# Most despicable reaction to the Tucson shootings?

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-despicable-reaction-to-the-tucson-shootings/567443>\
**Category:** Great Debates\
**Created:** [January 13, 2011, 12:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-despicable-reaction-to-the-tucson-shootings/567443 "2011-01-13T12:38:50Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 3\
**Page:** 8

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![xenophon41](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xenophon41/32/253_2.png) [@xenophon41](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/xenophon41)\
**Post date:** [January 19, 2011, 3:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-despicable-reaction-to-the-tucson-shootings/567443/141 "2011-01-19T15:50:53Z")

</div>

> [@What\_the](#):
>
> I clicked on your links and you are on notice that I am aware that it has something to do with “eliminationalism” or something like that but didn’t go any further.

Just in case some other participant or lurker thinks “TLDR” is a proper rebuttal, I offer the following concise description of eliminationism:

It is when one or more popular spokespersons of a specific political faction commonly and consistently use language in their public speech that _ **isolates** _ one ethnic or ideological group as an enemy and attempts to show it as an existential _ **threat** _ that must be _ **eliminated** _ from society.\*\*\*\*\*

If that’s too long and boring for anyone to respond to, I suggest such a person may not be equipped to discuss these grownup topics

\*\*\*\*\*For everyone else, please note that neither I nor **BrainGlutton** (to my knowledge) has ever claimed that eliminationism is dangerous or even very effective in isolation. Most partisan groups have been represented at one time or another by speakers who’ve used eliminationist rhetoric. But it begins to darken the political landscape when the same eliminationist images, concepts and word-for-word phrases are used in concert by many or most of the popular figures representing a specific world view. And _that_ is the ‘eliminationist’ argument about the rhetoric of the right.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\
**Post date:** [January 20, 2011, 5:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-despicable-reaction-to-the-tucson-shootings/567443/142 "2011-01-20T17:00:02Z")

</div>

> [@xenophon41](#):
>
> \*\*\*\*\*For everyone else, please note that neither I nor **BrainGlutton** (to my knowledge) has ever claimed that eliminationism is dangerous or even very effective in isolation. Most partisan groups have been represented at one time or another by speakers who’ve used eliminationist rhetoric. But it begins to darken the political landscape when the same eliminationist images, concepts and word-for-word phrases are used in concert by many or most of the popular figures representing a specific world view. And _that_ is the ‘eliminationist’ argument about the rhetoric of the right.

Agreed, with the caveat that eliminationism **can** be dangerous – rarely to the existential-threat-to-society level, but it can give rise to things like the Klan, the Minutemen (and no, ranking them with the Klan is **not** a false equivalency), etc.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![xenophon41](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xenophon41/32/253_2.png) [@xenophon41](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/xenophon41)\
**Post date:** [January 20, 2011, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-despicable-reaction-to-the-tucson-shootings/567443/143 "2011-01-20T17:06:30Z")

</div>

…I assume you’re talking about the nuts on the US-Mexican border (Google: Jim Gilchrist) rather than the colonial militiaists of the Am. Revolution.

[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-despicable-reaction-to-the-tucson-shootings/567443.md?page=7)