...that you don't apply it to similar events involving your ideological fellow-travelers. You don't mean it. You just use the definition for partisan purposes because it happened to involve people whom you oppose politically.

You claim 1/6 was an insurrection because it was a violent act* directed at the government or government officials. Well, so is any protest that involves violence or the hint of violence, including the Democrats' 2020 Summer of Love, Schumer's mob at the Supreme Court, countless occupations of Congress, statehouses or offices therein, and on and on and on. But none of these were called "insurrections" because 1) like the 1/6 protest, they weren't insurrections, and 2) they were carried out by the left, so calling them "insurrections" would be extremely inconvenient.

*Note: Taken as a whole, 1/6 was not a violent act. There were individuals within the massive crowd who engaged in violence, but the vast majority of the crowd was not violent, nor was it organized. It was also unarmed, which by itself demolishes the idea that it was an insurrection.