None of those points take away from it being "a literal sedition zone against the democratically elected government".
If we get a more transparent and verifiable election system in light of (or perhaps in spite of) the assault on capitol hill, then is it somehow justified? I certainly don't think so.
> If we get a more transparent and verifiable election system in light of (or perhaps in spite of) the assault on capitol hill, then is it somehow justified?
I don't think anyone should be screaming to melt down the government or set up their own, but let's be clear there is a difference in both degree and kind from BLM to the Capitol Insurrection: BLM protestors were driven by actual instances of racism--dozens, if not hundreds of people killed by police--and fundamentally wanted accountability for that blatant police misconduct, and Capitol Insurrectionists were driven by nothing more than lies and wanted to assassinate the legislative branch and install a dictator. We both know that "more transparency" and a "more verifiable" election system isn't going to make the crazies go away. They rejected election results outright because there must have been fraud.
If we get a more transparent and verifiable election system in light of (or perhaps in spite of) the assault on capitol hill, then is it somehow justified? I certainly don't think so.