on dehumanization

Dehumanization is the process of attacking someone in a way that makes them seem less than human. Notice the bold: it’s a targeted attack against a real, breathing, speaking person. It’s designed to make this very real person seem like less than a person. Instead, like an animal. Or worse: a cockroach.

Dehumanization is a form of “moral disengagement”. Moral disengagement is the process of intentionally disengaging our normal functional morals in order to do something we wouldn’t normally due (like violence). It’s a tactic that’s been on the rise for quite some time. It’s been masterfully used by the alt-right and religious right to create artificial enemies that seem less than human in order to unite a voting block.

Unfortunately I’m pretty sure it has an ugly, inescapable side effect: the more you view someone or a class of someones as less than, the more likely you are to resort to some form “cleansing” violence in response.

Just to highlight a few areas it’s readily seen today:

dehumanization of immigrants

It’s clear in the current administrations speech regarding immigrants and refugees that dehumanization is the priority. It has to be as they attempt to inhumanely expel these people from our country to torture prisons in Latin America¹ and countries known for trafficking migrants as slaves in Northern Africa². Or sending kids suffering from cancer packing without their meds or hope³.

How do they do this? Trump campaigned on and has long used dehumanizing language to talk about immigrants. He often spoke of an “invasion” or talked about how these people were “poisoning the blood”⁴. If that sounds familiar it’s because you probably studied history and know it’s straight up Nazi language used to justify genocide.

Today immigrants and refugees are talked about as terrorists or invasive species not the genuine people that they are and it’s enabling mass harm and violence unto people that have been through enough.

dehumanization of trans people

Trans people face this daily emanating from the current administration, Christian nationalist and alt-right media. It’s common for people from those spheres to talk about trans people not as people but as groomers⁵ or predators. It’s always broad strokes and broad brushes with no specific examples.

Trans people are also painted as individuals not capable of making their own choices about healthcare (something that should be no ones business but the individual and their doctor). They are stripped of that basic dignity of humanity to further dehumanize and villainize.

In this dehumanization, we see how moral disengagement spirals beyond anyones control. As people are increasingly seen as less than human any attack becomes acceptable. Cis-women are even starting to pay the price if they don’t measure up to some random persons ideals of femininity⁶.

what about when we do it?

We being progressive types that recognize the dignity and worth of these (and others!) being dehumanized. How do we position our own lives as we are pressure into playing around with dehumanization?

I think this is the heart of what I wanted to reflect on. It’s all too easy to become what we hate. The easy answer to dehumanization and the resulting violence is further dehumanization. “You are just a MAGAt.” It’s incredibly problematic though in that it traps us in a cycle of dehumanization and violence. History is rife with examples (for one, just look at the history of the middle east, foreign involvement and terrorism).

I’m convinced we are never going to overcome dehumanization with further dehumanization. My response can’t be reducing people to a sub-human status. As soon as I do that, I’m morally disengaging and inviting the same sort of end-game I want so desperately to prevent. My first response can’t and shouldn’t be over-the-top violence that obliterates⁷.

so what do we do?

Rather than overcoming dehumanization with further dehumanization, I think we start by overcoming it with truth. We do this in several ways.

First of all, we can’t shy away from speaking up and saying something. When we hear people dehumanize we need to be quick to respond: “They aren’t a predator or groomer or terrorist or bug or whatever. They are a person and worthy of humanity because of that.” I know you would literally say that but it’s an example. We can’t keep quiet with those we know. So many are caught in the wave of fascism and will only be sucked deeper into it if we allow them to morally disengage with dehumanization language.

Second of all, we have to call a spade a spade (without dehumanizing it in the promise). If someone is talking like a fascist or nazi, label it as such. If they are giving nazi salutes, it’s probably OK to call them a nazi (and maybe it’s OK to punch someone you see saluting like this in order to call a spade a spade). The challenge is doing this in way that recognizes they are still a human too.

Third, we have to get comfortable with public shame rather than public violence. Shame exposes actions for what they are in a way that encourages self and communal accountability. I talk about this in more detail here particularly where The Sermon on the Mount is concerned. It can be an incredible tool of nonviolent resistance that flips the tables, so to speak, without dehumanizing the guilting party because it exposes the truth of the matter.

I firmly believe that as we fight for something better, it needs to be done in a way that keeps us from becoming the thing we hate. There is no need to dehumanize with language comparing people to maggots or similar when we can speak truth.