He's Schrödinger's Brandon: Too strong and too weak at the same time. I wonder if there is an ideology that typically uses this tactic to define an opponent?
He's Schrödinger's Brandon: Too strong and too weak at the same time. I wonder if there is an ideology that typically uses this tactic to define an opponent?
There is, and the answer is as clear as the nose on your fascist.
Oh sure, it's clear to most, but today's conservative minds need to carefully do some warm up stretches before they can absorb this truth, or they'll tyranny ligament.
Same as it ever was. The Nazis did the same thing with the groups they scapegoated, simultaneously an incompetent drain/liability and and a hyper-competent threat that cannot be ignored.
Critical thinking and reasoning must be taught, without that, people will follow their feelings anywhere, and those are easy to manipulate.
Starving public education into complete and utter ruins for half a century to cut rich sociopath's taxes, and the rise of tens of millions of proudly counterfactual, willfully ignorant nitwits as a political force is not a coincidence.
Garbage in (refusing to pay to educate kids to critically scrutinize the information they take in), garbage out (The United States of duhhhhhhhhhhh).
The saddest part for them is, I've read about studies that say a better-educated populace is a more compassionate populace. Guess who will care for them when they are too old to care for themselves?
The followers must feel humiliated by the ostentatious wealth and force of their enemies. When I was a boy I was taught to think of Englishmen as the five-meal people. They ate more frequently than the poor but sober Italians. Jews are rich and help each other through a secret web of mutual assistance. However, the followers must be convinced that they can overwhelm the enemies. Thus, by a continuous shifting of rhetorical focus, the enemies are at the same time too strong and too weak. Fascist governments are condemned to lose wars because they are constitutionally incapable of objectively evaluating the force of the enemy.
Edit: I guess I can’t bold in a quoted passage, so here it is: Thus, by a continuous shifting of rhetorical focus, the enemies are at the same time too strong and too weak.
Democrats do the same thing to Republicans though, and people on Lemmy are even worse about it. I see posts all the time about how stupid Republicans are, right next to other posts about how serious of a threat they are to democracy or to _____ rights. These are games that politicians play and always have played because it solidifies and energizes their base. It allows the base to set aside differences between themselves to focus on a common enemy. Without a common enemy, they easily devolve to infighting. It's one of the central tenets of Saul Alinskys Rules for Radicals, how to unify against a common enemy. And he was a Communist.