Kristina Lindquist: There is no language for what avhumaniseringen of the migrants do with us

”most of us are also already nazis.”

the Spouses Pinnebergs in Hans Falladas classic 1932 novel, discussing the brutalisation that seems inevitable in a Berlin plagued by hyperinflation and unemployment. Neither Fallada or Pinnebergs have any financials for the rest of the story, but it has the contemporary reader. And, it should theoretically be our advantage vis-à-vis the real people who have gone before us – that we, with the help of them can read the signs in our own time?

But in the current political landscape it has become important for some factions to make each parallel to the present time, irrelevant and even offensive. The question, of course, applies ”whether or not The sweden democrats, who 30 years ago founded by, among others, nazistveteraner, fascists and open racists, to be röststöd for a Swedish government” (Peter Wolodarski, DN 17/3). No one believes that we are on the threshold of the 30s. But, it does mean that the story does not have anything to tell us about today's right-wing success?

the handy book of ”Fascist methods” (Daedalus), which has just been published in English. Jason Stanley, professor of philosophy at Yale, discusses how a normalization of the fascist ideology can last at the same time as the concept of ”fascism” retains its force. In this way perceived the epithet ”fascist” by definition, as an over-reaction, even in a society that is developing in such a direction. ”The accusation of fascism will always appear extreme; normalization means that the limit for a correct use of ”extreme” terminology all the time to move on,” writes Stanley.

What is needed, he says, is rather a greater understanding of fascism as a set of methods. Among these lifts Stanley, among other things, a nationalist focus on a mythical past and a ”fancier historic uniformity” that is said to live on in the small-town intimacy and the rural traditions, propaganda and conspiracy theories, forces, an obsession for law and order, and an emphasis on the traditional family. And, of course, To dehumanize segments of the population.

It should be obvious that there are several political actors of right now get inspired by the elements of this methodological toolbox. And maybe it is actually more important to learn to recognize these elements for what they are, rather than to drag perfunctory parallels to the historical abysses. Antifascismen should not be reduced to avoid a potential disaster somewhere up ahead?

It is the lack of a language to describe what avhumanisering do with, for example, migrants in an ongoing normality. No, Sweden is hardly on the way to becoming a fascist dictatorship – but what kind of normalcy, some of the groups to get accustomed to? What are people already accustomed to?

In the case of SD be the normalization of the party's ideas to mean that they probably are not so extreme in all cases – despite the fact that there are others who approached them and not vice versa. That when the Christian democratic youth league a couple of weeks ago published an election poster with the message ”Sweden should not have to suffer because other countries can't protect their borders” against an image of young refugees rescued from the Mediterranean sea. No faces, no names, just a random group of dark-skinned people who get to illustrate the concept of ”cause suffering”. ”Bildsättningen was simply wrong and for that we apologize”, pudlade KDU quickly. It was the picture that ”went wrong”, not the idea that migrants ' mere existence is a suffering for Sweden.

people as a burden and a threat, is without a doubt a fascist urmetod – and the end result, we feel well. But perhaps we would more often ask the question about what these methods are doing with us today.