Authoritarian Rhetorical Tricks Used to Prevent Voting

Let's take a closer look at the tricks supporting the "SAVE" Act

I try to use this space to show you how authoritarian rhetorical tricks are used to advance authoritarianism and destroy democracy. There’s probably no better example than a Republican bill called the SAVE Act.

This will be a short explainer, focused on the rhetorical tricks used in this one sentence from Speaker Johnson:

"We all know, intuitively, that a lot of illegals are voting in federal elections, but it's not been something that is easily provable," House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., said at a news conference introducing the SAVE Act last May,” wrote NPR in their report on the bill.

There are four authoritarian rhetorical tricks in this one sentence:

First, "we all know"--this is an ad populum (appeal to wisdom of the crowd) + positioning what we supposedly all know as "common sense." This positioning of the issue makes it an assumption that's very difficult to refute. If you try to refute it, then you lack common sense, you go against the crowd, you are on the side of the enemy.

Second, "intuitively"--Johnson tells us to trust our feelings over facts, while using rhetorical tricks to manipulate our feelings. You can’t argue against someone’s “intuition,” they believe without proof, therefore proof will not puncture their beliefs.

Third, "a lot of illegals"--reification (treating people as objects), hate-objects cannot be trusted, of course "they" are trying to vote, it's part of their "invasion" plot.

Fourth, "not...easily provable"--conspiracy language--conspiracy is "self-sealing," which means that evidence isn't allowed to count against the narrative. A conspiracy can never be proved or disproved. Conspiracy is immune to facts—any fact can be brushed aside and explained based upon the logic of the conspiracy: “they hide the facts,” “they made that up,” “they don’t want you to know this.”

When assumptions are irrefutable, when feelings are manipulated, when hate-objects are invoked, and when "self-sealing" conspiracy narratives are used, then you know that authoritarian manipulation is afoot.

And, of course, all of these authoritarian rhetorical tricks are in the service of disenfranchising Americans. The "SAVE" act is “eulogistic covering” for authoritarianism--a positive term that covers over an odious agenda. It’s a lot like the “literacy tests” that were designed so that no one could pass them. You can tell that the bill is authoritarian without even reading the bill, just by how Speaker Johnson argues for it (through manipulation). But, of course, read the bill.

These authoritarian rhetorical tricks are easy to see and breakdown if you know what to look for. If you don't, then they wash over you and you either believe (and support the bill) or you're confused about how to argue against it. Authoritarian rhetorical tricks are designed to make it hard to argue.

How to argue against this: name and call out the strategies. Because they’ve positioned anyone who argues against the bill as against “common sense” and “intuition” and used self-sealing conspiracy—facts will not defeat the bill. If you try to argue facts, they will invoke feelings and deny the facts. Instead, argue the arguments. Call out the authoritarian strategy. In so doing you’ll also prove the facts and reveal the authoritarian rhetorical tricks.