As experts have pointed out, Trump's idea of making the United States great again reflects a post-fascist approach (different from historical fascism but with a similar basis on similar racial hatred), seeking to purify the population and remove non-white immigrants.
The obsession about the construction or expansion of the wall on the southern border between the United States and Mexico; the policy of separation of families crossing the border; the overcrowding of migrants in cages in deplorable conditions; the pressure on Mexico to become a holding third country are pillars of Trump’s anti-immigrant policy.
Alongside these, his hostile speeches stigmatize migrants who go to the US for protection from war, misery and other difficult circumstances in their home country.
Jair Bolsonaro extravagantly vindicates the dictatorship in Brazil and has also revealed racist, misogynist and homophobic biases. Despite this, he managed to become President in January 2019, with support from the beef, bullet and bible sectors of the Brazilian congress.
These agrobusiness, evangelical groups, and lobbyists, for the relaxation in gun law, groups have a conservative agenda on social and economic issues, coinciding with the president's own agenda.
Bolsonaro’s policies towards indigenous communities particularly stands out. He attempted to modify the powers of the National Indian Foundation (FUNAI), which had responsibility for defining and demarcating indigenous territories. This is now done by the Ministry of Agriculture, a department of government that favours agrobusiness over the protection of ethnic groups and their environment.
This shows how the indifference towards ecological catastrophe particularly since the huge fires in the Amazon lands coincides with a failure to protect the indigenous people and their territories.
These governments show that democracy can be destroyed from within especially when there are sections of the population that support antidemocratic policies, as in the cases of Modi, Trump and Bolsonaro. Both precarity and aspiration have provided favourable to the hate speech they represent, including the idea of migrants as dangerous.
The consequences of the hate speech they endorse give rise directly to the tragedies that occurred in El Paso, for example, in August this year.
Therefore, ideas of white supremacism in the United States, of Hindu supremacism in India or the contempt of ethnic groups in Brazil when linked to the vision of an economy and a social welfare paradigm that, in theory, is violated with the arrival of certain groups allows leaders to rethink the notion of human rights and unfortunately results in accumulation of wealth in the most privileged groups.
Thus, right-wing government is not only a conservative critical vision of progressive agendas, but it also involves damaging the human rights of vulnerable groups and promoting social tension with open attempts to cancel any expression of solidarity and empathy.
Comments
We encourage anyone to comment, please consult the oD commenting guidelines if you have any questions.