Fascism fact checking

[dhol82]

Interesting piece.


https://www.christiancentury.org/blog-post/fascismfactchecking


I continue to be struck by this quote from Hannah Arendt in The Origins of Totalitarianism:

“This method [of infallible prediction] is foolproof only after the movements have seized power. Then all debate about the truth or falsity of a totalitarian dictator’s prediction is as weird as arguing with a potential murderer about whether his future victim is dead or alive – since by killing the person in question the murderer can promptly provide proof of the correctness of his statement. The only valid argument under such conditions is promptly to rescue the person whose death is predicted. Before mass leaders seize the power to fit reality to their lies, their propaganda is marked by its extreme contempt for facts as such, for in their opinion fact depends entirely on the power of man who can fabricate it…In other words, the method of infallible prediction, more than any other totalitarian propaganda device, betrays its ultimate goal of world conquest, since only in a world completely under his control could the totalitarian ruler possibly realize all his lies and make true all his prophecies.”

Arendt, a German-born Jewish philosopher, wrote these words trying to make sense of Hitler’s Germany. The ways in which they resonate in today's U.S. context is chilling. Arendt’s analysis here reminds me why fascism—including nascent neo-fascist forms—can’t be fact-checked.

When authoritarian rulers are on a quest to cleanse and restore the nation while scapegoating minorities, we can respond in a number of ways. Assuming the main issue is misinformation, science about climate change and data analyses on the feasibility of various proposals including mass deportations, border walls, and registries can be brought forth. Assuming the main issue is dialogue, friendly conversations with the ruler’s supporters can be pursued. Assuming the main issue is fake news, more real news can be circulated? Regardless, all of these approaches prove to be poor primary antidotes to this kind of political illness.

[mn9driver]

1. With a closed information bubble, there are no facts.

Providing more climate science becomes providing more climate change hoax.

Providing numbers about the cost of deportation, border fortification, and actual vs. imaginary crime rates becomes liberal spin.

Responding civilly to uncivil discussion becomes typical liberal weakness.

Providing more real news becomes providing more fake news.

It's a perfect, closed circle. The only possible way to penetrate it is from inside, and even that is unlikely to work. Witness all of the former RW darlings who were cast aside and ignored as soon as they expressed any reservations about Trump.

[dhol82]

2. True

This is a very depressing thought.
Figuring out a way to fight it will be tricky.

[burrowowl]

3. Arendt is well worth reading

One of my favorites along with Howard Zinn.