By now I'm sure you're saturated with social media posts, news broadcasts, and videos depicting and analyzing the chaos at the Capitol as rioters overtook police and stormed the Capitol building last Wednesday, January 6, 2021. I'm also sure that you, like me, are horrified. As you watched the unfolding images, maybe, also like me, you couldn't help but compare the police response that day to that of the Black Lives Matter protests (I'm speaking about the many peaceful protests here, not the looting and burning that followed). I'm sure you've seen the comparison images, so no need to repeat them here.
"How could this happen?" many of us are asking. On one level, we know that the seeds were sown over the course of many months as false information about the election results were disseminated by a variety of sources. Why do I say the information was false? Because there was no credible evidence given in any of the 60 lawsuits that followed the election contesting its results. But my goal here is not to go over that again. As someone who studies race relations, I'm interested in something more immediate: what is at the root of the very different police responses to the Capitol protest-turned-riot and the BLM protests over the summer?
It's pretty obvious that the Capitol Police were under-prepared last Wednesday, even though the plans of some groups and individuals toward insurrection were no secret--they were well-publicized on social media. These people thought their actions so justified they didn't even try to conceal their identities, as evidenced by the many videos and photos they posted of themselves and others breaking the law. The question is, why were the police so woefully under-prepared?
According to Rep. Tim Ryan (D-Ohio), who oversees the House committee in charge of the Capitol Police, that group expected a peaceful protest, a protest that would be "pretty vanilla"* (interesting use of terminology, but hold that thought for a moment). So sure were they that violence would not be an issue that the leadership of the Capitol Police twice turned down offers of help from the Pentagon days before the event.** Maybe hindsight is 2020 (or 2021), but how could they be so wrong? Why would they ignore ample warnings to the contrary?
In-group bias, that's why. According to the American Psychological Association, in-group bias is "the tendency to favor one’s own group, its members, its characteristics, and its products, particularly in reference to other groups."*** In-group bias may be a "natural" tendency (or it may seem natural because we've grown up in a racist and racially divided society), but when we allow it to go unchecked, we end up buying into stereotypes and acting on implicit beliefs about the motivations and actions of those in the "outgroup." People from any background can experience or act on in-group bias, but when that group is in authority and has power...well, we saw the result last week.
Am I saying the Capitol Police are outwardly racist? Of course not. They are public servants (many of them people of color) putting their lives on the line, trying to do their jobs, and remember that these concepts should be applied group-wide and not individually. I'm saying that those in leadership, those who rejected the offer of help, were displaying in-group bias when they thought this "vanilla" protest would remain nonviolent. If the color symbolism in the adjective "vanilla" doesn't jump out at you, well, I don't know what to say, but I'll try. Vanilla = white = perceived peaceful by other whites = in-group-bias. No one in leadership imagined that a group of government-supporting (our current President being the head of our government) white people would forcibly break into the Capitol with weapons and zip-ties (ready to take hostages) and wreak the havoc that resulted in five deaths (one being Brian D. Sicknick, Capitol Police officer). We white people just don't do things like that, right? That's what in-group bias would have us believe.
If you need an in-the-moment example, take a look at this video clip of the riot. You may not like the news outlet or the commentator or his analysis, but that's not the point. Watch what happens in the clip between 5:14 and 6:19. MSNBC video As the rioters try to break through glass doors, three white male officers bar their way. They are completely outnumbered and obviously in danger. One of the male protestors (presumably white) can be heard pleading with them to move out of the way. "Bro," he begs, "I've seen people out there get hurt. I don't want to see you get hurt...we will make a path [for their safe escape, I guess]...I want you to go home." The three officers finally move out of the way (which is another issue), the rioters begin to break through the glass, and suddenly a gun appears on the other side of the doorway. A few seconds later a shot is fired--it's unclear what happens after that.
But there you have it. "Bro." In the middle of a violent break-in intended as a government takeover, the rioters had the presence of mind to protect their "bros"-- members of their own racial group. There's a sense of camaraderie in the rioter's plea that can't be missed. Bro, go home. We don't want you to get hurt.
The takeover of the Capitol last Wednesday should teach us much on many levels about the danger of false information and the responsibility of our leaders to tell the truth. But we ignore the role that race played in how the events unfolded at our own peril.
*https://www.politifact.com/article/2021/jan/08/black-lives-matter-protests-and-capitol-assault-co/
**https://apnews.com/article/capitol-police-reject-federal-help-9c39a4ddef0ab60a48828a07e4d03380
***https://dictionary.apa.org/ingroup-bias
