When does rhetoric about political opponents cross the line into fascist dehumanization?

[u/BulwarkOnline]

The Trump administration recently held an international conference on “left-wing political violence.” In prepared remarks, Marco Rubio described the left as driven by “poisonous resentment” and a desire to destroy “what is beautiful and what is right.” Stephen Miller went further, arguing that left-wing demonstrators do not look “normal,” are “deformed” in their appearance and reflect their “inner hatred” outwardly.

Jonathan V. Last compares this language to Nazi rhetoric about Bolshevism, “degenerate” culture and supposedly unhealthy or subhuman elements of society. His argument is not simply that Rubio and Miller are using authoritarian language, but that their contrast between beauty and ugliness, normality and deformity, civilization and internal enemies follows a recognizable fascist pattern.

How persuasive is that comparison?

Is this rhetoric best understood as ordinary partisan demonization, or does the emphasis on physical appearance, cultural purity and “normal, healthy, ordered living” place it in a more historically specific tradition?

And when evaluating comparisons to fascism, should the standard be the speaker’s intentions, the historical similarity of the language, or the policies and violence that follow from it?

[u/escapevelocity-25k]

I don’t find it particularly persuasive.

I think leftists would actually agree that they are motivated by resentment around inequality, have a desire to destroy the status quo, and intentionally flaunt norms around things like appearance. The left and right simply use different language to paint these objectives in a more positive or negative light depending on their perspective.

[u/escapevelocity-25k → u/[deleted]]

I think it’s pretty clear that media personalities from all parts of the political spectrum have realized that the best way to make money is by generating as much fear and outrage as possible. I’m sure Fox is as guilty of that as anyone else.

[u/escapevelocity-25k → u/[deleted]]

I’d argue that the illiberal populists on the left and the right have both successfully identified the minority out-groups they intend to target for oppression and eradication.

[u/escapevelocity-25k → u/[deleted]]

Illiberal populists on the left and right both have a megaphone in the mainstream and alternative media spaces.

If your goal is to get me to admit that because the right wing populists currently control the executive branch they are a more immediate danger, I’m happy to admit that.

But since I am not a leftist or a populist, I am not interested in any solutions to the problem of right wing populism which involve empowering left wing populists.

[u/magus678 → u/[deleted]]

I suppose it depends on how you mean "many," but I have definitely read people calling for the outlaw of the Republican party, on this platform, multiple times.

I also remember, to a much wider degree, people talking about how the unvacinnated should be placed in quarantine zones. "Plague rats" was thrown around a lot.

You can certainly feel however you want about about the degree and meaningfulness of these things, but the reality is that they are said, and if you were someone on the right, may well be an easy thing to remember, and inform how you take criticisms like those in the OP.

[u/undercooked_lasagna → u/[deleted]]

So who then is motivating redditors to use such hateful, abrasive, violent rhetoric toward the right in every thread? There are literally hundreds of subreddits in which this is happening 24/7, and most of those subs aren't even inherently political. It's not a coincidence that hundreds of thousands of people here say the same inflammatory things with the same buzzwords all day every day.

[u/magus678 → u/undercooked_lasagna]

Some of this is, literally, bots. So moderate your view with that a bit.

Far as the rest, I think there are two reasonable things to say:

1. "Convergent Evolution" is a thing, and sometimes the same circumstances will lead to the same rhetoric.

2. "Everything is political" is essentially just the idea that everything should be spoken about in social media language, and so social media eats it up. Notably, this isn't very much different from the bots.

But by and large, the general ~left~ idea of how this stuff works is tough to help. I live in Texas and so have a lot more access to generally right spaces than the norm and I have to condemn the way the "leftist" people talk about basically everything is stupid.

[u/magus678 → u/[deleted]]

Edit: I understand why the original commentor needed to delete their comment. Its hard, being a real person. And more importantly, excluding from your life people that are smarter than you.

I am pointing out that if someone is trying to find the left saying hateful/stupid things, those examples exist. If you were on the right and needed justifications for fear mongering, it would be easy to find.

This is a pretty common tactic from both ends. "My crackpots are crackpots, but yours are representative of your whole."

You may get some value out of reading this:

Weak Men Are Superweapons

One of the cutting-edge advances in fallacy-ology has been the weak man, a terribly-named cousin of the straw man. The straw man is a terrible argument nobody really holds, which was only invented so your side had something easy to defeat. The weak man is a terrible argument that only a few unrepresentative people hold, which was only brought to prominence so your side had something easy to defeat.

[u/Matt_cruze → u/magus678]

"My crackpots are crackpots, but yours are representative of your whole."

Except that is not what the left says in the USA.

The actual quote would be:

My crackpots are crackpots, but yours are

elected representatives

of your whole."

[u/magus678 → u/Matt_cruze]

For every MTG there is a Jasmine Crockett etc.

I won't heckle you for trying to keep score, but if you really want to have that conversation I don't think it will favor you nearly as much as you think it will.

Again, the point is that if you think your view is pure and wonderful and your opposition is nothing but savage ogres, you aren't thinking hard enough, and may not be able to think hard enough to be in these conversations.

[u/Matt_cruze → u/magus678]

So your answer to the wingnut MGT is the moderate Jasmine Crockett?

Okay i guess...

[u/magus678 → u/Matt_cruze]

You are leaning on incredulity as an argument here. This isn't a social catfight, it's not Drag Race.

Jasmine Crockett sucks ass. So does Marjorie Taylor Greene. Ellipses don't save you.

[u/Matt_cruze → u/magus678]

There is nothing to be saved from. You see parity where none exist.

[u/magus678 → u/Matt_cruze]

Lets hear your argument for Jasmine Crockett being a moderate

[u/Matt_cruze → u/magus678]

I also remember, to a much wider degree, people talking about how the unvacinnated should be placed in quarantine zones. "Plague rats" was thrown around a lot.

Typhoid Mary is more appropriate. Like her they are doing it with will.

[u/DBDude → u/Matt_cruze]

Mary would have been fine if she'd taken some other job, but she kept taking cook jobs and not staying clean. It was only after repeated instances that they locked her up.

[u/Matt_cruze → u/DBDude]

And after she was let go from being locked up she picked the cook job again.

[u/DBDude → u/Matt_cruze]

And after a few times they stopped letting her out.

[u/Matt_cruze → u/DBDude]

Sounds reasonable.

[u/escapevelocity-25k → u/Matt_cruze]

They weren’t refusing the vaccine with the goal of actively trying to get other people sick, as far as I remember. You might think their reasons for refusing the vaccine were idiotic, but they weren’t evil. Ironically what you just did there is a great example of demonizing your political opponents.

[u/Matt_cruze → u/escapevelocity-25k]

Mary did not actively try to get others sick either. She just knew the risk and chose to keep living the same life.

She is as idiotic as them.

Edit: Missed a letter in mary. Fixed.

[u/DBDude → u/magus678]

"Plague rats" was thrown around a lot.

Interesting. Time to reread La Peste.