And this post above by @Der_Trihs is exactly why I think that avoiding dehumanizing language is important in this particular context.
There was a thread recently about the reasons why Conservatives oppose social acceptance of homosexuality. We had a bunch of responses along the lines of “well they’re closeted, duh” or “they’re just that full of hate”. And then we had a wonderful post - I forget if it was by @Miller or by @Chronos - that, without defending or excusing homophobia, delved onto the actual, non-meme reasons why a human being trying their best to be empathetic may screw up horribly and end up a homophobe.
There are bad, hateful people out there. People who despise other groups of people with every fiber of their being and wish to harm them. And you know what? 9 times out of 10 they arrived there not out of hateful psychopathy but out of somewhat understandable human motivations. They are Driven by ignorance, and fear of the unknown. Both are very common parts of the human condition.
A Maggot/MAGAt doesn’t have understandable human motivations. It supports Trump because being vile and disgusting is in its nature. It is an alien entity, hostile, not only unworthy of being understood but lacking any true sentience to be understood.
Unfortunately for us, in reality, Trump isn’t supported by horrible monstrous creatures made of pure hatred. He is supported by human beings, with human motivations. If we aren’t planning on destroying them all in a glorious Civil War, we’d do well to understand that and act accordingly.
“They” would make, probably are, the exact same argument. It’s a cycle.
Late: A simple test is helpful to see. If you replace “they” (or whatever categorical name you use) with an actual person’s name. So, in your post for example, “Bill Johnson wants to hurt us and kill us” - it’s harder to say that to a person. It’s easier to say that to a group.
Must’ve been Chronos. I recall the thread, and I did push back on the “homophobes are all closeted” meme in it, but I don’t think most homophobes end up that way out of anything resembling empathy.
Sorry, that’s not what I was trying to say - I think your post is the one I was thinking of - it’s not that empathy causes them to become homophobes, it’s that they’re normal people capable of showing empathy otherwise yet end up homophobic. You don’t have to be a monster motivated only by hate to end up that way.
And that motivation is to hurt and kill everyone but themselves, even if they suffer and die in the process. All real monsters are human. The Nazis were human, and so are their MAGA successors.
And what do their “motivations” matter? Why should I care why they want to kill me? I’ll be dead either way, if they get their way. Along with most of humanity.
FWIW I don’t think even Hitler and the Nazis had the motivation of wanting to make everyone else die and suffer.
This, is true.
Because their motivations drive their actions, so if you understand their motivation you can better oppose their actions, or even convince them to change the way they act.
Well, that’s why I said:
If what you say are true - if all Trump supporters really want is to cause death and suffering to others - then there’s no negotiating with them, there’s no turning them back into productive members of society. They are literally Evil with a capital E, and we should prepare ourselves for an End Times Civil War against them, where we either triumph completely and utterly destroy them, or we all perish.
If that’s the case, go ahead and call them Maggots. Don’t even bother spelling it funny. It will get you into the right mindset for the upcoming war of extermination one way or the other.
“At this point, we’re living under corporate and medical fascism. This is tyranny. When do we get to use the guns?” the man asked, to applause from the crowd. “No, and I’m not – that’s not a joke. I’m not saying it like that. I mean, literally, where’s the line? How many elections are they going to steal before we kill these people?” Charlie Kirk rebukes man who wants to kill Democrats. It's not enough
That’s when dehumanizing language like “NPC” and “zombie” (et al) makes me worry.
There never has been with them; it’s always come down to force. Whether it’s all the revolutions against ancient aristocracies, WWII against the fascists, the US Civil War, desegregation at gunpoint, or just the implied force of the law saying SSM is now legal. They can’t be reasoned with, their non-existent empathy and morality can’t be appealed to, even their concern for their own well-being is minimal at best. It always comes down to forcing them to comply, evading or sidelining them somehow, or just outliving them.
That’s precisely what I mean. Every group on that list, the Nazis went after for ideological reasons, not because they put Evil on their character sheet.
Where is the +1 button. I was thinking the exact same thing viz. it’s OK to use dehumanizing language with them because they don’t deserve human rights.
Right. That’s precisely what I menat, but perhaps too many naked pronouns confused the issue.
The Nazis wanted to kill the Jews because Nazi ideology claimed that Jews were evil masterminds manipulating the whole world including but not limited to making Germany lose WWI.
They (the Nazis) did not kill Jews because they (the Nazis) put “Evil” on their character sheet and thus decided to kill as many non Nazis as possible.
This is an important distinction. If you are able to convince Nazis that Jews don’t actually control the world for the purpose of destroying Germany, they may stop trying to kill Jews, or even stop being Nazis altogether.
On the other hand, if they are killing Jews because of a burning inherent hatred that has no reason and can never be removed, then all you can do is exterminate every single one of them, perhaps in some kind of chamber filled with gas.
You see, Nazi ideology held that Jews are inherently evil, and this is what drove them to try to exterminate the Jewish people. Perhaps that should serve as a warning to those of us who want to label others as inherently evil.
Nice excluded middle there. Remember that in reality we neither reasoned the Nazis out of their ideology nor exterminated all of them in gas chambers.
You can’t reason someone out of a position they didn’t reason themselves into. Nazis didn’t persecute Jews because they had a persuasive rational argument that Jews were evil. They hated Jews because they were simply told that Jews were evil as demonstrated by a vast amount of propaganda and manufactured narratives designed to have emotional appeal that circumvented all rationality. They also let it be known that the hating and hurting of Jews was now permissible - and people do love a good target for irrational hatred, as Orwell observed.
So you’re saying there are good people on both sides?
Sure, if you ignore all context and exclude the middle again.
And much more likely you and the Jews die together in the camps, which is what trying to reason with Nazis got people in real life. It’s both self destructive and immoral to refuse to condemn Nazis and people like them.