5 ms·

What I think we're re-discovering is that it's not so straightforward to tell while it's happening. I'm willing to bet during the rise of people like Mussolini,

by _yb2s 2y ago

What I think we're re-discovering is that it's not so straightforward to tell while it's happening. I'm willing to bet during the rise of people like Mussolini, Pol Pot, Stalin, Hitler, etc. many people were concerned, and many others were saying it was nothing and they were just being hyperbolic. However, it was the same with times when it didn't turn out like that. What concerns me most about this, is the general attitude of entirely dehumanizing specific groups of people. That, I expect, is the crux that makes atrocities possible, and it is happening now.

shigawire 2y ago
>What concerns me most about this, is the general attitude of entirely dehumanizing specific groups of people And they are armed to the teeth.
twodave 2y ago
What does America or even Trump have to gain by installing a dictatorship? Assuming he even could, which is probably worth arguing. He is already the most powerful executive of the most powerful (by far, it is not close) and future-proof (again, by far) nation on Earth. His actions in my view are more aligned with getting America the best deal ahead of whatever unfavorable population and trade collapses await the world in the next few decades. As an American, I only half expect democracy to survive putting my cohort (millennials) through retirement. Industrialization has left the world on a pretty bleak course, with America most equipped to weather it. Most of the moves I see the current administration readying itself for are ones to strengthen our already dominant geopolitical advantages worldwide. Hard to do that if you have a civil war to manage on top of it.
- _yb2s 2y ago
  What did past demagogues and dictators have to gain? It always turned out awful in the end, but concerns over that didn't stop them or their supporters. Trump appears to have no stable ideals, he seems to be only interested in attention and appearing successful. He's previously tried unsuccessfully to launch into politics from the left, right, and center but eventually found traction with this new movement, so he doubled down and played the demagogue after a lifetime of being the epitome of the elite. Ultimately there is a narrative that regular people are doing bad economically because of a few specific groups of people, and that this can be fixed by dehumanizing, terrorizing, and persecuting these people. They will need an all powerful leader not constrained by laws, opposing politics, or human rights to "solve the problem." Of course people think his actions are "aligned with getting America the best deal" or else they wouldn't want to help install him as dictator. Trump seems to have gotten pretty far along this path already. He appointed his own sycophant supreme court that ruled him above the law and unprosecutable. He failed at trying to overthrow an election, but managed to get away scott free by intimidating people out of doing their jobs, and eventually pardoned everyone criminally convicted of participating. He was convicted of 34 felonies in a trial by jury, but received no sentence. Now he's experimented with simply announcing the 14th amendment of the US constitution invalid by executive order, and will see if he gets away with it- if so, I think that qualifies as being successfully installed as a dictator.
  - twodave 2y ago
    Honestly there are too many parts of what you wrote that I disagree with to bother writing much of a rebuttal. The people spoke about the border and other cultural issues. They spoke about the justice system and its targeting of Trump. You can be for strong borders and safe spaces for the majority of people without being for “dehumanizing” people. So that to me is disingenuous. I’m not likely to change your mind on these things, so what I’ll say instead is to look at what he is actually doing geopolitically through the lens of a declining world, which is what we are about to be experiencing as literally every other port country in the world begins its population decline.
    - _yb2s 2y ago
      > You can be for strong borders and safe spaces for the majority of people without being for “dehumanizing” people Perhaps one could be, but these people are not- their rhetoric about immigrants is based on hate and dehumanization, and the entire narrative that immigrants are harmful economically and culturally is a lie. Moreover, it is a red herring that causes people to ignore all of the real reasons people are struggling - so nobody will take actual steps towards solving any real problems- and those problems will continue to get worse as a result. I refuse to be like the Germans who said "davon haben wir nichts gewusst" - "we knew nothing about that." I will not participate in dehumanizing, persecuting, or abusing other people, and I will do everything in my power to stop them. > justice system and its targeting of Trump He has Narcissistic personality disorder (NPD), and he cannot accept responsibility or fault for anything- even crimes he was found guilty of by a jury. I have experience with people like that in real life and can spot it from a mile away, and I think our society would be a much better place to live for everyone if more people could spot this, and had some awareness or "antibodies" against emotional manipulation in general. Lastly, thank you for being able to disagree with me in a calm and respectful manner- that is a rare thing online nowadays.
      - twodave 2y ago
        I can definitely understand. I actually think immigrants are necessary for our future, but I want them to follow our laws and not just have an open border. When my generation reaches retirement age the rest of the world will already be crippled more or less, and we will need the supplemental workforce that immigration can provide. Politics can definitely get heated. I have always thought that you can get far even with people you strongly disagree with by assuming the best of their motives. Thanks for engaging with me :)
int_19h 2y ago
It was exactly like that with Putin, as well. To remind, the guy was elected fair and square in a landslide originally. And there were people back then who screamed from the rooftops that if you elect a former KGB operative as a "strong hand", that'll be the last free elections that you'll have. And yes, there were many in the middle who laughed at them. I wonder how many of those have left the country since.
pseudalopex 2y ago
> I'm willing to bet during the rise of people like Mussolini, Pol Pot, Stalin, Hitler, etc. many people were concerned, and many others were saying it was nothing and they were just being hyperbolic. Yes. A German Jewish newspaper published this.[1] "We do not subscribe to the view that Herr Hitler and his friends, now finally in possession of the power they have desired for so long, will enact the proposals circulating in the Angriff or the Völkischer Beobachter newspapers; they will not suddenly divest German Jews of their constitutional rights, lock them away in race ghettos, or subject them to the avaricious and murderous impulses of the mob. They not only cannot do this because many other crucial factors hold their powers in check, ranging from the Reich president to some of the political parties affiliated with them, but they also clearly do not want to go this route, for when one acts as a European world power, the whole atmosphere is more conducive to ethical reflection upon one’s better self than to revisiting one’s earlier oppositional role: operating as a European world power means that one seeks an enduring place in the harmonious exchange of peoples of culture. And beyond that, it is clear that the powers at Wilhelmstrasse no longer see demagogic appeals designed to heat up mass gatherings of the Volk as strictly necessary. The new Prussian Minister of the Interior [Hermann Göring] can perform a far greater service to the old comrades in arms and party friends by rejuvenating the huge, state civil service along National Socialist lines than by making open concessions to the brutal manifesta- tions of hatred of Jews." [1] https://www.ushmm.org/m/pdfs/20091110-Matthaus-Ch-1.pdf https://www.ushmm.org/m/pdfs/20091110-Matthaus-Ch-1.pdf
- _yb2s 2y ago
  Wow that is really something else, and closely echoes what people are saying nowadays.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
- krapp 2y ago
  I wonder if a term like "Hitler Derangement Syndrome" was popular at the time.
silverquiet 2y ago
Probably twentyish years ago, I read some comment or other that when reading right-wing propaganda, just mentally replace "immigrant" with "jew" and see how it sounds to you. Since then I can never not see that, and I think it really is the key to understanding the nature of these movements; they thrive on dehumanization of groups of humans. There's an LBJ quote that springs to mind immediately: > “If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you.”

by _yb2s 2y ago

shigawire 2y ago

>What concerns me most about this, is the general attitude of entirely dehumanizing specific groups of people And they are armed to the teeth.

twodave 2y ago

What does America or even Trump have to gain by installing a dictatorship? Assuming he even could, which is probably worth arguing. He is already the most powerful executive of the most powerful (by far, it is not close) and future-proof (again, by far) nation on Earth. His actions in my view are more aligned with getting America the best deal ahead of whatever unfavorable population and trade collapses await the world in the next few decades. As an American, I only half expect democracy to survive putting my cohort (millennials) through retirement. Industrialization has left the world on a pretty bleak course, with America most equipped to weather it. Most of the moves I see the current administration readying itself for are ones to strengthen our already dominant geopolitical advantages worldwide. Hard to do that if you have a civil war to manage on top of it.

_yb2s 2y ago
What did past demagogues and dictators have to gain? It always turned out awful in the end, but concerns over that didn't stop them or their supporters. Trump appears to have no stable ideals, he seems to be only interested in attention and appearing successful. He's previously tried unsuccessfully to launch into politics from the left, right, and center but eventually found traction with this new movement, so he doubled down and played the demagogue after a lifetime of being the epitome of the elite. Ultimately there is a narrative that regular people are doing bad economically because of a few specific groups of people, and that this can be fixed by dehumanizing, terrorizing, and persecuting these people. They will need an all powerful leader not constrained by laws, opposing politics, or human rights to "solve the problem." Of course people think his actions are "aligned with getting America the best deal" or else they wouldn't want to help install him as dictator. Trump seems to have gotten pretty far along this path already. He appointed his own sycophant supreme court that ruled him above the law and unprosecutable. He failed at trying to overthrow an election, but managed to get away scott free by intimidating people out of doing their jobs, and eventually pardoned everyone criminally convicted of participating. He was convicted of 34 felonies in a trial by jury, but received no sentence. Now he's experimented with simply announcing the 14th amendment of the US constitution invalid by executive order, and will see if he gets away with it- if so, I think that qualifies as being successfully installed as a dictator.
- twodave 2y ago
  Honestly there are too many parts of what you wrote that I disagree with to bother writing much of a rebuttal. The people spoke about the border and other cultural issues. They spoke about the justice system and its targeting of Trump. You can be for strong borders and safe spaces for the majority of people without being for “dehumanizing” people. So that to me is disingenuous. I’m not likely to change your mind on these things, so what I’ll say instead is to look at what he is actually doing geopolitically through the lens of a declining world, which is what we are about to be experiencing as literally every other port country in the world begins its population decline.
  - _yb2s 2y ago
    > You can be for strong borders and safe spaces for the majority of people without being for “dehumanizing” people Perhaps one could be, but these people are not- their rhetoric about immigrants is based on hate and dehumanization, and the entire narrative that immigrants are harmful economically and culturally is a lie. Moreover, it is a red herring that causes people to ignore all of the real reasons people are struggling - so nobody will take actual steps towards solving any real problems- and those problems will continue to get worse as a result. I refuse to be like the Germans who said "davon haben wir nichts gewusst" - "we knew nothing about that." I will not participate in dehumanizing, persecuting, or abusing other people, and I will do everything in my power to stop them. > justice system and its targeting of Trump He has Narcissistic personality disorder (NPD), and he cannot accept responsibility or fault for anything- even crimes he was found guilty of by a jury. I have experience with people like that in real life and can spot it from a mile away, and I think our society would be a much better place to live for everyone if more people could spot this, and had some awareness or "antibodies" against emotional manipulation in general. Lastly, thank you for being able to disagree with me in a calm and respectful manner- that is a rare thing online nowadays.
    - twodave 2y ago
      I can definitely understand. I actually think immigrants are necessary for our future, but I want them to follow our laws and not just have an open border. When my generation reaches retirement age the rest of the world will already be crippled more or less, and we will need the supplemental workforce that immigration can provide. Politics can definitely get heated. I have always thought that you can get far even with people you strongly disagree with by assuming the best of their motives. Thanks for engaging with me :)

int_19h 2y ago

It was exactly like that with Putin, as well. To remind, the guy was elected fair and square in a landslide originally. And there were people back then who screamed from the rooftops that if you elect a former KGB operative as a "strong hand", that'll be the last free elections that you'll have. And yes, there were many in the middle who laughed at them. I wonder how many of those have left the country since.

pseudalopex 2y ago

> I'm willing to bet during the rise of people like Mussolini, Pol Pot, Stalin, Hitler, etc. many people were concerned, and many others were saying it was nothing and they were just being hyperbolic. Yes. A German Jewish newspaper published this.[1] "We do not subscribe to the view that Herr Hitler and his friends, now finally in possession of the power they have desired for so long, will enact the proposals circulating in the Angriff or the Völkischer Beobachter newspapers; they will not suddenly divest German Jews of their constitutional rights, lock them away in race ghettos, or subject them to the avaricious and murderous impulses of the mob. They not only cannot do this because many other crucial factors hold their powers in check, ranging from the Reich president to some of the political parties affiliated with them, but they also clearly do not want to go this route, for when one acts as a European world power, the whole atmosphere is more conducive to ethical reflection upon one’s better self than to revisiting one’s earlier oppositional role: operating as a European world power means that one seeks an enduring place in the harmonious exchange of peoples of culture. And beyond that, it is clear that the powers at Wilhelmstrasse no longer see demagogic appeals designed to heat up mass gatherings of the Volk as strictly necessary. The new Prussian Minister of the Interior [Hermann Göring] can perform a far greater service to the old comrades in arms and party friends by rejuvenating the huge, state civil service along National Socialist lines than by making open concessions to the brutal manifesta- tions of hatred of Jews." [1] https://www.ushmm.org/m/pdfs/20091110-Matthaus-Ch-1.pdf https://www.ushmm.org/m/pdfs/20091110-Matthaus-Ch-1.pdf

_yb2s 2y ago
Wow that is really something else, and closely echoes what people are saying nowadays.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
krapp 2y ago
I wonder if a term like "Hitler Derangement Syndrome" was popular at the time.

silverquiet 2y ago

Probably twentyish years ago, I read some comment or other that when reading right-wing propaganda, just mentally replace "immigrant" with "jew" and see how it sounds to you. Since then I can never not see that, and I think it really is the key to understanding the nature of these movements; they thrive on dehumanization of groups of humans. There's an LBJ quote that springs to mind immediately: > “If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you.”