Thread by @tzimmer_history

This is a key point. Every time I mention how the Right is embracing the threat of political violence against supposedly “Un-American” enemies, I get a flurry of “Where were you when those woke barbarians destroyed our cities?! The violence is coming from the Left!!!” replies.

This has become dogma on the Right: That the country is facing an onslaught from a radically “Un-American,” extremist “Left” that is violently threatening to destroy everything the nation is supposed to stand for. And that the Democratic Party has been taken over by those forces.

That’s how they’re giving themselves permission to embrace whatever radical measures are deemed necessary to defeat this “Un-American” enemy. If the nation is under acute threat, nothing is beyond the pale to defend it. Democracy? The rule of law? Who cares!

This permission structure is really crucial. The Right doesn’t want to say: “We are the aggressors.” Building up this supposedly totalitarian threat from the “Left” allows them to justify their actions within the long-established framework of conservative self-victimization.

This is also why clinging to the idea that “They won’t go *that* far” is both futile and dangerous: They absolutely will, because they have convinced themselves that the other side has already gone *much further* and will stop at nothing.

But do they *truly* believe this, or are they just using these ideas opportunistically? The answer is: Yes. Or, to be more precise: It’s rarely just one or the other, as ideology defines the realm and limits of opportunism; and the specific mix ratio may vary from case to case.

Therefore, focusing too much on whether or not they *truly* believe is misleading and somewhat beside the point. It’s more important to acknowledge that this permission structure is established and that it works because it fits and confirms the Right’s overall worldview.

What are they giving themselves permission to do? That is the key question, politically as well as analytically, when dealing with the Right. And an honest assessment of that question should leave no doubt that American democracy is currently in an acutely perilous situation.

Addendum: @MatthewSitman and @SamAdlerBell provided the clearest articulation I’ve heard of this idea that we need to pay attention to what the Reactionary Right is giving itself permission to do, in this episode of the @KnowYrEnemyPod on the self-styled National Conservatives.

What are they giving themselves permission to do?

Here’s senator Rick Scott, preparing the ground for a large-scale purge of the “enemy within” - and soon, as it has supposedly already “seized control” of all areas of American life.

What are they giving themselves permission to do?

Here’s the former governor of Missouri (anyone remember why he resigned??) decrying “leftist tyranny.” And he is “willing to fight” - because that’s what you do if you’re living under a tyranny.

What are they giving themselves permission to do?

Oregon GOP edition: A Communist conspiracy that has taken over: the “godless Left” destroying the country - If that’s true, is there *any* action or measure that is not justified in the urgent fight to save America?

What are they giving themselves permission to do?

If it serves the larger struggle against “the Left,” there is no line conservatives, even the supposedly “respectable” ones at the National Review, aren’t willing to cross.

So advocating for a coup becomes “political activism.”

What are they giving themselves permission to do?
 
In a vacuum, this sounds really, really bad, doesn’t it? A frontal assault on the American political system! Do you see what’s going on? They’re out to get us! Shouldn’t we make sure we get them first?!!

It comes from the author of "American Ingrate: Ilhan Omar and the Progressive-Islamist Takeover of the Democratic Party" – just in case you needed more evidence what this Claremont fellow was trying to tell us: The Democrats are a radical, “Un-American” enemy!

Also, please note how this perfectly encapsulates how the “cancel culture” discourse works: What’s actually going on is deliberately obscured by referring solely to procedure and ignoring all content. Like: “Cancelled for his opinion” instead of “Criticized for racist remarks.”

What are they giving themselves permission to do?

If this were true, would there be anything - very much including the use of political violence - *not* justified in the struggle against such demonic forces? What other than a call for a radical purge is this supposed to be?

What are they giving themselves permission to do?

Once you have convinced yourself you are fighting a noble war against a bunch of pedophiles seeking to destroy “real” America, there are no more lines you’re not justified to cross.

We are in deeply dangerous territory.

What are they giving themselves permission to do?

Once you have convinced yourself and/or your supporters that the other side is scheming to kill and replace you, any measure you take, regardless of how radical, is justified as an inevitable act of (preemptive) self-defense.