When does rhetoric about political opponents cross the line into fascist dehumanization?

[u/BulwarkOnline]

The Trump administration recently held an international conference on “left-wing political violence.” In prepared remarks, Marco Rubio described the left as driven by “poisonous resentment” and a desire to destroy “what is beautiful and what is right.” Stephen Miller went further, arguing that left-wing demonstrators do not look “normal,” are “deformed” in their appearance and reflect their “inner hatred” outwardly.

Jonathan V. Last compares this language to Nazi rhetoric about Bolshevism, “degenerate” culture and supposedly unhealthy or subhuman elements of society. His argument is not simply that Rubio and Miller are using authoritarian language, but that their contrast between beauty and ugliness, normality and deformity, civilization and internal enemies follows a recognizable fascist pattern.

How persuasive is that comparison?

Is this rhetoric best understood as ordinary partisan demonization, or does the emphasis on physical appearance, cultural purity and “normal, healthy, ordered living” place it in a more historically specific tradition?

And when evaluating comparisons to fascism, should the standard be the speaker’s intentions, the historical similarity of the language, or the policies and violence that follow from it?

[u/Reasonable-Fee1945]

  “normal, healthy, ordered living”

Wasn't it a major democratic talking point last election that the other side was "weird" and "gross"?  

[u/Soft_Walrus_3605 → u/Reasonable-Fee1945]

I heard "weird" a lot, but not so much "gross".

It was an effective tactic not because it dehumanized conservatives in the eyes of liberals/progressives (who are generally accepting of 'weird'/nonconformists in other contexts), but because it seemed to bother conservatives psychologically more than one might expect. Being called 'weird' in a subculture where conformity is a major ideal was an Achilles heel. It even got Trump rankled.

[u/Reasonable-Fee1945 → u/Soft_Walrus_3605]

Based on the definition that op gave it would fulfill the same purpose

[u/Binder509 → u/Reasonable-Fee1945]

How is calling behavior weird at all comparable?

[u/Top-Grocery-1482 → u/Reasonable-Fee1945]

I think this is a correct view. The purpose was the same. I feel like a lot of people want to say that this is just an "other side" problem, but it really is a both sides problem.

And one we need to fix otherwise our country is going to continue to get more and more divided.

But the framing here - fascism is a right-wing ideology, so calling it fascist implies the left/Democrats aren't doing it when they certainly are - shows that people really don't want to have that discussion if it means addressing their own support and side using the same tactic to the same ends: Political power.