciplines, which is why the libraries drew upon the expertise of so many distinguished University of Maryland faculty members.
Clarice Smith Performing Arts Center Librarian Drew Barker, who participated as a panelist, said that this dialogue is vital in helping students remember the riots for what they are.
“There’s been other mob violence in our country’s history, but when it comes to symbols being attacked, denigrated, trespassed on, broken and even invaded, those are strange things for us to try to compute,” Barker said in an interview.
Howard Smead, a Senior Lecturer in the Department of History, shared a presentation that touched on why this instance of organized violence stands out in American history. According to Smead, it was the first time that mob violence among citizens directly targeted the federal government.
Smead added that when politicians advocate that the insurrection did not depict American values, they neglect that mob violence is characteristic of American history.
“People have always taken matters into their own hands and enforced their version of tradition, law, morality or racial hierarchy. This is a characteristic of our history,” Smead said. “Our president said ‘the scenes at the Capitol do not reflect who we are.’ But I’m not so sure about that. It’s a manifestation of our history in many big ways.”
Associate Professor of government and politics Lilliana Mason’s presentation focused on the partisanship that made the insurrection possible.
Mason’s research showed staggering increases in political polarization in recent years. According to Mason, 60% of American partisans think that people in the other party are threats to the United States. She added that 40% to 50% believe that the other party is evil. Mason’s research also indicated that around 30% are willing to dehumanize people in the other party by calling them animals.
Mason and her colleagues also investigated actions to curb the rise of radicalism. Mason found that when Americans watched one of their leaders advocate against violence before participating in her partisanship survey, there was a sharp decline in the amount of Americans who agreed with violent radicalism.
“We need to think about the things that our leaders are saying because they do have a lot of influence over people’s support for violence. We should try to hold them accountable for that,” Mason said.
Sarah Ann Oates, professor and scholar in the Philip Merrill College of Journalism, researches how political narratives disseminate through the media. She added that social media played a crucial role in causing the insurrection. She characterized the lack of truth on social media as a consumer safety issue.
“Leadership rhetoric matters. January 6 was a concerted, organized and powerful propaganda attempt to subvert a democratic election,” Oates said.
Oates added that most Capitol rioters traveled from around the country and the majority did not belong to gangs or militias. These characteristics confirmed to her that many Americans radicalized using social media as their primary tool. For this reason, Oates believes that social media should be regulated to prevent future disinformation campaigns, and Barker agrees.
“When cars first rolled off the assembly line, they didn’t have the seat belts, let alone air bags. Similarly, as misinformation spreads, we must find a way to prevent life-threatening incidents on social media from crashing into the real world,” Barker said in an interview.
Some professors focused on the actions that American society must take to overcome bitter misinformation and partisanship. Others provided students with examples of how they can improve their ability to analyze the information they consume.
“I encourage people to think about analyzing the credibility, the trustworthiness, the competence and the dynamism of a communicator to understand their arguments,” Communications Professor and Oral Communication Program Executive Director Andrew D. Wolvin said.
Despite their diverse perspectives, all professors agreed that the Capitol insurrection would define the next generation of politics and communication.
“I hope students take away that this is a big thing to process,” Oates said in an interview. “We had an enormous lesson about democracy and how precious and fragile it can be. I genuinely believe that is a positive thing moving forward.”
Featured image: From Left to Right: Howard Smead, Andrew Wolvin, and Sarah Ann Oates and Drew Barker discussed the Jan. 6 Capitol insurrection on Zoom Friday. Background image courtesy of CNN.