I know fascists do this, but doesn't everyone kind of? If you don't think your enemy has strengths then they're not worth being your enemy and if you don't think they have weaknesses then opposing them is pointless.

edit: I guess one difference is fascists pick enemies that genuinely are powerless, but that doesn't really seem to line up with the original claim

  • Liberalism [he/him,they/them]
    hexagon
    ·
    4 years ago

    Who doesn't do this, though?

    For example if you're a socialist, capitalists are strong because they control the means of production but weak because there aren't very many of them and they are dependent on subjugating others to maintain their power.

    • coeliacmccarthy [he/him]
      ·
      edit-2
      4 years ago

      that's just a realistic evaluation of strengths and weaknesses, which is not the same as "trump is a competent fascist dictator who also shits in a diaper and eats hamberders all day like a little hamberder baby" or "antifa are shrimpy pathetic soyboys, I will defend my family with flamethrowers and with my dying breath as they tear my body apart i will caw like the mighty eagle"

      edit: that's not to say that leftists can't fall victim to liberal/fascist thought and demonstrate it, us being libs and all

    • RandyLahey [he/him]
      ·
      4 years ago

      I think it's more just that it's a necessary rhetorical thing

      Like your enemies have to be subhuman and pathetic, cos it defeats the purpose if they're actually superior to you (and strength ~= superiority in fashy thought)

      But they also have to be an overwhelming threat to your way of life to justify what needs to be done