Frank wrote on Aug 6th, 2025 at 9:39am:Yes, that is a strong element. ANother, related one, is the compulson to degrade and humiliate and dehumanise.
They do not merely disagree, protest, critique - they want to simultaneously degrade and demonise. So they make out their opponents to be sexual perverts and mentally sub-human or devilishly demonic (the paradox is lost on them since the dehumanisation is the point).
Solzhenitsyn and others documented this extensively when reporting on the Soviet method of psychologcal strategy and tactics, others have written about the fascists ways of psychologically breaking their opponents. Today we notice these tactics among the left and the militant activists of their various pet identity group.
The phrase, 'her majesty's loyal opposotion' doesn't chime with the Left anymore. opposition to them is evil and/or subhuman. their rhetoric cofirms and reinforces that in their own minds in their every utterance. They are not debating democratic equals who are on their level but think and reason differenly, they are fighting evil demons. There is no 'loyal opposition', no recognised, shared foudation when you are battling evil demons. This requires their constant sexually, mental and moral dirtying, degrading and dehumanising those who oppose them.
There are honourable exceptions, some sober, rational voices can still be heard on the Left but they are over-shouted, over-snarled by the mob. It has always been like this. |
|
The irony here is thick enough to bottle. You're lamenting the supposed "dehumanisation" and "demonisation" tactics of the Left while defending a movement that worships a man credibly accused of rape, who brags about sexual assault, walks in on naked teenagers, and pals around with a convicted child trafficker. Spare us the high-minded lectures on civility and moral discourse.
Your entire post is a masterclass in projection. You whine about degradation and humiliation while aligning yourself with a political cult that mock disabled people, chant "lock her up", call women "nasty", immigrants "animals", and political opponents "vermin".
The Trumpist right perfected the politics of cruelty, and now you want to pretend you're shocked that people aren't politely debating whether a sex offender in the Oval Office should be held accountable?
Dragging Solzhenitsyn into this is pure farce. The man warned against totalitarianism, not against calling out predators or the moral rot of political fanbases.
You're not referencing him because you understand him, you're using his name as intellectual camouflage to dress up your complicity. Just like Scoot.
And the idea that calling out Trump's abuses is somehow Soviet-style "psychological warfare" is utterly deranged. No one is rounding up Trump supporters and sending them to gulags. They're being criticised because they're at best minimising child sexual abuse and at worst, flat out defending it, and you can't handle that.
You talk about the "loss of loyal opposition", but where was that when your side was cheering seditionists storming the Capitol? Where was it when Trump tried to overthrow an election and install himself as dictator? You don't get to plead for civility after helping torch the rules of the game. This isn't a debate club.
The truth is, you're upset that people are no longer afraid to speak plainly about what your movement has become. You mistake moral clarity for incivility and outrage for oppression. You're not being silenced, you're being held accountable.
And it's about damn time.
