While there are still many unknowns regarding the January 6th attack, the ideologies and actors involved are becoming increasingly clear in the painting of various experiences.

Former President Donald Trump is a key actor in the events of January 6th due to his (widely considered) encouragement and call-to-action media content released before, during, and after the attack (primarily through tweets) (“Capitol Riots Timeline: What Happened on 6 Jan One Year Ago?”). Since President Trump’s support base has substantial connection with far-right extremist groups, we see these groups heavily involved and of influence in the unfolding of the Capitol attack. Many of the protesters present belonged to a far-right extremist group, like the Proud Boys, and cling to ideologies that enforce strict gender roles while acting against politics associated with “neoliberalism” (Graff et al. 541). Much of the relevance of their core values in relation to their behavior during the January 6th attack can be centered around their views on hyper-masculinity and, reversely, feminism (Graff et al. 541). The rigid adherence to these gender roles and expectations clearly carve out individual roles in carrying out the attack on the capitol as the specific support styles of attackers were separated along their role as more background members (such as in social media broadcasting and other displays of “overt” ) (Ebner and Davey 34) or as more frontline, aggressive participants (engaging in ways which “[fetishize] physical strength”) (Ebner and Davey 34).

These values, specifically the contrast identifying men as approved expressors of violent aggression and women as sideline supporters, is largely corroborated by the images and legal charges stemming from the attack. When looking through the images which emerged following the attack, the vast majority of those pictured are (according to assumptions based on dress and other heuristic features, so vulnerable to inaccuracies) male with a very select few presenting as female/feminine. Photos of the attackers inside the Capitol (in comparison to those outside the building) show an even greater picture of majority male involvement. This coincides with the far-right ideology that this level of aggression falls within a strictly masculine domain. While there were female protesters included in the storming of the Capitol, such as now-deceased female aggressor Ashli Babbitt (“Capitol Riots Timeline: What Happened on 6 Jan One Year Ago?”), they were the extreme minority. Further evidence of the disparities in gender representation in the attack’s participation is reflected in the FBI’s list of those arrested or wanted in connection. Analyzing these lists, it appears only around 2% of those identified (or seeking the identification of) are female (“Capitol Violence.”). Again, this is open to error as much of these observations are made on gender assumptions based on norms of expression rather than clear articulation or specification.

Once inside the Capitol, the gender beliefs held by the rioters (many of whom belonged to the previously mentioned far-right extremist groups) continued to be displayed. Much of the architectural damage enacted (around $1.5 million dollars worth) (“One Year since the Jan. 6 Attack on the Capitol.”) was the result of blind and generalized destruction. However, it is clear that some of the damage was motivated by the desire to make a distinct political comment on the very government the rioters acted in spite of (those they perceived as radical). One example of this was the entirely intentional destruction of a cabinet which showcased literature and publications featuring women’s political involvement (Lena Krook). The direction of anger can also be seen through their specific targeting of Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (“Capitol Riots Timeline: What Happened on 6 Jan One Year Ago?”) (Lena Krook), two women who were frequent targets of Trump’s (and therefore far-right extremist groups’) rhetoric.

The experiences of Congresswomen AOC and Ayanna Pressley are especially interesting as they demonstrate how the compound effect of intersectional identities filter into public response and threat perception. Both of these congresswomen are women of color and felt or experienced a heightened sense of danger. In the case of Congresswoman Pressley, it was discovered during hiding (in the attack), the panic buttons “regularly tested and maintained” in her office had been mysteriously removed prior to the siege (Spocchia). Given the consistent racist history and rhetoric of the groups involved, this raises severe concerns regarding the specific targeting of not only a woman in power, but also a woman of color. Also disturbing was the aftermath to AOC’s disclosure of her experience. Immediately, AOC was accused by journalists and other congress members of dramatizing and fabricating details of her story.

One additional, and surprising, target of the Capitol attack was then Vice President Mike Pence. Pence, despite being clearly tied to conservatism and the Trump administration, was singled out by searching protestors due to previous tweets from Trump, insinuating that Pence’s lack of resistance to the 2020 Presidential election results were cowardly (“Capitol Riots Timeline: What Happened on 6 Jan One Year Ago?”), and thus disloyal to Trump and the conservative movement. By associating Pence with lacking “courage” by accepting the republican’s defeat (“Capitol Riots Timeline: What Happened on 6 Jan One Year Ago?”) and not continuing the narrative of election fraud and a stolen election, Trump appealed to the gender roles present in far-right extremist groups, seeking stronger support from other actors, such as aggressive protestors who would be viewed as more masculine.

When taking a closer look at the power dynamics shaping the attack and its’ aftermath, it is extremely important to attempt understanding the individual and ideological motivations at play. On a more individual level, we again look at the emphasis of Former President Donald Trump. Through the urging on Twitter (Kessler) for his followers to show up to the Capitol and rally against the 2020 Presidential election results, it became clear that he held power within far-right extremist communities. This power becomes murky, however, when it comes time to allocate responsibility for individuals’ actions. After (some of) their arrests, several of the rioters involved have cited the (then) President’s encouragement as justification for their actions (Kessler). The logic of this argument is rooted in implications of the power differential between a President and the endorsement of his followers’ behavior. Those who referred back to Trump’s (discrete or indiscrete) directions believed they were acting with the protection and approval of the individual holding the highest-ranking political position in the country. The level of responsibility Trump has for the attack on January 6th, 2021 is still being debated in spaces such as in the Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol (“About”).

The power dynamics among the actors taking part in the Capitol attack are largely reflective of the ideology presented in the far-right extremist groups many were connected to. As earlier discussed, male attackers were most prominent in the more physically aggressive and violent roles, while female participants generally held a role of support (nonviolent). This aligns with the groups’ firm gender beliefs as “toxic masculinity is mobilized into political action to defend male supremacy, which includes a notion of racial superiority, from the ‘threat’ posed by feminists” (Graff et al. 547). This further develops two sub discussions of the power dynamics present:

1) How this ideological base positioned group members to view Donald Trump as an authoritative leader and a “‘real’ man” (Graff et al. 547).

2) How the groups’ beliefs of gender and racial hierarchy created a compounded effect in regards to threat perception for individuals of color, such as the congresswomen targeted (also discussed earlier). This is further showcased in how the vast majority of those attacking the Capitol appeared to be caucasion as well as male (another compounded effect).

Another crucial part of the power dynamics puzzle in understanding this attack is the role of social media. Social media is an essential tactic tool for far-right extremist groups because of how it allows them to counter power and content against mainstream (non-extremist) media producers, with whom they historically have “voice[d] their criticism of, or hostility toward” (Krämer 1293). With the virality and mass accessibility offered with social media, far-right extremist groups can “circumvent the established media” (Krämer 1294), allowing their messages and beliefs to spread to their desired audiences. This also allows for a larger scale of participation in these communities, where the possibility of anonymity could cause further emboldenment plans and the perpetrating of dangerous rhetoric, such as issues centered around women’s rights like abortion access and the prevalence of sexual assault (Graff et al. 548). Social media platforms like Reddit along with petition websites are hubs for these groups (Graff et al. 542), where they virtually join together to take collective action against issues like gay marriage and “gender ideology” (Graff et al. 542). Just as in real life (in-person interactions), the behavior of these groups in a digital space pose a threat to equality and safety across lines of gender, race, and political affiliation.

Interestingly, since social media content is seen as being non-violent and therefore more of a support role, these digital spaces are oftentimes a place of action for the female members of far-right extremist groups (Ebner and Davey 33), where they are “a key asset in the branding and outreach strategies of extremist movements” (Ebner and Davey 33). This is because they can support the cause without going against the clear gender expectations laid out for them by the very group they belong to and are promoting in digital spaces. Here, the women involved with far-right extremist groups gain a sense of (permitted) autonomy and, “claim to feel: a sense of strength, dignity, and mission drawn from participation in a collective action” (Graff et al. 546).

1. Stricter Gun Control– One policy change that could potentially help to prevent an event such as the January 6th attack on the Capitol would be an initiative to prevent gun violence. Multiple individuals at the Capitol had obtained guns and brought them on the day of the attack. Several grassroots organizations pushing for greater initiatives to prevent gun violence exist in the United States, including; Moms Demand Action, Everytown for Gun Safety, Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, and the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence. Preventing those in violent, extremist groups from obtaining guns could potentially prevent them from undertaking violent action in the future.

2. Fighting Extremism– A second policy change could be the expansion of existing laws in the United States that already prohibit supremacist and/or extremist activity. These laws already in existence prevent supremacist activity toward members of a certain race, sex, sexual orientation, or religious group. An expansion of these laws could prevent future events like the January 6th attack from occurring because it would create a greater disincentive to not involve oneself in many of the groups involved in the attack, thus decreasing member base and member participation. It could also prevent many of these groups from engaging in other kinds of violent attacks and hate crimes throughout the country. The power of this policy is how it breaks the cycle of a wave of extremist terrorism as "When that ideology can no longer generate the formation of new organizations, the wave dissipates" (Auger 88)

3. Security Training & Funding– A final policy that would help prevent another attack on the Capitol would be increasing funding to train, hire, and improve security within the Capitol building, particularly for the individuals targeted by these extremist groups. Not only is more security important, but being able to train security to handle a situation as chaotic and unexpected as the January 6th attack is an additionally crucial skill. It was clear to see that many of the targeted members and much of the vandalism that occurred was directed at women. Greater security within the Capitol building not only ensures the physical security of the country’s congressional representatives, but also provides the peace of mind they need to properly perform in their jobs.