Sliming the Messenger
Attacking motive over fact is Fascism 101. Here's how to counterattack.
Note: I’ve been writing a longer piece on the long and sordid history of corporate gun disinformation and I’ll share that shortly, but oh boy, that January 6th Commission. So in the meantime, here’s this.
“One of the greatest advantages of the totalitarian elites of the twenties and thirties was to turn any statement of fact into a question of motive.”
― Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism
Imagine a murder trial in which the prosecuting attorney sums up by showing a video of the defendant shooting and then standing over the victim’s outstretched corpse with smoking gun still in hand. Imagine that video was backed up with the testimony of several credible eyewitnesses. Then imagine that the defendant stands up and yells, “Don’t listen to this prosecutor! She’s just trying to send me to jail!!” Would that be a good defense, likely to result in an aquittal?
Of course not. Everyone knows that a prosecuting attorney wants to put the defendant in jail. That’s her job, and her desire to do it well doesn’t affect the credibility of the case she makes at all. Yet right wing goons continually use the fact that many Democrats would love to see Donald Trump and his enablers punished for their crimes, to deny that the incredibly strong case the Jan 6 commission is now making is credible. And liberals seldom know how to thwart that kind of attack because they don’t recognize the tactic right wingers are employing or know its ugly history. However, once you understand the motive attack as a go-to fascist strategy, you will see it everywhere and if you follow the directions below, you can stymie it.
As of this week, the fascists’ motive-based attack on the January 6th hearings is going strong. The official line coming from Fox News and other facist media sources is, “it’s a distraction.” Elise Stefanik said it; Laura Ingraham said it and of course, Tucker Carlson will keep repeating it long after every last Guernsey and Holstein is home, snuggled safe in their bovine bed. But liberals can only respond with, “no it’s not! It’s important because [ignored explanation goes here]” As Rocky the Flying Squirrel reminds us, that trick never works. It doesn’t work because LIBERALS’ MOTIVATIONS DON’T MATTER. Having what other people see as bad motivations doesn’t make your wrong. It just means that those people don’t like your priorities, which also doesn’t matter. The only things that really matter are the case you make and the evidence you bring to support it. Period.
How to Counter the Motive Attack
First, don’t explain or defend. If you take away no other message for dealing with Republican lies, please internalize that one. Defending and explaining are what victims do to placate abusers. Are we ready to stop being victims? Really? Good. So don’t explain or defend. Just don’t.
Here’s what to say instead:
“If your little fable about Democrats’ motives were true, could you explain how that changes the fact that [insert damning fact here]”
Here are some sample damning facts but feel free to choose your own.
“His own daughter, Ivanka admitted under oath that she didn’t believe the ‘stop the steal’ story?”
Trump’s own attorney general and a bunch of his cabinet repeatedly told him that there had been no election fraud?
For six hours Trump watched the riot on TV and refused to ask the rioters to stand down, talk to anyone in the military, or authorize the national guard?
Remember. Use specific, incidents based on verifiable facts.
and follow up with:
Explain that to me. Go ahead.
Bad faith right wingers are used to calling the shots, asking leading questions and then dismissing the answers. They like to feel large and in charge and by demanding you justify yourself to them. This approach denies them that strategy and they hate it. Naturally, they will respond by attacking you, liberals and the people who testified. Or they may try whataboutisms like “but what about Black Lives Matter?” Whatever they do, they won’t actually address the facts because the facts don’t support their fantasy world view. Don’t take the bait. Arguing against deflections is the number one liberal rhetorical fail. Instead, just say “thanks for the deflection. Now would you answer the question?” Then repeat what you just said exactly as you did the first time.
And of course, follow every question with
Explain that to me. Go ahead.
They hate that. But be careful. If you use this technique too much, some right winger might say mean things about your motives.
Then you will know you’re really doing it right.