Normalizing Fascism: The Paradox of Tolerance

The Brexit campaign succeeded on a platform that cultivated anger, fear, conspiracies, and racism based on lies and disinformation. Donald Trump’s campaigns have succeeded twice on platforms that increasingly cultivated anger, fear, misogyny, conspiracies, and racism based on lies and disinformation. Pierre PoiLIEvre, head of Canada’s now far-right MAGA-mimicking CONservative Party campaigns on a platform that cultivates anger, fear, conspiracies, and racism based on lies and disinformation in the hope of succeeding as the next Prime Minister. If Canada’s electorate is ignorant enough, and has not learned the lessons either of history or the American experience with fascism, he might well win that office.

India, Israel, Turkey, Iran, Argentina, and Russia all have far-right governments that successfully ran on campaigns of fear, anger, conspiracies, and racism based on lies and disinformation. The far-right parties in France and Germany have made significant inroads into their federal parliaments using the same tactics in recent elections. In Italy, Finland, Slovakia, Hungary, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Sweden, and the Netherlands, far-right parties have gained seats, in some countries even forming governments or part of a governing coalition. Whole populations seem to have been seduced by the siren call of the extremist right.

And mainstream media (MSM) worldwide has normalized them, their campaigns, their racist and extreme views through the tactic of ‘sanewashing.’ Far too many media reports and editorials did not report the lies, insults, racist and misogynist slurs, disinformation, threats, and outright fascism these rightwing politicians and backers actually presented. This is how democracy ends and the media — labelled by Trump as the “enemies of the people” and threatening revenge on them, even as they sanewash and enable him — is complicit in its and their own destruction.

By not accurately reporting or commenting editorially on what these far-right leaders are actually saying, by omitting to report on their rambling incoherencies, their disinformation, conspiracies, and flat-out lies, the mainstream media is failing in its core duty to inform the public. The media become not reporters and editors, but sanitation engineers, cleaning up the mess that demagogues and wannabe dictators make so the public only sees the shiny final result.*

Why? In The Atlantic, Jeffrey Goldberg wrote “It works like this: Trump sounds nuts, but he can’t be nuts, because he’s the presumptive nominee for president of a major party, and no major party would nominate someone who is nuts. Therefore, it is our responsibility to sand down his rhetoric, to identify any kernel of meaning, to make light of his bizarro statements, to rationalize.” But is it really the role of journalists to rationalize the lies, the insults, the disinformation, the addled conspiracies, and to overlook the incoherent electric-boat-vs-shark madness or his rants about immigrants eating dogs and cats that Trump spewed? Should the media avoid fact-checking and just make the demagogues seem normal just in case they win the election and exact — as Trump has promised to do many times — their revenge on the media for being honest and critical? Well, those few who didn’t kowtow to Trump, that is…

I don’t think so. I think that’s capitulation by frightened and cowardly media. And it has sold out democracy to the fascists.**

We saw the Washington Post refuse for the first time in almost four decades to endorse a presidential candidate when its publisher intervened to stop a planned editorial that endorsed Harris (allegedly under orders from the paper’s owner, Amazon billionaire Jeff Bezos). Former WaPo Executive Editor Martin Baron, called the decision “cowardice, a moment of darkness that will leave democracy as a casualty.” And he was right. But did mainstream media care? Or was it too busy kissing Trump’s ring?

American democracy is in its final hours, with the MAGA Project 2025 showing how quickly and easily it will be dismantled (happening even before the inauguration). If you don’t believe it can happen, then I recommend you read Richard Evan’s book, The Third Reich in Power. It documents how easily and quickly the Nazis took over the state, the bureaucracy, the police, the military, the institutions, schools, and organizations, turning it into a one-party state within three months in the 1930s. The architects of Project 2025 have it all mapped out for how to burn down the USA, and they are much more organized and prepared to do it than the Nazis ever were.

Pierre PoiLIEvre has the same plans for remaking Canada in his far-right, authoritarian image where he is the supreme gatekeeper. On the ReportNorth website, in a piece titled “Pierre Poilievre, Trumpism, and the Normalization of Fascism,” the author noted that Canadian media continue to normalize the incipient fascism of PoiLIEvre and his Maple MAGA CONservatives (emphasis added):

 Like Trump, Poilievre is following the fascist playbook. He appeals to populist messaging, positioning himself as the ‘champion of ordinary Canadians’. Moreover, Poilievre also tries to incite anger and rage toward institutions and ‘elites,’ frequently targeting the political establishment, including both Liberals and Conservatives who are not aligned with his populist, right-wing views. He also is very vocal in his critiques of what he calls the “left-wing” establishment media, like the CBC, which he vows to dismantle when Prime Minister. Like Trump (and Hitler), he believes in education reform and has even called for a ‘massive government intrusion into academic freedom. Poilievre has even adopted the internal foreign immigrant enemy Trump created, claiming that he too will carry out mass deportations when elected. Oh, and let us not forget his blatant attempt at rage-baiting symbols and slogans of “Axe the Tax” and “Common Sense” conservatives. In fact, the first thing you see when you visit the CPC website is a merch store where you can buy hats and shirts that sport this Lib-hate-inducing rhetoric.
All this is to say that the Canadian media must call this what it is. It is fascism. Anybody who knows anything about history has seen this time and time again, all over the world. We just saw it happen in the United States. A politician uses racism and populism to gain power, and then with that power, they destroy democratic institutions and replace those institutions with ones that will support their new status quo. Poilievre has not tried to hide his intentions, but the media refuses to call it what it is.

In an earlier post, the ReportNorth authors wrote (emphasis added),

Pierre Poilievre and his “Common-Sense Conservatives” movement threaten the very core of what it means to be a Canadian. For years, Conservative governments did not dare to try and undermine Trudeau’s core Canadian values, at least not in any meaningful way. Poilievre has boldly and loudly deviated from this norm. But now, Canadian principles rooted deep in our shared history, like multiculturalism and public welfare, are being redefined as “woke” by Poilievre’s Conservative Party.

PoiLIEvre has also been courting Canadian corporate elite and billionaires, much like Trump courted Elon Musk (now considered the puppetmaster or Shadow President behind Trump). In June of 2024, The Breach reported: “In Saskatchewan, Poilievre allies with tycoons who treat province like ‘fiefdom’. Saskatchewan’s richest family, which has a history of purchasing influence, hosted Pierre Poilievre for a private fundraiser.” The article notes:

…the private fundraiser in Regina—one of scores of such cash-for-access events Poilievre has held in exclusive clubs and mansions—is a window into the alliances he is striking up with the corporate elite across the country.

On CTV News, Don Martin asked, “What will change if Poilievre’s Conservatives win a majority in the next election?” He wrote,

This Conservative trashing of the Liberal legacy isn’t exactly being planned by stealth.
As he’s vowed a thousand times, Poilievre’s first item of business will be to eliminate Trudeau’s carbon tax(opens in a new tab), an increasingly popular idea that could become the ballot box issue in the Liberal strongholds of Atlantic Canada.
Now, Poilievre will have to stomp carefully on all this environmental protection legislation. Voters will not tolerate empty planks on the Conservative platform where serious measures to combat climate change should be nailed down.

The Tyee had a piece titled earlier this year, “What We Risk by Normalizing Poilievre’s Politics,” and answered that with a question: “We face losing nothing less than Canadian decency, decorum and democracy. Do news media recognize this?” The article adds a comment on just how much PoiLIEvre mimics Trump’s abrasive, insulting, rage-farming, lying, and disinformation-spreading tactics (emphasis added):

Consider, in the past two years Poilievre has vilified political leaders, academics and private citizens he disagrees with, exhibited open hostility toward journalists and engaged in anti-trans rhetoric.
He has attacked the legitimacy of the Senate, mocked government regulators and responded with insolence to rulings from the Speaker in the House of Commons.
Poilievre championed the foreign-influenced “freedom convoy” insurrection, has bluntly criticized court decisions and promised to lead the first federal government to invoke the notwithstanding clause to override the Charter. He has promoted falsehoods about important public policy issues, frequently shared conspiracy theories and vigorously defended a far-right media organization.
Demonizing opponents, intimidating journalists, disrespecting institutions, politicizing the rights of the vulnerable and undermining truth are warning signs for democratic erosion.

But most Canadian mainstream media simply ignore PoiLIEvre’s far-right Trumpist threat to Canadian values and our democracy. I’ve written on social media that most Canadian media have become mere Rebel-Media-wannabes, shilling for the CONservatives. And that’s because most Canadian media is owned by conservatives or conservative-controlled corporations. The exception is National Post, which has devolved into a Der-Sturmer-wannabe, shilling for the far-right extremists.

There’s a thing called the “paradox of tolerance,” described by philosopher Karl Popper, which Wikipedia tells us is when,

…a society extends tolerance to those who are intolerant, it risks enabling the eventual dominance of intolerance, thereby undermining the very principle of tolerance.***

Mainstream media are guilty of being far, far too tolerant of the rage, lies, and extremism of the right, and in doing so have let it dominate the political narrative. In 1939, 20,000 Americans attended a Nazi rally in New York’s Madison Square Garden to show their support for Hitler’s ideology. After the USA joined the Allies to fight racism, that event was almost scrubbed out of history until, in late 2024, Trump brought his neo-Nazi hate rally to MSG and reminded Americans that a deep streak of fascism still runs in the American soul. It was so vile that it finally shocked many in the media into expressing their vague displeasure and unease, but Trump had been spreading these views and racial hatred throughout his campaign with only expressions of mild concern at best from far too many media outlets. By the time the rally happened, the media had so normalized and sanewashed Trump’s hate rallies that most flailed and failed to make a suitable response to this final outrage.***

As Newsweek reported: “Donald Trump Won. But the Biggest Loser Was the Mainstream Media.” It noted:

Last month, the entrepreneur Patrick Bet-David had Donald Trump on his podcast, where he congratulated him for “killing the mainstream media.”
“I did. I’m very proud of it too,” Trump responded.

As the reach and power of extremist far-right rise in Western nations and the media’s credibility falls, we can see the “dominance of intolerance” in real time as more and more media simply normalize the extremists. America’s January 6 insurrectionists become patriots instead of traitors; the Ottawa convoy insurrectionists become brave protestors resisting Big Government mandates instead of traitors. When the right wins, their Talibangelist backers are enabled to present their pseudo-Christian ideology for their Gilead-like, misogynist theocracy.

Intolerance affects not just nations, but reaches down to individuals as well. A friend on Facebook recently posted an example of how the paradox works at the personal level:

I’ve been invited to a Christmas party given by a Trumper (who EVEN NOW has a ginormous Trump sign on her lawn). I suppose I need to decline with decorum. But what I REALLY want to tell her is I refuse to fraternize with fascists…

I understand his conundrum. How do we deal with family, friends, and neighbours who share what we see as fascist views? Do we continue to tolerate the increasingly toxic views of the right because we are liberal democrats not in the demagogue’s cult? Do we deflect or ignore their pro-Trump or pro-PoiLIEvre comments simply because we are better people, we are still tolerant? Can we be fair and non-judgemental in the face of fascism?

Certainly, the rightwing leaders have no tolerance for opposition, and do not accept dissent or resistance. We want to be good people in the face of a tsunami of evil and not lower ourselves to their level of rage and insult. But, as the popular meme says, “We no longer have a difference in political opinion. We have a difference in morality.”

On the American Crisis blog, media critic Margaret Sullivan asked (emphasis added),

But why does the media sanewash Trump? It’s all a part of the false-equivalence I’ve been writing about here in which candidates are equalized as an ongoing gesture of performative fairness.
And it’s also, I believe, because of the restrained language of traditional objective journalism. That’s often a good thing; it’s part of being careful and cautious. But when it fails to present a truthful picture, that practice distorts reality.

Author Thomas Mann wrote in his novel, A Good Soldier, “Tolerance becomes a crime when applied to evil.” If true, then what the media has done to normalize the fascism of the rightwing parties here, in the USA, and elsewhere, is criminal.

We can no longer allow ourselves the luxury of tolerance. We can no longer pretend there is an equivalence of views, of morals, of ethics.  If we do not defend our position, if we do not stand up for our beliefs, if we do not fight back, we risk being dominated by those on the right whose intolerance is manifest. Our democracy, and, in fact, our lives and children’s future are at stake.

Don’t tolerate fascists. Speak up. Defend our democracy against them. And if you care a whit about democracy, never, ever vote CONservative.

Notes:

* It’s not just the obvious propaganda media spewing rightwing lies, disinformation, and conspiracies for the extremists, and to actively help further Putin’s agenda to destabilize democracy — Fox Newz, Newzmax, National Post, and Rebel Media for example — it’s the traditional mainstream media that normalizes the lies, the racism, and misogyny by looking the other way and ignoring it. From Wikipedia:

Sanewashing is the act of minimizing the perceived radical aspects of a person or idea in order to make them appear more acceptable to a wider audience. The term was initially coined in online discussions about defunding the police in 2020, but has come to greater prominence in critique of media practices relating to Donald Trump in the 2024 United States presidential election. Journalism organizations and media commentators have suggested actions both readers and writers can take to mitigate sanewashing.

The Columbia Journalism Review also noted:

As applied to Trump, the idea is that major mainstream news outlets are routinely taking his incoherent, highly abnormal rants—be they on social media or at in-person events—and selectively quoting from them to emphasize lines that, in isolation, might sound coherent or normal, thus giving a misleading impression of the whole for people who didn’t read or watch the entire thing.

Parker Molloy wrote a piece in The New Republic titled, “How the Media Sanitizes Trump’s Insanity.” It was subtitled, “The political press’s efforts to rationalize Trump’s incoherent statements are eroding our shared reality and threatening informed democracy.” In that piece, she wrote (emphasis added):

This “sanewashing” of Trump’s statements isn’t just poor journalism; it’s a form of misinformation that poses a threat to democracy. By continually reframing Trump’s incoherent and often dangerous rhetoric as conventional political discourse, major news outlets are failing in their duty to inform the public and are instead providing cover for increasingly erratic behavior from a former—and potentially future—president.
The consequences of this journalistic malpractice extend far beyond misleading headlines. By laundering Trump’s words in this fashion, the media is actively participating in the erosion of our shared reality. When major news outlets consistently present a polished version of Trump’s statements, they create an alternate narrative that exists alongside the unfiltered truth available on social media and in unedited footage.
Voters who rely solely on traditional news sources are presented with a version of Trump that bears little resemblance to reality. They see a former president who, while controversial, appears to operate within the bounds of normal political discourse—or at worst, is breaking with it in some kind of refreshing manner. You can see this folie à deux at work in a recent Times piece occasioned by Trump’s amplification of social media posts alleging that Harris owed her career to the provision of “blowjobs”: “Though he has a history of making crass insults about his opponents, the reposts signal Mr. Trump’s willingness to continue to shatter longstanding norms of political speech.” Meanwhile, those who seek out primary sources encounter a starkly different figure—one prone to conspiracy theories, personal attacks, and extreme rhetoric.

** After their election of a fascist to the presidency, it is questionable how deep the American dedication to democracy actually goes. From my perspective, it sure looks shallow. The American Declaration of Independence (DOI) includes “an unalienable right” granted by some imaginary deity: “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” While this phrase has no legal status, Wikipedia says it has been “widely referenced and seen as an inspiration for the basis of government.” However, the “pursuit of happiness” is a vague, individual goal, not one for nations, nor for governments to legislate. It is essentially selfish. Democracy requires collective goals.

Compare it to the French national motto: “Liberté, égalité, fraternité” or ‘liberty, equality, fraternity,’ which shows collective, national goals (equality and fraternity). Millions of Americans voted to make Donald Trump happy, without considering how it would inevitably make them and millions of others worldwide unhappy. Apparently defending democracy against his predations was not a concern.

The DOI also claims “all Men are created equal,” a phrase not given any credence by the slave-owning states and still generally ignored by modern conservatives and MAGA cultists. Plus, it is clearly patriarchal by ignoring women. The DOI does not mention equality or women anywhere. However, it does go on at length to warn about the English King being a tyrant, including many things the King allegedly did that are remarkably similar to those things Trump has promised or his Project 2025 team intends to do. Millions of Americans, it seems, believe those actions and attitudes they once rejected are now acceptable.

It is instructive to note that America’s national motto is “In God we trust” signed into law by President Dwight D. Eisenhower in 1956, replacing the previous “E Pluribus Unum” (Latin for “Out of many, one” which suggested a collective or common goal) with a politically-motivated theological statement, despite the Founding Fathers’ reticence about religion generally, and Christianity specifically. And despite it going against the Constitution’s First Amendment that established the “separation of church and state.” The pseudo-Christian Talibangelists backing Trump intend to delete that amendment and turn the USA into a repressive theocracy.

*** Karl Popper wrote in The Open Society and its Enemies (emphasis added),

The so-called paradox of freedom is the argument that freedom in the sense of absence of any constraining control must lead to very great restraint, since it makes the bully free to enslave the meek… Less well known is the paradox of tolerance: Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance.
If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. — In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols. We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant. We should claim that any movement preaching intolerance places itself outside the law, and we should consider incitement to intolerance and persecution as criminal, in the same way as we should consider incitement to murder, or to kidnapping, or to the revival of the slave trade, as criminal.

*** The 1939 rally was the subject of a short documentary now available to view on YouTube (see below). It is instructive to see that an enthusiastic streak of fascism has long run deep in America, and has apparently resurfaced under Trump. The video of the ’39 rally is reminiscent of Leni Reifenstahl’s movie made of the 1935 Munich Rally, Triumph of the Will:

In August 1941, while America was still debating whether to join the war, Dorothy Thompson wrote a piece for Harper’s Magazine about this streak titled, “Who Goes Nazi?” In it, she presaged some of what Hannah Arendt would write in Eichmann in Jerusalem about the banality of evil:

It is also, to an immense extent, the disease of a generation—the generation which was either young or unborn at the end of the last war. This is as true of Englishmen, Frenchmen, and Americans as of Germans. It is the disease of the so-called “lost generation.”
Sometimes I think there are direct biological factors at work—a type of education, feeding, and physical training which has produced a new kind of human being with an imbalance in his nature…
Kind, good, happy, gentlemanly, secure people never go Nazi… But the frustrated and humiliated intellectual, the rich and scared speculator, the spoiled son, the labor tyrant, the fellow who has achieved success by smelling out the wind of success—they would all go Nazi in a crisis.

David Bauder, writing for the Associated Press (published in the Toronto Star), said reporters guilty of sanewashing Trump were  “succumbing to the “banality of crazy… where journalists become accustomed to things Trump says that would be shocking coming from other candidates simply because they’re numbed to it.” He asked, “Should his rallies be aired at length, or not at all? To fact-check or not fact-check?”

Words: 3,824