177
submitted 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) by silence7@slrpnk.net to c/politics@lemmy.world

The word “fascist” gets thrown around a lot in politics, but it’s hard to find a more apt one for “Unhumans,” which came out last month. The book argues that leftists don’t deserve the status of human beings — that they are, as the title says, unhumans

top 18 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Ilandar@aussie.zone 43 points 3 months ago

Vance is a quite fascinating and rare example of what happens when one of these people who dedicates themselves to Trump actually gets rewarded for it. And the reward is getting absolutely shit on by everyone, every day, for the rest of all time lol

[-] silence7@slrpnk.net 29 points 3 months ago

The phrase I like is 'dignity wraith' — somebody who in their quest for power has let everything rot away, and all that's left is a constant stream of humiliation.

[-] NegativeInf@lemmy.world 9 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

The perfect trifecta of kink: couches, dolphins, and humiliation.

Edit: Punctuation Clarity.

[-] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

Wouldn't that be a quadfecta or something like that? 🤔

[-] NegativeInf@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago

Oh, sorry, I think a punctuation error made it unclear. The 3 are a list of his kinks. I'll edit for clarity.

[-] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago
[-] NegativeInf@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago

Not a big deal. I'm glad you pointed it out. I'd rather be clear. Thanks!

[-] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago

You're very welcome, have a nice day 🙂

[-] DevCat@lemmy.world 22 points 3 months ago

It's dangerous to declare your opponents are not really human. A long time ago a term was coined, "outlaw". It meant somebody had committed crimes that placed them outside the law. They not only no longer had the protections the law placed gave all others, but the responsibilities as well. The y could be killed out of hand, but they could also kill without further repercussions.

[-] captainWhatsHisName@lemm.ee 5 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

The most obvious example is untermenche which the nazis used to describe their enemies.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Untermensch

I can’t imagine that the authors of the book didn’t know this. It’s not quite a dog whistle to neo nazis and white supremecists. More like a bullhorn.

[-] worldwidewave@lemmy.world 12 points 3 months ago

Didn’t realize this day would ever come, but finally, a book I do support burning.

[-] Daxter101@lemmy.blahaj.zone 9 points 3 months ago

I know you might be joking for hyperbole, but still. If you burn it, you can't read what runs through their and their friends' head, and you lose the historical value of having access to this period's political pulse later.

And I don't think these books turn people fascist. They only consolidate them.

If we want to stop fascism, part of the solution is stopping the root of the problem, where people become fascists. And our best bet on that is understanding.

[-] moon@lemmy.cafe 5 points 3 months ago

If the right people read their playbooks, then it can greatly empower them to fight back. As they know their every move and can call out exactly what they're doing. I personally believe knowledge can counter this kind of thing, and I think more people reading it under the pretense that it's a fascist playbook would hurt the Republican cause the most.

[-] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 3 points 3 months ago

Don't be ludicrous.

Burn the person who wrote it.

[-] capital@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

As hard as it will be, I think it better to read it to better understand my enemy.

[-] capital@lemmy.world 4 points 3 months ago

Yeahhhh, Imma go ahead and hold onto these guns.

[-] Treczoks@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago

So "Project 2025" was not even enough?

[-] MediaBiasFactChecker@lemmy.world -1 points 3 months ago

New York Times - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for New York Times:

MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Wikipedia about this source

Search topics on Ground.Newshttps://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/05/opinion/jd-vance-fascism-unhumans.html?unlocked_article_code=1.Ak4.8Vwx.qnIxaaQF7h3Z&smid=url-share
Media Bias Fact Check | bot support

this post was submitted on 05 Aug 2024
177 points (97.8% liked)

politics

19148 readers
2087 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS