From the Anti-Authoritarian Playbook;
-
From the Anti-Authoritarian Playbook;
“The targeting of trans people - and specifically trans youth and trans women in sports - is not a policy agenda. It is a strategic operation. Understanding it as policy produces the wrong response. Understanding it as strategy produces the right one.
Jason Stanley, in How Fascism Works, identifies the targeting of vulnerable minorities as a core mechanism of authoritarian consolidation. The function is not primarily to harm the targeted group, though that harm is real and intentional. The primary function is to test the solidarity of potential opposition coalitions, to find and exploit the fracture lines, and to establish a precedent: that some members of the coalition can be sacrificed when the political cost of defending them is judged too high.
Every successful authoritarian project has done this. The question it is always asking of the opposition is: is there anyone in your coalition you will abandon to protect the rest? Because if the answer is yes, we know exactly how to proceed. We find that person. We make defending them as costly as possible. And we watch the rest of the coalition either hold together or fracture. If they fracture, we learn where the next fracture line is, and we push there.
The targeting of trans people is not the end of this strategy. It is the test. And what the test is measuring, in real time, is whether LGBTQ organizations, progressive coalitions, and pro-democracy movements will sacrifice their most vulnerable members when the pressure is sufficient.
@Elodie_lyra this is an eye opening summary. I already knew parts of it but this fills the blanks for me. I now understand better why it's always perfectly harmless groups, which do no harm to none, who get singled out and target of hate campaigns.
-
From the Anti-Authoritarian Playbook;
“The targeting of trans people - and specifically trans youth and trans women in sports - is not a policy agenda. It is a strategic operation. Understanding it as policy produces the wrong response. Understanding it as strategy produces the right one.
Jason Stanley, in How Fascism Works, identifies the targeting of vulnerable minorities as a core mechanism of authoritarian consolidation. The function is not primarily to harm the targeted group, though that harm is real and intentional. The primary function is to test the solidarity of potential opposition coalitions, to find and exploit the fracture lines, and to establish a precedent: that some members of the coalition can be sacrificed when the political cost of defending them is judged too high.
Every successful authoritarian project has done this. The question it is always asking of the opposition is: is there anyone in your coalition you will abandon to protect the rest? Because if the answer is yes, we know exactly how to proceed. We find that person. We make defending them as costly as possible. And we watch the rest of the coalition either hold together or fracture. If they fracture, we learn where the next fracture line is, and we push there.
The targeting of trans people is not the end of this strategy. It is the test. And what the test is measuring, in real time, is whether LGBTQ organizations, progressive coalitions, and pro-democracy movements will sacrifice their most vulnerable members when the pressure is sufficient.
@Elodie_lyra If we aren’t all safe and free, none of us are.
-
From the Anti-Authoritarian Playbook;
“The targeting of trans people - and specifically trans youth and trans women in sports - is not a policy agenda. It is a strategic operation. Understanding it as policy produces the wrong response. Understanding it as strategy produces the right one.
Jason Stanley, in How Fascism Works, identifies the targeting of vulnerable minorities as a core mechanism of authoritarian consolidation. The function is not primarily to harm the targeted group, though that harm is real and intentional. The primary function is to test the solidarity of potential opposition coalitions, to find and exploit the fracture lines, and to establish a precedent: that some members of the coalition can be sacrificed when the political cost of defending them is judged too high.
Every successful authoritarian project has done this. The question it is always asking of the opposition is: is there anyone in your coalition you will abandon to protect the rest? Because if the answer is yes, we know exactly how to proceed. We find that person. We make defending them as costly as possible. And we watch the rest of the coalition either hold together or fracture. If they fracture, we learn where the next fracture line is, and we push there.
The targeting of trans people is not the end of this strategy. It is the test. And what the test is measuring, in real time, is whether LGBTQ organizations, progressive coalitions, and pro-democracy movements will sacrifice their most vulnerable members when the pressure is sufficient.
@Elodie_lyra This is also why TERFs and 4channers have been pushing the “queer is a slur” idea until young or inexperienced people start repeating it. It pairs with shit like “LGB Drop the T” by splintering communities into individuals who have nowhere near the same power as the original communities did in the selfish but vain belief that they deserve acceptance before others do.
This is why I firmly identify as queer, because umbrella terms cover everyone in community.
-
@Elodie_lyra If we aren’t all safe and free, none of us are.
This. ^
-
From the Anti-Authoritarian Playbook;
“The targeting of trans people - and specifically trans youth and trans women in sports - is not a policy agenda. It is a strategic operation. Understanding it as policy produces the wrong response. Understanding it as strategy produces the right one.
Jason Stanley, in How Fascism Works, identifies the targeting of vulnerable minorities as a core mechanism of authoritarian consolidation. The function is not primarily to harm the targeted group, though that harm is real and intentional. The primary function is to test the solidarity of potential opposition coalitions, to find and exploit the fracture lines, and to establish a precedent: that some members of the coalition can be sacrificed when the political cost of defending them is judged too high.
Every successful authoritarian project has done this. The question it is always asking of the opposition is: is there anyone in your coalition you will abandon to protect the rest? Because if the answer is yes, we know exactly how to proceed. We find that person. We make defending them as costly as possible. And we watch the rest of the coalition either hold together or fracture. If they fracture, we learn where the next fracture line is, and we push there.
The targeting of trans people is not the end of this strategy. It is the test. And what the test is measuring, in real time, is whether LGBTQ organizations, progressive coalitions, and pro-democracy movements will sacrifice their most vulnerable members when the pressure is sufficient.
@Elodie_lyra such an important note and one I see missing in many organizing spaces! Thanks for sharing
We go together or we all fall.
-
From the Anti-Authoritarian Playbook;
“The targeting of trans people - and specifically trans youth and trans women in sports - is not a policy agenda. It is a strategic operation. Understanding it as policy produces the wrong response. Understanding it as strategy produces the right one.
Jason Stanley, in How Fascism Works, identifies the targeting of vulnerable minorities as a core mechanism of authoritarian consolidation. The function is not primarily to harm the targeted group, though that harm is real and intentional. The primary function is to test the solidarity of potential opposition coalitions, to find and exploit the fracture lines, and to establish a precedent: that some members of the coalition can be sacrificed when the political cost of defending them is judged too high.
Every successful authoritarian project has done this. The question it is always asking of the opposition is: is there anyone in your coalition you will abandon to protect the rest? Because if the answer is yes, we know exactly how to proceed. We find that person. We make defending them as costly as possible. And we watch the rest of the coalition either hold together or fracture. If they fracture, we learn where the next fracture line is, and we push there.
The targeting of trans people is not the end of this strategy. It is the test. And what the test is measuring, in real time, is whether LGBTQ organizations, progressive coalitions, and pro-democracy movements will sacrifice their most vulnerable members when the pressure is sufficient.
@Elodie_lyra yup. Saw this when people I know who were formerly staunchly liberal started sliding into radicalization when confronted with anti-trans content. They don’t call them wedge issues because they love salad.
-
From the Anti-Authoritarian Playbook;
“The targeting of trans people - and specifically trans youth and trans women in sports - is not a policy agenda. It is a strategic operation. Understanding it as policy produces the wrong response. Understanding it as strategy produces the right one.
Jason Stanley, in How Fascism Works, identifies the targeting of vulnerable minorities as a core mechanism of authoritarian consolidation. The function is not primarily to harm the targeted group, though that harm is real and intentional. The primary function is to test the solidarity of potential opposition coalitions, to find and exploit the fracture lines, and to establish a precedent: that some members of the coalition can be sacrificed when the political cost of defending them is judged too high.
Every successful authoritarian project has done this. The question it is always asking of the opposition is: is there anyone in your coalition you will abandon to protect the rest? Because if the answer is yes, we know exactly how to proceed. We find that person. We make defending them as costly as possible. And we watch the rest of the coalition either hold together or fracture. If they fracture, we learn where the next fracture line is, and we push there.
The targeting of trans people is not the end of this strategy. It is the test. And what the test is measuring, in real time, is whether LGBTQ organizations, progressive coalitions, and pro-democracy movements will sacrifice their most vulnerable members when the pressure is sufficient.
@Elodie_lyra Yes, "great criminals" are indeed cautious like that. And relentless.
If you take that into account, and see that the veil of dumb is there to soften the perception of the blows, then the evil really starts to shine through.
-
From the Anti-Authoritarian Playbook;
“The targeting of trans people - and specifically trans youth and trans women in sports - is not a policy agenda. It is a strategic operation. Understanding it as policy produces the wrong response. Understanding it as strategy produces the right one.
Jason Stanley, in How Fascism Works, identifies the targeting of vulnerable minorities as a core mechanism of authoritarian consolidation. The function is not primarily to harm the targeted group, though that harm is real and intentional. The primary function is to test the solidarity of potential opposition coalitions, to find and exploit the fracture lines, and to establish a precedent: that some members of the coalition can be sacrificed when the political cost of defending them is judged too high.
Every successful authoritarian project has done this. The question it is always asking of the opposition is: is there anyone in your coalition you will abandon to protect the rest? Because if the answer is yes, we know exactly how to proceed. We find that person. We make defending them as costly as possible. And we watch the rest of the coalition either hold together or fracture. If they fracture, we learn where the next fracture line is, and we push there.
The targeting of trans people is not the end of this strategy. It is the test. And what the test is measuring, in real time, is whether LGBTQ organizations, progressive coalitions, and pro-democracy movements will sacrifice their most vulnerable members when the pressure is sufficient.
@Elodie_lyra@lgbtqia.space It's classic divide and conquer. The same "technique" is used in both the macro and micro, and so easy to see and understand if you have knowledge and experience with domestic abuse.
It's very particular human behavioral characteristics of a certain mindset that are imposed outwardly onto others and the environment. Often in domestic situations being unconscious, rather than conspired, but in both cases still mostly derived from insecurities and inadequacies, with the need to control others and the environment.
○ Step one is distraction - shifting the focus of the cause of a problem away from the perpetrator / abuser to somewhere else.
○ Step two is division - turning groups against each other, or an individual against friends / family.
○ Step three is isolation - keeping groups or individuals ignorant, and controlling the information they receive in order to shape their belief system - making them more malleable and controllable.
That testing (mentioned in the original post) which is a part of this process, is the same as how a domestic abuser constantly tests their partner, and which is also a part of classic conditioning - which is why the testing is continuous and punishable, until the subject(s) automatically respond in the desired manner, where they are then rewarded.
The bottom line though is that humans are just shit. -
E em0nm4stodon@infosec.exchange shared this topic
-
From the Anti-Authoritarian Playbook;
“The targeting of trans people - and specifically trans youth and trans women in sports - is not a policy agenda. It is a strategic operation. Understanding it as policy produces the wrong response. Understanding it as strategy produces the right one.
Jason Stanley, in How Fascism Works, identifies the targeting of vulnerable minorities as a core mechanism of authoritarian consolidation. The function is not primarily to harm the targeted group, though that harm is real and intentional. The primary function is to test the solidarity of potential opposition coalitions, to find and exploit the fracture lines, and to establish a precedent: that some members of the coalition can be sacrificed when the political cost of defending them is judged too high.
Every successful authoritarian project has done this. The question it is always asking of the opposition is: is there anyone in your coalition you will abandon to protect the rest? Because if the answer is yes, we know exactly how to proceed. We find that person. We make defending them as costly as possible. And we watch the rest of the coalition either hold together or fracture. If they fracture, we learn where the next fracture line is, and we push there.
The targeting of trans people is not the end of this strategy. It is the test. And what the test is measuring, in real time, is whether LGBTQ organizations, progressive coalitions, and pro-democracy movements will sacrifice their most vulnerable members when the pressure is sufficient.
Trans people are the canary in the coalmine. If fascists are successful in convincing the rest of society that such a small sacrifice will protect them, all that will happen afterwards is the sacrifices asked for will get bigger.
We 21st century people think we are so sophisticated. But really we are still tossing people into volcanoes to placate the gods, like cartoon savages.
It's beyond disgusting.
-
From the Anti-Authoritarian Playbook;
“The targeting of trans people - and specifically trans youth and trans women in sports - is not a policy agenda. It is a strategic operation. Understanding it as policy produces the wrong response. Understanding it as strategy produces the right one.
Jason Stanley, in How Fascism Works, identifies the targeting of vulnerable minorities as a core mechanism of authoritarian consolidation. The function is not primarily to harm the targeted group, though that harm is real and intentional. The primary function is to test the solidarity of potential opposition coalitions, to find and exploit the fracture lines, and to establish a precedent: that some members of the coalition can be sacrificed when the political cost of defending them is judged too high.
Every successful authoritarian project has done this. The question it is always asking of the opposition is: is there anyone in your coalition you will abandon to protect the rest? Because if the answer is yes, we know exactly how to proceed. We find that person. We make defending them as costly as possible. And we watch the rest of the coalition either hold together or fracture. If they fracture, we learn where the next fracture line is, and we push there.
The targeting of trans people is not the end of this strategy. It is the test. And what the test is measuring, in real time, is whether LGBTQ organizations, progressive coalitions, and pro-democracy movements will sacrifice their most vulnerable members when the pressure is sufficient.
@Elodie_lyra Yes.
Also, targeting trans women reinforces a certain image for women to the point where even cis women are policed if they don't seem female enough. Which will probably hit Black women hardest. Handmaid's Tale like uniformity and lack of reproductive freedom for cis women is possibly the last logical step in this fascist progression. With an extra of good old segregation. -
@Elodie_lyra this is an eye opening summary. I already knew parts of it but this fills the blanks for me. I now understand better why it's always perfectly harmless groups, which do no harm to none, who get singled out and target of hate campaigns.
We see this same playbook happening in real time as Leonard Leo funds attacks on Somali immigrant communities in Maine.
Out of the blue, suddenly a small visible yet vulnerable group, it gets targeted by bigoted propaganda.
https://theintercept.com/2026/04/08/maine-wire-conservative-news-leonard-leo-somalis/
-
@Elodie_lyra@lgbtqia.space It's classic divide and conquer. The same "technique" is used in both the macro and micro, and so easy to see and understand if you have knowledge and experience with domestic abuse.
It's very particular human behavioral characteristics of a certain mindset that are imposed outwardly onto others and the environment. Often in domestic situations being unconscious, rather than conspired, but in both cases still mostly derived from insecurities and inadequacies, with the need to control others and the environment.
○ Step one is distraction - shifting the focus of the cause of a problem away from the perpetrator / abuser to somewhere else.
○ Step two is division - turning groups against each other, or an individual against friends / family.
○ Step three is isolation - keeping groups or individuals ignorant, and controlling the information they receive in order to shape their belief system - making them more malleable and controllable.
That testing (mentioned in the original post) which is a part of this process, is the same as how a domestic abuser constantly tests their partner, and which is also a part of classic conditioning - which is why the testing is continuous and punishable, until the subject(s) automatically respond in the desired manner, where they are then rewarded.
The bottom line though is that humans are just shit.https://dvcc.delaware.gov/background-purpose/dynamics-domestic-abuse/
https://safelives.org.uk/about-domestic-abuse/what-is-domestic-abuse/psychological-abuse/
There's a lot of overlap between domestic abuse techniques and the Leonard Leo- style "divide & conquer" political playbook for fascism.
Both are motivated by psychological dysfunction & moral rot to exploit & control people.
-
From the Anti-Authoritarian Playbook;
“The targeting of trans people - and specifically trans youth and trans women in sports - is not a policy agenda. It is a strategic operation. Understanding it as policy produces the wrong response. Understanding it as strategy produces the right one.
Jason Stanley, in How Fascism Works, identifies the targeting of vulnerable minorities as a core mechanism of authoritarian consolidation. The function is not primarily to harm the targeted group, though that harm is real and intentional. The primary function is to test the solidarity of potential opposition coalitions, to find and exploit the fracture lines, and to establish a precedent: that some members of the coalition can be sacrificed when the political cost of defending them is judged too high.
Every successful authoritarian project has done this. The question it is always asking of the opposition is: is there anyone in your coalition you will abandon to protect the rest? Because if the answer is yes, we know exactly how to proceed. We find that person. We make defending them as costly as possible. And we watch the rest of the coalition either hold together or fracture. If they fracture, we learn where the next fracture line is, and we push there.
The targeting of trans people is not the end of this strategy. It is the test. And what the test is measuring, in real time, is whether LGBTQ organizations, progressive coalitions, and pro-democracy movements will sacrifice their most vulnerable members when the pressure is sufficient.
@Elodie_lyra Thank you for this post! However, could I ask that you add content warnings to it? That'd be very nice of you
-
R relay@relay.mycrowd.ca shared this topic
