Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Demonization

Demonization is the rhetorical and psychological tactic of portraying individuals, groups, or entities as embodiments of pure evil, demonic forces, or moral abominations, thereby stripping them of humanity and rationalizing hostility, exclusion, or violence toward them.^[1]^[2] This process extends beyond mere dehumanization by invoking supernatural or absolute moral corruption, often amplifying perceived threats to foster in-group solidarity and out-group aggression.^[3]^[4] Psychologically, demonization arises from cognitive biases that simplify complex social dynamics into binary moral absolutes, enabling moral disengagement and heightened punitive responses; empirical studies show it intensifies when observers perceive offenders as powerful, leading to greater vilification and demands for retribution.^[5]^[6] In societal contexts, it erodes empathy, entrenches divisions, and correlates with escalated conflict, as seen in propaganda campaigns where targeted groups are framed as existential evils to justify extreme measures.^[7]^[8] Historically, it has fueled genocides and wars by transforming adversaries into irredeemable monsters, while in contemporary politics and media, it manifests in polarized discourses that prioritize emotional mobilization over evidence-based critique, often amplifying biases in institutional narratives.^[9]^[10] Despite its utility in rallying support, demonization hinders reconciliation and truth-seeking by foreclosing nuanced understanding of causal motivations.^[11]

Definition and Conceptual Framework

Etymology and Core Definition

The term demonization derives from the English verb to demonize, attested as early as 1743, formed by adding the suffix -ize to demon, which itself originates from the Late Latin daemon and the ancient Greek δαίμων (daimōn), meaning a supernatural spirit, divine power, or intermediary entity between gods and mortals.^[12] In classical Greek contexts, a daimōn carried neutral or even positive connotations, often denoting a personal attendant spirit or fate-influencing force, as seen in works by Hesiod and Plato, rather than an inherently malevolent being. This evolved through Hellenistic and Roman adaptations, where Latin daemōn retained similar ambiguity, but by late antiquity, Christian reinterpretations increasingly associated such entities with adversarial supernatural forces, solidifying the term's negative valence in Western languages. At its core, demonization constitutes the deliberate attribution of inherently evil, malevolent, or subhuman qualities—evoking demonic archetypes—to individuals, groups, ideas, or institutions, framing them as existential threats that transcend rational critique and demand unqualified opposition or eradication.^[13] This process operates on causal principles of threat amplification, wherein perceived rivals are not merely opposed but metaphysically vilified to mobilize instinctive aversion, drawing on innate human mechanisms for identifying and neutralizing dangers akin to predatory or corrupting forces.^[2] Unlike simple criticism, it systematically invokes moral absolutism, positing the target as an embodiment of primordial evil, which historically served to consolidate in-group solidarity by externalizing discord onto otherworldly scapegoats.^[14] The application of demonization has shifted from predominantly literal religious usages—where polytheistic deities or spirits were recast as demons to assert doctrinal supremacy, as in early Christian apologetics around the 4th century CE—to figurative secular extensions post-Enlightenment, wherein "demonic" labels denote ideological corruption or societal pathology without explicit supernatural claims.^[14] This evolution reflects broader cultural desacralization, yet retains the underlying logic of hyperbolic threat perception, adapting theological rhetoric to rationalist frameworks for justifying exclusionary policies or conflicts.

Distinctions from Vilification, Dehumanization, and Propaganda

Demonization differs from vilification in its invocation of supernatural or metaphysical evil, portraying targets not merely as morally reprehensible individuals or groups but as embodiments of cosmic malevolence akin to demonic entities, which intensifies the rhetorical framing beyond standard personal or ethical condemnation.^[1] Vilification, by contrast, encompasses broader derogatory attacks on character or actions without necessitating this attribution of otherworldly agency, as evidenced in rhetorical analyses distinguishing general defamation from demonizing strategies that legitimize existential threats. In relation to dehumanization, demonization operates through an opposite mechanism: while dehumanization denies human attributes such as rationality, empathy, or moral agency to justify reduced concern or mistreatment, demonization ascribes exaggerated, supra-human capacities for deliberate evil, framing targets as active agents of chaos warranting moralized countermeasures including violence.^[3] Psychological research positions demonization as a pathway to moral certainty in intergroup conflict, distinct from dehumanization's removal of ethical barriers, by providing a mandate for retributive aggression against perceived incarnations of pure evil.^[15] Propaganda, as a systematic effort to influence opinions through selective or biased information, subsumes demonization as one tactic among many, but the latter uniquely relies on absolutist moral dichotomies that render targets irredeemable, empirically correlating with elevated punitive responses and hostility in experimental settings over generic persuasive appeals.^[16] Studies on belief in pure evil demonstrate that demonizing rhetoric heightens aggression via retribution motives, setting it apart from propaganda's diverse tools like exaggeration or omission, which lack this specific causal link to perceived ontological threats.^[17]

Religious and Theological Origins

Reinterpretation of Deities in Monotheism

In ancient Israelite theology, foreign deities worshipped by neighboring peoples were reframed as demons rather than legitimate divine beings, as evidenced in Deuteronomy 32:17, which states that sacrifices were offered "to demons who were no gods" instead of to Yahweh. This interpretation extended to practices like child sacrifice, described in Psalm 106:37 as offerings "to the demons," portraying polytheistic rituals as transactions with malevolent entities that demanded blood in exchange for illusory power.^[18] Such reframing established a causal framework wherein deviation from monotheism invoked supernatural threats, reinforcing exclusive allegiance to one God by equating alternatives with existential spiritual peril. Early Christianity inherited and amplified this approach, applying it to Greco-Roman pagan gods; 1 Corinthians 10:20 explicitly declares that "what pagans sacrifice they offer to demons and not to God," advising believers to avoid any fellowship with such entities.^[19] Following the Edict of Milan in 313 CE, which legalized Christianity under Constantine, this doctrinal stance facilitated the religion's consolidation within the Roman Empire by justifying the suppression of polytheistic cults as combats against demonic deception.^[20] The Theodosian decrees of 391–392 CE banned pagan sacrifices and temple access, empirically linking demonization to iconoclastic actions, such as the 391 CE destruction of the Serapeum in Alexandria, where the temple of Serapis—a syncretic god blending Greek and Egyptian elements—was razed by Christians under Bishop Theophilus, with its statue dismantled and site repurposed.^[21] This process subordinated polytheistic traditions to monotheistic causality, where deities like Zeus or Serapis were recast as fallen angels or disguises for adversarial forces, aiding imperial religious unity without reliance on mere cultural imposition. In Islam, emerging in the 7th century CE, pre-Islamic Arabian deities such as those represented by the 360 idols in the Kaaba were similarly demonized as false intermediaries or jinn manipulated by Satan (Iblis), with Quran 6:100 condemning the attribution of partners to Allah via jinn worship, a holdover from pagan practices. Muhammad's conquest of Mecca in 630 CE culminated in the systematic smashing of these idols, reframing them not as gods but as powerless fabrications ensnared by demonic influence, thereby purging polytheistic elements to enforce tawhid (strict monotheism). This theological maneuver causally positioned Islam as a corrective revelation against jinn-deceived idolatry, empirically evidenced by the rapid unification of Arabian tribes under a singular faith that vilified prior spiritual hierarchies as threats to divine sovereignty.

Demonization in Scriptural and Doctrinal Contexts

In the Hebrew Bible, the figure of "the satan" emerges in the Book of Job, dated by scholars to approximately the 6th century BCE, as a member of the divine council acting as an adversary or prosecutor who tests human faithfulness under God's authority, as seen in Job 1–2 where he inflicts suffering on Job to probe the sincerity of his devotion.^[22]^[23] This portrayal establishes an early scriptural framework for oppositional spiritual entities within a monotheistic context, distinct from later adversarial roles. The New Testament expands this through Gospel accounts of exorcisms, where demons are depicted as causing physical illnesses, seizures, and behavioral disturbances, such as the Gerasene demoniac in Mark 5:1–20 or the epileptic boy in Mark 9:14–29, with Jesus expelling them to restore health, framing demonic agency as a direct antagonist to human well-being.^[24]^[25] Christian doctrinal elaboration in patristic writings systematized these scriptural elements, portraying demons as fallen angels whose rebellion against God—led by Satan—resulted in their exclusion from divine favor and assignment to promote human sin. Augustine of Hippo, in The City of God (Books VIII–X, completed 426 CE), describes demons as rational but prideful spirits who envy humanity's potential for salvation, deceiving through false oracles, temptations, and illusions to undermine moral order, thereby influencing evil acts without overriding free will.^[26] This framework, drawing on biblical precedents like Isaiah 14:12–15 and Revelation 12:7–9, positioned demons as causal agents in spiritual warfare internal to theology, emphasizing their role in explaining pervasive human vice. In Islamic scripture, the Quran presents jinn as pre-Adamitic beings created from smokeless fire (Quran 55:15), capable of free will and thus varying in disposition, with Surah Al-Jinn (72, revealed circa 615–620 CE in Mecca) recounting jinn who accept or reject monotheism after hearing the Quran, including disobedient ones who mislead humans.^[27] Malevolent jinn are doctrinally linked to pre-Islamic idolatry, possessing idols or whispering suggestions to foster polytheistic worship, as elaborated in tafsir traditions attributing societal errors to their influence, contrasting with submissive jinn who affirm Allah's sovereignty (Quran 72:1–19).^[28] This scriptural depiction underscores jinn as potential adversaries in doctrinal explanations of moral deviation, without equating them uniformly to demons in Abrahamic counterparts.

Role in Religious Conflicts and Persecutions

In religious conflicts, demonization served as a theological justification for portraying adversaries as extensions of cosmic evil, thereby transforming doctrinal disputes into existential battles against Satan and his minions. This framing mobilized believers by equating opposition with infernal allegiance, as seen in the Crusades (1095–1291), where crusade preachers depicted Muslims as "servants of Satan" and unclean agents of demonic forces, drawing on biblical motifs of spiritual warfare to rally European armies under papal authority.^[29] Pope Urban II's summons at the Council of Clermont in 1095 invoked such rhetoric to frame the liberation of Jerusalem from "infidels" as a divine mandate against hellish pollution, contributing to the recruitment of tens of thousands for expeditions that unified fractured Christendom against a supernaturalized foe.^[29] The Albigensian Crusade (1209–1229), launched by Pope Innocent III against the Cathar heretics in southern France, exemplified demonization's role in internal persecutions, with Cathars—dualists who rejected Catholic sacraments as satanic—branded as devil-worshippers worse than Muslim Saracens, prompting a papal bull that authorized crusading indulgences for their extermination.^[30] This portrayal, rooted in earlier inquisitorial accusations of Luciferian rites, facilitated the movement's suppression, reducing Cathar strongholds from widespread influence to scattered remnants by the mid-13th century through massacres like the Béziers slaughter of 20,000 in 1209. Medieval Inquisitions further entrenched this by systematically alleging pacts with demons among heretics like Waldensians and Templars, enabling legal mechanisms that, while targeting genuine challenges to ecclesiastical unity, amplified accusations into tools for consolidating papal power.^[31] Demonization's destructive excesses peaked in the European witch persecutions of the 15th to 17th centuries, where societal misfortunes were causally attributed to individuals in demonic compacts, spurring trials across the Holy Roman Empire, France, and Scotland. Texts like the Malleus Maleficarum (1487) codified witches as Satan's emissaries, correlating with peak executions of 40,000 to 60,000, predominantly women, amid inquisitorial and secular courts.^[32] While this rhetoric effectively quelled perceived supernatural threats and reinforced communal orthodoxy—evident in the decline of organized heresy post-Inquisition—it engendered indiscriminate violence, as in the Salem trials of 1692 where 20 were executed amid Puritan fears of diabolical infiltration, underscoring how demonization, though rooted in doctrinal vigilance against real heterodoxies, devolved into paranoia-driven purges beyond empirical justification.^[32]

Historical Development

Ancient and Pre-Modern Instances

In Mesopotamian conquest narratives dating to the second millennium BCE, royal inscriptions frequently portrayed rival city-states' rulers and patron deities as agents of disorder or cosmic rebellion, subordinating or vilifying them to affirm the victor's divine mandate. Assyrian texts from the Neo-Assyrian period (circa 911–612 BCE), building on earlier traditions, depicted enemies like the Elamites or Babylonians as impious upstarts forsaken by their gods, with defeated deities sometimes "captured" or recast as inferior, effectively demonizing foreign pantheons to justify annexation and ritual humiliation.^[33] This rhetorical strategy emphasized the enemy's alignment with chaotic forces, as seen in portrayals of adversaries embodying peripheral threats to be ritually dismantled. During the Punic Wars (264–146 BCE), Roman accounts systematically demonized Carthaginians as devotees of bloodthirsty, demonic cults, particularly highlighting tophet sacrifices of infants to Baal-Hammon and Tanit during sieges and defeats, such as the reported 300 noble children immolated after the Battle of Himera in 480 BCE (recounted in later histories).^[34] Sources like Diodorus Siculus described these rites as frenzied appeals to cruel underworld powers, contrasting them with Roman pietas to portray Carthage as a barbaric, subhuman foe warranting eradication; archaeological findings of over 20,000 urns containing infant remains in Carthaginian tophets corroborate the practice, though Romans likely exaggerated its scale for propagandistic effect to rally support for the Third Punic War's genocidal climax in 146 BCE.^[34] In medieval feudal Europe, demonization targeted internal religious dissenters, as exemplified by the Catholic Church's campaign against the Cathars during the Albigensian Crusade (1209–1229 CE), where dualist doctrines positing the material world as the devil's creation were reframed as explicit devil-worship and satanic perversion.^[35] Papal legates and preachers, including those under Innocent III, depicted Cathar perfecti as infernal agents corrupting Christendom through blasphemy and moral inversion, inciting mass violence such as the Béziers sack in 1209, where 15,000–20,000 were slain amid cries equating heretics with beasts of hell; this rhetoric, rooted in earlier anti-heretical councils like that at Tours in 1163, mobilized northern French barons by casting the crusade as a holy purge of diabolical spawn, resulting in the near-eradication of Cathar communities by 1244.^[35]^[29]

Transition to Secular Contexts Post-Enlightenment

Enlightenment thinkers, while dismantling religious frameworks of demonology as superstitious folly, repurposed demonizing rhetoric to target ecclesiastical institutions and fanaticism as barriers to reason. Voltaire, for instance, in his Philosophical Dictionary (1764), lambasted beliefs in demons, witches, and possessions as clerical inventions designed to exploit credulity, arguing they stemmed from ignorance rather than divine reality.^[36] Yet, this rational critique did not eradicate the impulse; Voltaire inverted it against the Catholic Church, depicting priests and bishops as tyrannical manipulators who perpetuated dogma to maintain power, equating religious authority with despotism that stifled human liberty.^[37] Such portrayals framed the Church not as a supernatural evil but as a systemic "infâme" (infamous thing)—a secular analogue to demonic forces—evident in Voltaire's campaigns like Écrasez l'infâme, which mobilized public sentiment against perceived religious oppression by 1770s.^[36] This rhetorical continuity manifested empirically in the French Revolution of 1789, where demonization secularized into assaults on "enemies of humanity" devoid of theological trappings. Propaganda from Jacobin clubs and revolutionary presses recast aristocrats and refractory clergy as bloodthirsty monsters or beasts preying on the Republic, as seen in caricatures depicting nobles as vampires draining the populace's vitality.^[38] During the Vendée civil war (1793–1796), Republican forces amplified this by labeling Catholic royalists as fanatical hordes embodying counter-revolutionary barbarism, justifying mass executions under the Law of Suspects (September 1793), which targeted over 300,000 suspects as threats to national sovereignty.^[38] Historians note this shift replaced scriptural damnation with Enlightenment-derived categories of moral corruption, yet preserved the causal mechanism: portraying opponents as irredeemable to rationalize violence, with terror tribunals executing approximately 17,000 by guillotine alone between 1793 and 1794.^[14] By the 19th century, nationalism adapted these patterns to frame internal revolutionaries and external "others" as existential perils to enlightened progress, sustaining demonization amid secular ideologies. In post-Napoleonic Europe, conservative regimes demonized liberal insurgents during the 1848 revolutions as anarchic destroyers of order, with Prussian and Austrian authorities portraying them as morally degenerate forces akin to societal cancers.^[14] Colonial enterprises echoed this, as European powers justified expansion by depicting indigenous resistance—such as in Britain's Opium Wars (1839–1842)—as manifestations of despotic irrationality, rendering Qing officials and subjects as obstacles to civilizational advancement rather than equals in rational discourse.^[14] This persistence underscores a worldview-independent utility: demonization mobilized cohesion and legitimized coercion, transitioning from theological to ideological grounds without altering its function in power struggles.^[14]

Psychological and Cognitive Mechanisms

Individual-Level Processes

Cognitive mechanisms at the individual level contribute to demonization by enabling the perception of others as inherently malevolent entities, often through simplified attributions that bypass nuanced situational analysis. The ultimate attribution error, an extension of the fundamental attribution bias to intergroup contexts, leads individuals to interpret negative actions by out-group members as reflective of deep-seated evil traits rather than environmental pressures, thereby entrenching demonizing views.^[17] This error, first articulated by Pettigrew in 1979 based on experimental evidence from prejudice studies, manifests when personal resources for balanced judgment are limited, such as under cognitive load, prompting reliance on stereotypes of pure evil to categorize ambiguous behaviors.^[39] Moral disengagement processes further facilitate individual demonization by cognitively restructuring harmful intentions toward targets, allowing perpetrators to evade self-condemnation. Albert Bandura's framework, developed through longitudinal studies on aggression and ethical decision-making from the 1970s onward, identifies mechanisms like advantageous comparison and displacement of responsibility, but notably includes demonization as a variant of dehumanization where targets are recast as moral abominations warranting mistreatment.^[40] Empirical validation in lab simulations of conflict, such as those examining ethical lapses, demonstrates that invoking demonizing labels reduces empathic responses and justifies aggression, with participants showing diminished guilt when out-group actors are framed as villainous.^[41] This disengagement operates via selective activation, where situational cues trigger reconstrual of the target's agency as irredeemably corrupt. These processes are compounded by categorizational judgments of severe moral failure, where individuals prototype "evil" based on cultural schemas, leading to rapid demonization of perceived transgressors. Neuroimaging evidence from threat perception paradigms reveals heightened amygdala activity during exposure to stimuli evoking moral outrage or framed enmity, mirroring responses to demonized figures as existential dangers, though direct causal links to demonizing cognition remain correlational.^[42] Overall, such individual biases provide micro-level foundations for broader demonization, empirically linked to reduced interpersonal tolerance in controlled psychological experiments.^[11]

Group Dynamics and In-Group/Out-Group Bias

Group dynamics in demonization involve the escalation of intergroup biases, where portraying out-groups as inherently malevolent reinforces in-group solidarity and justifies exclusionary behaviors. This process amplifies tribalism by framing conflicts in zero-sum terms, fostering cohesion through shared perceptions of existential threat from outsiders. Sociological research indicates that such dynamics emerge rapidly under minimal conditions of group categorization, leading to discriminatory allocations of resources that favor the in-group even when it reduces overall group gains.^[43] Henri Tajfel's minimal group paradigm experiments, conducted in the early 1970s, demonstrated this through studies involving over 60 adolescent boys assigned to arbitrary groups based on aesthetic preferences, such as liking abstract paintings by Klee or Kandinsky. Participants, unaware of actual group compositions, consistently allocated higher rewards to their in-group and lower ones to out-groups via anonymous matrices, exhibiting bias without personal gain or prior interaction—revealing the ease with which group membership triggers derogation that can underpin demonization in more polarized settings.^[44] These findings, replicated across cultures, highlight how trivial distinctions suffice to initiate out-group devaluation, scaling to collective demonization when amplified by perceived competition.^[45] From an evolutionary standpoint, in-group/out-group biases likely originated as adaptations for coalitional survival, enabling preferential cooperation and aggression toward rival groups in ancestral environments marked by resource scarcity and inter-tribal raids. Models suggest this favoritism enhanced fitness by promoting alliances against threats, but in contemporary low-mortality settings with abundant resources, it manifests as maladaptive overgeneralization, sustaining unnecessary hostility and impeding cross-group collaboration.^[46] Empirical simulations confirm that such biases persist because they exploit proximate mechanisms like social categorization, originally tuned for high-stakes ancestral conflicts rather than modern abstractions.^[47] In insular groups like cults, demonization enforces boundaries by vilifying external critics or defectors as agents of evil, thereby deterring exit and bolstering internal loyalty through heightened us-versus-them narratives. Studies of high-control organizations show this tactic correlates with reduced member exposure to counter-information, sustaining cohesion via fear of contamination from out-group influences.^[48] This mirrors broader sociological patterns where demonization rigidifies group identities, prioritizing boundary maintenance over adaptive flexibility in diverse societies.^[49]

Applications in Politics, Warfare, and Ideology

Warfare and Enemy Portrayal

In ancient Assyrian military campaigns, palace wall reliefs from the 9th century BCE, such as those commissioned by Ashurnasirpal II (r. 884–859 BCE), graphically depicted conquered enemies subjected to flaying, impalement, and decapitation, portraying them as degraded and impotent figures stripped of identity to emphasize Assyrian dominance and instill terror.^[50]^[51] These images functioned as propaganda tools, reinforcing soldier morale by visualizing total subjugation and deterring rebellion among subjugated populations through visual threats of supernatural retribution-like brutality.^[52]^[53] During World War II, Allied propaganda materials, including posters from the 1940s, frequently rendered Nazi leaders like Adolf Hitler in demonic or monstrous forms, such as in enraged, bloodstained depictions evoking satanic imagery, to heighten perceptions of existential threat and spur enlistment among civilians.^[54] This portrayal extended to Axis forces as subhuman entities, particularly intensifying against Japanese combatants, where dehumanizing rhetoric facilitated broader combat motivation by framing the conflict as a moral crusade against inherent evil.^[55]^[56] Empirical analyses in military psychology link such demonization to causal reductions in mercy toward prisoners of war, as it disengages moral inhibitions by denying enemies full human status, evidenced in studies showing correlations between dehumanizing ideologies and support for torture or harsh interrogation of outgroup captives.^[8]^[57] Historical wartime data from conflicts like WWII further indicate that enemy demonization elevated troop cohesion and aggression, though it concurrently heightened reciprocal atrocities, as seen in elevated execution rates of surrendering foes following propaganda peaks.^[58]^[59]

Ideological and Partisan Uses

In the ideological battles of the Cold War era, both superpowers employed demonization to frame opponents as existential moral threats. In the United States during the 1950s, McCarthyism involved portraying communists as agents of "godless" atheism and evil, with rhetoric emphasizing a cosmic struggle between American religious values and Soviet totalitarianism, as seen in congressional hearings and public speeches that accused thousands of subversion.^[60] Conversely, Soviet propaganda systematically demonized capitalism as a parasitic system of exploitation, depicting Western capitalists as bloodsucking imperialists in posters and media that justified purges and expansionism as defenses against inherent bourgeois depravity.^[61] These tactics, rooted in binary moral absolutes, mobilized domestic support by reducing complex geopolitical rivalries to irreconcilable good-versus-evil narratives. Beyond interstate rivalries, demonization facilitated internal ideological purges, as in China's Cultural Revolution (1966-1976), where Maoist rhetoric classified dissidents, intellectuals, and "capitalist roaders" as non-people or demonic "ox ghosts and snake spirits," enabling Red Guard violence against an estimated 1-2 million deaths and widespread persecution.^[62] This language, drawn from CCP discourse, dehumanized targets to legitimize factional struggles, fostering short-term regime cohesion but undermining evidentiary debate and institutional trust through unchecked accusations.^[63] In contemporary partisan contexts, empirical content analyses reveal asymmetries in demonizing rhetoric, particularly in U.S. media ecosystems dominated by left-leaning institutions. A longitudinal study of 27 million articles from 47 outlets (1970-2019) documented a sharper rise in "far-right" extremism terms (e.g., "white supremacist," "Nazi") compared to "far-left" equivalents, with frequency accelerating post-2016 across ideological spectrums, suggesting disproportionate emphasis on portraying conservatives as inherently threatening.^[64] Such patterns, corroborated by party-level data on electoral demonization tactics since the 1990s, indicate how ideological framing prioritizes out-group vilification over policy nuance, eroding cross-partisan dialogue while entrenching affective polarization.^[65] This dynamic, informed by institutional biases toward progressive narratives, often attributes exaggerated moral depravity to opponents, justifying exclusionary measures at the expense of causal analysis of policy disagreements.

Propaganda Techniques and State-Sponsored Demonization

Propaganda techniques employed in state-sponsored demonization rely on structured methods to systematically vilify targeted groups or individuals, often centralizing control under a single authority to ensure consistency and repetition. Joseph Goebbels, as Nazi Minister of Propaganda, outlined principles emphasizing that propaganda must be planned by one entity, directed primarily at the masses rather than elites, and utilize simplification by adopting a single idea or symbol while individualizing the opponent into a unique enemy.^[66]^[67] These techniques, including relentless repetition of false narratives to foster an "illusion of truth," were designed to embed demonizing portrayals into public perception.^[68] Symbolism plays a core role, reviving historical libels to evoke primal fears and justify aggression; for instance, Nazi propagandists resuscitated medieval blood libel accusations against Jews, falsely claiming ritual murders to portray them as inherent threats requiring eradication.^[69]^[70] This method combined archaic myths with modern media control, including films, posters, and press, to amplify dehumanizing imagery across Germany. Studies of World War II propaganda indicate these approaches effectively shaped public attitudes, with Nazi efforts sustaining support for policies like the Holocaust by normalizing enmity through pervasive exposure.^[71]^[72] In state contexts, demonization integrates with purges and policy enforcement; during Stalin's Great Purge from 1936 to 1938, Soviet media under centralized control reframed Leon Trotsky and his followers as diabolical conspirators orchestrating sabotage and espionage, inverting prior Bolshevik hero narratives to legitimize executions and loyalty tests.^[73] This tactic adhered to propaganda axioms of agitation—exploiting emotions over intellect—and transfusion, where false claims were repeated until accepted as fact.^[66] Empirical analyses of such regimes highlight how unified messaging from state apparatuses, unopposed by independent media, entrenched these portrayals, enabling mass mobilization against designated foes.^[74] As internet infrastructure emerged in the 1990s, states began adapting these techniques to digital platforms for demonization, with early operations involving government-coordinated websites and forums to disseminate controlled narratives against internal or external adversaries, foreshadowing scaled information warfare.^[75] Such previews maintained core principles like repetition via algorithmic precursors and symbolic enemy framing, but leveraged nascent online reach for broader, less detectable influence.^[76]

Modern and Contemporary Examples

20th-Century Totalitarian Regimes

In Nazi Germany, propaganda under Adolf Hitler systematically demonized Jews as racial parasites and existential threats to the German volk, a portrayal originating in Mein Kampf (1925) and amplified through state media to justify escalating persecution.^[77] This rhetoric framed Jews not merely as opponents but as subhuman agents of decay, enabling the regime's mobilization for the "Final Solution," which exterminated approximately 6 million Jews from 1941 to 1945 via ghettos, forced labor, and death camps.^[78] Archival analysis of Nazi texts reveals a shift toward ascribing high intentionality to Jews during the Holocaust's onset, portraying them as diabolical planners to rationalize mass violence and sustain public compliance.^[8] Under Joseph Stalin in the Soviet Union, demonization targeted "class enemies" such as kulaks—prosperous peasants labeled as exploitative saboteurs during the 1929-1933 collectivization drive.^[79] State campaigns dehumanized them as "vermin" and irredeemable foes of socialism, mobilizing Red Army units and party cadres to confiscate grain and deport or execute resisters, contributing to the Holodomor famine that killed 3.5 to 5 million Ukrainians in 1932-1933 alone.^[80] The Great Purge (1936-1938) extended this to perceived internal threats within the Communist Party, with show trials and NKVD executions eliminating over 680,000 people by framing dissent as demonic conspiracy. Such tactics consolidated Stalin's control through fear-induced loyalty but entrenched informational silos, exacerbating miscalculations like the 1939 Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact's fragility. In Maoist China, the Chinese Communist Party under Mao Zedong vilified landlords, intellectuals, and "rightists" as parasitic class enemies obstructing proletarian utopia, a narrative intensified during the Great Leap Forward (1958-1962).^[81] This demonization justified violent struggle sessions and forced communalization, where local cadres exaggerated production reports to avoid being labeled enemies, leading to a policy-induced famine that claimed 30 to 45 million lives through starvation and related violence. Archival records from provincial ledgers, accessed post-1980s reforms, confirm how moral binarism—virtuous masses versus demonic exploiters—drove overreporting and resource misallocation, suppressing dissent that might have averted catastrophe. While demonization facilitated swift regime consolidation—evident in Nazi mass rallies drawing hundreds of thousands and Soviet industrialization's forced pace—it empirically fostered echo chambers that prioritized ideological purity over adaptive strategy. In Nazi decision-making, unyielding portrayal of Bolsheviks as subhuman inferiors contributed to the 1941 Operation Barbarossa invasion's underestimation of Soviet reserves, hastening Germany's defeat.^[82] Similarly, Mao's suppression of famine critiques as "counterrevolutionary" prolonged the Great Leap's errors, and Stalin's purges decimated military leadership, weakening defenses against the 1941 German assault. These cases illustrate how initial cohesion gains yielded to systemic rigidity, with excess deaths totaling tens of millions across regimes, underscoring causal links between unchecked demonization and policy distortion absent empirical correction.

Post-2000 Political Polarization

Following the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, political discourse in the United States intensified with demonization of Islamist extremism as an existential, apocalyptic threat, exemplified by President George W. Bush's January 29, 2002, State of the Union address, which labeled Iraq, Iran, and North Korea an "axis of evil" for supporting terrorism and pursuing weapons of mass destruction.^[83] This framing portrayed adversarial regimes and their ideologies not merely as policy opponents but as morally absolute evils necessitating total confrontation, contributing to heightened partisan divides by justifying expansive military responses like the 2003 Iraq invasion.^[84] Such rhetoric aligned with post-Cold War shifts where ideological voids were filled by securitizing non-state actors, fostering a binary worldview of good versus irredeemable evil.^[85] In Europe, the 2015 migrant crisis, triggered by over 1 million asylum seekers arriving amid conflicts in Syria and elsewhere, spurred populist movements employing demonizing anti-immigrant rhetoric that framed newcomers as cultural invaders threatening national identity and security.^[86] Leaders in parties like Hungary's Fidesz and France's National Front depicted mass migration as a deliberate demographic assault, with terms evoking existential peril and societal decay, amplifying polarization between cosmopolitan elites and nativist bases.^[87] This discourse, peaking with events like the Cologne New Year's Eve 2015 assaults, correlated with electoral gains for anti-establishment forces, as empirical analyses show rhetorical estrangement tactics—ridicule and demonization—intensified in-group cohesion while alienating out-groups.^[88] Empirical data indicate a surge in political polarization from the 2000s to 2010s, with Pew Research documenting ideological consistency among partisans rising sharply—consistent conservative Republicans increasing from 10% in 1994 to 21% by 2014, and consistent liberal Democrats from 5% to 17%—alongside deepened antipathy, where 43% of Republicans viewed Democrats very unfavorably in 2014 versus 27% in 1994.^[89] This era's polarization intertwined with demonizing language, as studies link affective divides to dehumanization of opponents, evidenced by increased portrayals of ideological adversaries as threats rather than competitors, a pattern observable globally post-Cold War in responses to terrorism and migration.^[90] Such dynamics, while mobilizing support against genuine security challenges like jihadist attacks, empirically exacerbated societal fractures without resolving underlying causal drivers like geopolitical instability.^[91]

Media and Digital Amplification in the 2020s

Social media algorithms in the 2020s have systematically amplified outrage and demonizing content, prioritizing engagement metrics that favor emotionally charged, intergroup-hostile posts. A January 2024 analysis of Twitter's (now X) ranking system revealed that it boosts divisive material—such as attacks on political out-groups—over neutral or affirming content, with users self-reporting increased negative affect toward opponents after exposure.^[92] This algorithmic bias, rooted in maximizing user retention through controversy, has entrenched echo chambers, where partisan users encounter predominantly reinforcing narratives; a 2023 Reuters Institute study documented such patterns in U.S. political news discussions on the platform, with limited cross-ideological exposure even after ownership changes.^[93] Empirical trends post-2020, including a February 2025 examination of extremism spread, confirm that these dynamics accelerate the viral propagation of dehumanizing labels, particularly against populist figures and their adherents, amid institutional media's prevailing left-leaning skew that normalizes such portrayals of right-wing groups as existential threats.^[94] In the U.S. 2020 election context, digital platforms magnified rhetoric equating Trump supporters with fascism, as mainstream outlets and Democratic figures amplified narratives framing the movement as inherently authoritarian. Post-election analyses highlighted how terms like "fascist" were applied broadly to conservatives, correlating with surges in online harassment and doxxing campaigns targeting perceived enablers.^[95] Counter-demonization emerged on platforms like X, portraying "woke" ideologies as corrosive to institutions, though algorithmic legacies from pre-2022 moderation suppressed its reach relative to opposing content. This asymmetry reflects platform governance favoring progressive sensitivities, per internal leaked documents and user migration data following policy shifts. By 2025, escalating violence tied to demonizing rhetoric prompted official interventions, with the Department of Homeland Security on September 17 issuing a directive urging media and far-left actors to cease portraying President Trump, his supporters, and law enforcement as demonic forces, directly linking such language to a over 1,000% rise in assaults on ICE officers since 2020.^[96] This followed two 2024 assassination attempts on Trump, where surveys indicated bipartisan recognition of extreme rhetoric's role in inciting action, yet disproportionate blame fell on right-leaning speech despite empirical spikes in left-motivated threats.^[97] Such patterns underscore digital amplification's causal role in normalizing one-sided demonization of populists, with underreported retaliatory violence against progressive targets revealing media selectivity.^[98]

Consequences, Effects, and Empirical Impacts

Mobilization and Cohesion Benefits

Demonization of perceived threats has historically facilitated mobilization by fostering unified resolve and heightened commitment to collective defense efforts. During World War II, Allied propaganda campaigns portrayed Axis leaders and forces as embodiments of barbarism and existential danger, which contributed to sustained public and military morale amid prolonged conflict. For instance, depictions of Nazi atrocities and Japanese aggression in media and posters not only justified sacrifices but also reinforced solidarity among diverse Allied populations, enabling large-scale industrial and troop mobilizations that proved decisive in victories such as the D-Day invasion on June 6, 1944.^[76]^[99] Empirical research in social psychology supports the adaptive function of out-group demonization in enhancing in-group cohesion under realistic threats. Studies demonstrate that perceived external dangers prompt individuals to affiliate more closely, forming resilient units motivated to defend shared interests, as out-group vilification amplifies collective identity and willingness to cooperate against verifiable harms like territorial incursions or ideological subjugation.^[100] This mechanism aligns with realistic group conflict dynamics, where competition over resources or survival elevates prejudice toward adversaries while bolstering internal bonds, as evidenced in controlled experiments simulating intergroup rivalries. Such responses prove particularly effective when tied to empirical evidence of out-group aggression, countering totalitarian expansions through coordinated resistance. In contemporary contexts, demonization of acute threats has similarly catalyzed short-term societal cohesion and policy support. Following the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, portrayals of al-Qaeda as an irredeemable ideological foe spurred a "rally effect," with national approval for U.S. leadership surging to 90% by September 15, 2001, and fostering bipartisan unity for military responses that enhanced perceived group resilience.^[101] This pattern extends to analyses of terrorism's broader impacts, where out-group hostility reinforces in-group solidarity and trust in democratic institutions, enabling adaptive countermeasures without eroding foundational social fabrics.^[102]

Dehumanization, Violence, and Societal Division Risks

Demonization frequently escalates into dehumanization, a psychological process where outgroups are depicted as possessing subhuman traits, such as vermin or machines, which diminishes empathy and normalizes aggression toward them. Experimental studies demonstrate that explicit dehumanization prompts individuals to endorse or perpetrate greater instrumental violence—harm inflicted for strategic ends—while moral violence, driven by outrage, remains unaffected.^[103] This pathway aligns with genocide prevention frameworks, where dehumanizing rhetoric serves as an early indicator of atrocity risks by eroding ethical barriers to mass harm.^[104] Historical evidence from the 1994 Rwandan genocide illustrates this: Radio Télévision Libre des Mille Collines (RTLM) broadcasts systematically labeled Tutsis as "inyenzi" (cockroaches), fostering Hutu perceptions of them as pests warranting extermination, which preceded the slaughter of an estimated 800,000 Tutsis and moderate Hutus over 100 days.^[105]^[106] In the United States during the 2020s, intensified partisan demonization—framing opponents as traitors or subhuman threats—has correlated with spikes in targeted violence. Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) data record hate crime incidents rising from 7,314 in 2019 to 10,840 in 2021, with offenses against persons (including intimidation and simple assaults) comprising over 60% of reports, often tied to biases amplified by political rhetoric.^[107]^[108] Research links such rhetoric to outcomes like increased assaults, as demonizing language by public figures inflames predisposed actors and correlates with real-world attacks, including those during election cycles.^[109]^[110] For instance, studies on polarization highlight how mutual demonization contributes to political violence by portraying rivals as dehumanized enemies, elevating risks of assaults and disruptions beyond verbal hostility.^[90] Societal division intensifies as reciprocal demonization undermines trust, fragmenting communities into antagonistic silos. Pew Research Center findings show U.S. trust in the federal government at 22% in 2024—down from 77% in the 1960s—with polarization cited as a driver, as negative views of opposing partisans (e.g., 70%+ seeing the other side as immoral) erode generalized social trust.^[111]^[112] Empirical analyses confirm that heightened perceptions of partisan divides reduce interpersonal trust, fostering environments where cooperation yields to suspicion and institutions are viewed through zero-sum lenses, with longitudinal trends showing accelerated declines post-2016 amid rhetorical escalation.^[113]^[114]

Psychological and Long-Term Societal Costs

Demonization inflicts enduring psychological harm on targeted individuals, manifesting as elevated levels of anxiety, depression, and social withdrawal. Empirical analyses indicate that those subjected to demonizing portrayals endure trauma-like responses, with chronic emotional distress eroding mental well-being over time.^[115] In contexts of heightened political hostility, such as following the 2016 U.S. presidential election, demonization has been linked to broader psychological maladjustment, including negative spiritual appraisals that exacerbate adjustment difficulties across ideological lines.^[116] At the societal level, demonization promotes rigid, absolutist framings of opponents as irredeemable threats, stifling compromise and yielding policy paralysis. This dynamic is evident in the U.S. Congress, where productivity has plummeted amid rising polarization; in 2023, only 27 public laws were enacted by year-end, marking a record low against historical session averages exceeding 300 bills.^[117]^[118] Ideological divergence, intensified by mutual demonization, has widened partisan gaps to levels unseen in over five decades, correlating with reduced legislative output and floor activity since the 1980s.^[119] Over generations, these costs compound through the transmission of biased attitudes, embedding division into family socialization patterns. Studies of adolescent-parent pairs reveal a direct correlation of 0.51 between parental and child party preferences, with parental ideological positions accounting for 33% of variance in children's alignments via mediated effects like left-right placements.^[120] Experimental and survey data further demonstrate that parental authoritarianism and anti-outgroup prejudices—hallmarks of demonizing mindsets—transfer to offspring, explaining substantial portions of children's corresponding attitudes and perpetuating societal mistrust indefinitely.^[121]^[122]

Criticisms, Debunkings, and Alternatives

Critiques of Overuse in Mainstream Narratives

Critics contend that mainstream narratives frequently overstate demonization's exclusivity to right-wing or populist movements, framing it as a novel threat while empirical evidence demonstrates its bidirectional application in contemporary US politics. A 2016 Pew Research Center survey found that 45% of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents regarded the Republican Party as a threat to the nation's well-being, nearly matching the 41% of Republicans who viewed the Democratic Party similarly, with both figures reflecting heightened animosity since the 1990s.^[123] This symmetry challenges claims of one-sided overuse, as scholarly analyses of electoral rhetoric identify demonization—portraying opponents as moral deviants or societal dangers—as a strategic tool employed by both major parties to mobilize bases amid polarization.^[65] Left-leaning media outlets have routinely contributed to this pattern by depicting conservatives as existential dangers, as seen in coverage amplifying Hillary Clinton's September 9, 2016, speech labeling half of Donald Trump's supporters a "basket of deplorables"—implying inherent bigotry—without proportionate critique of analogous progressive rhetoric against centrists or moderates. Reports purporting to document demonization's surge, such as Amnesty International's 2017 annual assessment attributing global "politics of demonization" to events like the US election and European populism, exhibit selective focus on right-leaning figures while sidelining equivalent left-leaning instances, a limitation attributable to the organization's documented institutional biases toward certain ideological framings over comprehensive bilateral scrutiny.^[124] Echo chambers within mainstream media further exemplify overuse through the sustained promotion of unverified narratives that demonize political adversaries, notably the Trump-Russia collusion allegations from 2016 to 2019, which dominated coverage despite lacking evidentiary foundation. Special Counsel Robert Mueller's 2019 report concluded no prosecutable conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russia, while John Durham's 2023 investigation exposed FBI procedural lapses and media amplification of Steele dossier claims originating from partisan sources, revealing how such stories persist in ideologically aligned outlets to portray opponents as traitors irrespective of factual refutation. These cases underscore critiques that mainstream overuse dilutes demonization's analytical value, conflating routine partisan hyperbole with genuine threats and eroding discourse by prioritizing narrative coherence over empirical validation.

Validity in Response to Genuine Threats

Demonization of ideologies or actors becomes a valid rhetorical and strategic response when empirical evidence demonstrates their direct causation of widespread harm, exceeding thresholds of mere policy disagreement and warranting societal mobilization for self-preservation. This proportionality principle holds that rhetoric intensity should align with the threat's scale and irredeemability, as seen in historical precedents where existential dangers, such as expansionist regimes committing mass atrocities, justified uncompromising opposition to prevent further casualties. For instance, verifiable patterns of violence provide a causal benchmark: ideologies endorsing or enabling systematic killing render nuanced engagement futile, prioritizing empirical threat assessment over balanced discourse.^[125] Jihadist ideologies exemplify this validity, with groups like Al-Qaeda and ISIS perpetrating attacks that have causally linked to over 210,000 deaths worldwide from 1979 to April 2024, including 48,000 documented incidents targeting civilians for ideological supremacy. These figures, derived from comprehensive tracking of Islamist-motivated terrorism, underscore a pattern of irreconcilable hostility, where attackers explicitly invoke religious doctrines to justify beheadings, bombings, and enslavement, as in the 2014-2017 ISIS caliphate's genocide against Yazidis and Christians. Opposition rhetoric framing such actors as existential evils—rather than disputable viewpoints—has empirically facilitated coalitions that degraded their operational capacity, reducing global terrorism deaths by over 50% since 2014 peaks, without evidence of disproportionate escalation in non-threat contexts.^[126]^[127] In contemporary cultural domains, critiques demonizing elements of gender ideology gain legitimacy where data reveal causal harms to youth, such as the UK's explosion in gender clinic referrals—from 97 in 2009 to over 5,000 annually by 2018—coinciding with unproven interventions linked to irreversible effects like infertility and bone density loss. The 2024 Cass Review, an independent NHS-commissioned analysis of 103 studies, found "remarkably weak evidence" for puberty blockers and hormones improving mental health outcomes, with low-quality research failing to demonstrate benefits outweighing risks, including elevated detransition potential amid social contagion patterns. This evidentiary gap, compounded by desistance rates of 61-98% in untreated youth historically resolving dysphoria naturally, positions aggressive pushback against institutional promotion of such practices as proportionate to protecting vulnerable minors from ideologically driven medicalization, distinct from critiquing individual identities.^[128]^[129]^[130]

Strategies for Mitigation and Truth-Seeking Discourse

To mitigate demonization, discourse can prioritize empirical scrutiny through cost-benefit analyses of policies, which ground debates in quantifiable trade-offs rather than categorical moral judgments. Such approaches foster first-principles evaluation by requiring proponents to demonstrate net societal gains, as evidenced by regulatory frameworks where cost-benefit assessments have promoted transparent deliberation among stakeholders, even amid political contention.^[131] This method counters rhetorical escalation by shifting focus from opponent vilification to verifiable outcomes, with studies indicating it enhances policy legitimacy when applied consistently, though outcomes vary by implementation rigor.^[132] Platform-level interventions, such as crowdsourced fact-checking, offer scalable tools to curb misinformation-driven demonization without centralized suppression. X's Community Notes, rolled out in 2021 and expanded post-2022, enable users to append contextual notes to misleading posts, reducing their virality by 20-30% according to a 2025 University of Washington analysis of over 100,000 flagged tweets.^[133] Complementary research from the University of Illinois confirms this mechanism prompts voluntary retractions of false claims, with note contributors disproportionately targeting ideologically opposed content, thereby diluting partisan echo chambers.^[134] Unlike traditional fact-checking prone to institutional biases—evident in pre-2020 third-party partnerships that amplified selective narratives—these decentralized systems build trust across divides, as a 2024 study of 1,810 U.S. respondents showed Community Notes elevating perceived credibility of corrections by 15-20% relative to anonymous or elite sources.^[135] Cultural reforms in education and media emphasize causal reasoning to dismantle entrenched biases fueling demonization. Curricula integrating evidence-based causal inference, such as randomized evaluations of interventions, equip individuals to discern correlation from causation, reducing susceptibility to oversimplified threat narratives. A 2024 Harvard analysis of classroom practices found that structured exposure to opposing viewpoints in "open climate" settings decreased affective polarization by 10-15% among students, measured via self-reported ideological distance.^[136] In media, adopting prosocial framing—appealing to shared values and agency—has empirically lowered acceptance of dehumanizing rhetoric, per a 2024 Carnegie Endowment review of intervention trials, which reported 25% drops in endorsement of divisive claims when empathy was invoked alongside facts.^[137] These shifts prioritize epistemic humility, acknowledging systemic biases in academic and journalistic institutions that often normalize one-sided portrayals, thereby promoting discourse resilient to manipulation.

References

[1]
Strategies & Techniques of Demonization of Others - Academia.edu
Demonization Definition Demonization is a specific form of vilification in which the demonizer vilifies some group (victim group) by portraying the victim ...
[2]
Demonization - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics
Demonization is a suprahuman metaphor that transforms other people into demons, devils, or witches. Through demonization other people are attributed ...Missing: paper | Show results with:paper
[3]
Dehumanization, Demonization, and Morality Shifting
Oct 12, 2011 · This chapter contains sections titled: Dehumanization: Removal of Moral Concern. Demonization: Moralized Violence.
[4]
The Meaning of Hate, Dehumanization, and Demonization
Aug 7, 2025 · First, demonization is a form of dehumanization, but it is a more extreme form of dehumanization than animal dehumanization. We can call it ...
[5]
Reactions to offenders: Psychological differences between beliefs ...
Mar 7, 2019 · The effect of communion on demonization was significant, F(1,225) = 12.80, p < .001, η2 = .05. Observers demonized offenders more strongly if ...
[6]
[PDF] Motives for Punishing Powerful Vs. Powerless Offenders
May 2, 2022 · The main effect of power on demonization was significant, F(1,277) = 14.54, p < .001, η2 = .05. Observers demonized offenders more when they had ...<|control11|><|separator|>
[7]
The Psychology of Demonization: Promoting Acceptance and ...
This book explores the psychological processes involved in demonization and their implications for the effort to effect change in relationships.
[8]
A study of mental state language in Nazi propaganda (1927–1945)
We speculate this may reflect a process of demonization in which Nazi propagandists portrayed the Jews as highly capable of planning and intentionality ...
[9]
Changing Perception through Media Bombardment and Demonization
Aug 6, 2025 · ArticlePDF Available. Changing Perception through Media Bombardment and Demonization. June 2021; Bulletin of the Transilvania University of ...
[10]
[PDF] Populism and Fake News: The role of anti-elitism, demonization and ...
In this study, we propose that demonization and moral disengagement mediate the relationship between anti-elitism and the motivation to engage in acts of ...
[11]
[PDF] The Psychology of Demonization
One of the psychotherapeutic trends they wish to challenge is the tendency toward what they call the demonization of things or people. Our normal tendency is to ...
[12]
demonize, v. meanings, etymology and more
The earliest known use of the verb demonize is in the mid 1700s. OED's earliest evidence for demonize is from before 1743, in the writing of A. M. Ramsay. ...
[13]
DEMONIZE Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster
The meaning of DEMONIZE is to portray (someone or something) as evil or as worthy of contempt or blame : vilify. How to use demonize in a sentence.
[14]
Demonization in Historical Context - ResearchGate
The chapter concludes by showing the transition from demonization in the context of religious wars to the more secularized demonization in modern political ...
[15]
Dehumanization, demonization, and morality shifting - APA PsycNet
Dehumanization, demonization, and morality shifting: Paths to moral certainty in extremist violence. In M. A. Hogg & D. L. Blaylock (Eds.), Extremism and the ...
[16]
The effects of belief in pure evil, demonization, and retribution on ...
In sum, characterizing others as “evil” should increase demonization and feelings of retribution thereby increasing aggression against them. That is ...
[17]
[PDF] PATHS TO MORAL CERTAINTY 1 Dehumanization, demonization ...
Demonization is a special kind of moral mandate that identifies an out-group as evil, and justifies any measures taken against them, including violence.
[18]
Psalm 106:37 They sacrificed their sons and their daughters to ...
They sacrificed their sons and daughters in the fire and practiced divination and soothsaying. They devoted themselves to doing evil in the sight of the LORD, ...
[19]
1 Corinthians 10:20 No, but the sacrifices of pagans are offered to ...
1 Corinthians 10:20 states that pagan sacrifices are offered to demons, not God, and Paul does not want Christians to participate with demons.
[20]
https://www.brewminate.com/theodosius-i-founder-of-christianity-as-the-official-state-religion-in-ancient-rome/
[21]
The Temple of Serapis (Serapeum) in Alexandria
The Temple of Serapis was adorned with columned halls and a large statue, and was destroyed after a riot, later replaced by a church.
[22]
Is "The Satan" in Job Actually Not the Devil? - Holy Joys
Jul 24, 2025 · Is “the satan” in Job actually not the devil? The BibleProject's description of “God holding court with His staff team” does raise questions ...
[23]
Why Michael Heiser is Probably Wrong about Satan in the Book of Job
Feb 24, 2021 · Perhaps most importantly, Satan (also called the devil) is viewed as an evil angel opposing the work of God throughout the New Testament. This ...
[24]
Exorcism: The history of purging demons, from the New Testament ...
Dec 26, 2021 · Exorcism: The history of purging demons, from the New Testament ... New Testament, illnesses were thought to be caused by demonic possession.<|separator|>
[25]
Demon Possession - The Gospel Coalition
Demon possession describes a variety of conditions, both physical and emotional-mental-psychological, caused by direct demonic influence.
[26]
https://brill.com/display/book/9789004350618/B9789004350618_002.xml
[27]
Surah Al-Jinn - 1-28 - Quran.com
Now, we have no clue whether evil is intended for those on earth, or their Lord intends for them what is right. 72:11.
[28]
The World of the Jinn (part 1 of 2) - The Religion of Islam
By doing this, the evil Jinn hope to make people worship others besides God. The possession of idols is one way to do this. Not so long ago the world-wide ...
[29]
Violent Rhetoric and Its Consequences in the Middle Ages
Sep 23, 2025 · The rhetoric of the crusade pulpit trafficked heavily in demonization. Muslims were depicted as “unclean dogs,” “pagans,” and “servants of ...
[30]
[PDF] they are worse than saracens with their strong hand and their arm
2 The demonization of the Cathars acquired an immediate religio-political dimension when Pope Innocent III (1160-1216) wrathfully called for war against the ...
[31]
Europe's Inner Demons: The Demonization of Christians in Medieval ...
May 27, 2019 · Europe's Inner Demons: The Demonization of Christians in Medieval Christendom by Norman Cohn (1975) · Medieval pessimism · Heretic hunting and the ...
[32]
Five witchcraft myths debunked by an expert - The Conversation
Oct 26, 2023 · Between the 15th and 18th centuries, an estimated 50,000 people, mostly women, were executed for witchcraft across Europe. They were accused ...
[33]
[PDF] “Godnapping” and Omission in Neo-Assyrian Inscriptions
Dec 3, 2015 · Stealing the Enemy's Gods: An Exploration of the Phenomenon of. Godnap in Ancient Western Asia. Ph.D dissertation., University of Birmingham ...
[34]
Ancient Carthaginians really did sacrifice their children
Jan 23, 2014 · After decades of scholarship denying that the Carthaginians sacrificed their children, new research has found 'overwhelming' evidence that this ancient ...
[35]
[PDF] Mediaeval Studies 83 (2021) 119-64 - The Birth of the Luciferians
eleventh- and twelfth-century reports about devil-worshipping heretics,9 ... sical work about the demonization of medieval heretics and the emer- gence of ...
[36]
[PDF] Voltaire and the Enlightenment Response to Superstition
new set of tyrants, the clergy and the Pope.64 He claims that bishops ... He considered the Church to be a tyrannical institution that cared more for ...Missing: portraying | Show results with:portraying
[37]
[PDF] Religious criticism in 18th-century France - HAL
The God of Judeo-Christianity is a detestable God, and Voltaire openly declares that he is not Christian: People say you are a tyrant; but in you I seek a ...
[38]
[PDF] Civil War in the Vendée: The Perpetuation of Brutality During the ...
Apr 4, 2016 · had existed before the Revolution began in 1789, and promoted the demonization of opposing ... The French Revolution and the Church. New York: ...
[39]
Perceiving Pure Evil: The Influence of Cognitive Load and ...
Nov 30, 2010 · The present research sought to investigate the psychological dynamics underlying demonizing, that is, the tendency to see others as personifications of pure ...
[40]
ALBERT BANDURA Moral Disengagement | Social Psychology
They do so by disengaging moral self-sanctions from their harmful practices. These psychosocial mechanisms of moral disengagement operate at both the individual ...Missing: demonizing others
[41]
Situationally Selective Activation of Moral Disengagement ... - Frontiers
Jun 8, 2020 · The results showed changes in moral disengagement mechanisms across the bullying situations. For instance, moral justification, victim blaming, ...Introduction · Materials and Methods · Results · Discussion
[42]
The Cognition of Severe Moral Failure: A Novel Approach to the ...
Apr 20, 2018 · I describe the perception of evil as a categorization judgment, based on a prototype, with extensive feedback loops and top-down influences.
[43]
Minimal Group Paradigm Study experiments Henri Tajfel
The Minimal Group Paradigm is a methodology employed in social psychology to investigate the minimal conditions required for discrimination to occur between ...
[44]
Social Identity Theory In Psychology (Tajfel & Turner, 1979)
Oct 5, 2023 · ... bias, and discrimination. It helps us understand why group ... In-group bias in the minimal inter-group situation: A cognitive motivational
[45]
The origins of the minimal group paradigm. - APA PsycNet
The effects of common fate and discrimination upon inter-group attitudes: Paper presented at the Second Conference on Experimental Social Psychology in Europe, ...
[46]
Evolutionary models of in-group favoritism - PMC - PubMed Central
Mar 3, 2015 · In-group favoritism is the tendency for individuals to cooperate with in-group members more strongly than with out-group members.
[47]
[PDF] Evolutionary Perspectives on Group Dynamics 1 - Mark van Vugt
The implication is that our evolved group psychology reflects adaptations to past rather than present environments. Because modern humans live in very different.
[48]
Political and Spiritual Cults - Cult Education Institute
Sep 13, 2020 · Demonization of outside groups that are competition with the cult; ... Since cults usually blur boundaries between work and free time ...
[49]
Ideology, Demonization, and Scholarship The Need for Objectivity ...
Cult Involvement Suggestions for Concerned Parents · Cult Is ... International Cultic Studies Association (ICSA) provides information on cults, cultic groups ...
[50]
Wall Reliefs: Ashurnasirpal II's War Scenes at the British Museum
Sep 13, 2017 · This is how Ashurnasirpal II (r. 884-859 BCE) recorded the way he had dealt with his enemies during one of his military campaigns.
[51]
https://brill.com/edcollchap-oa/book/9789004683181/BP000006.xml
[52]
[PDF] Warfare in Neo-Assyrian Art - Oxford University Research Archive
... enemies depicted on a relief panel from the same wall (at the same level but closer to the throne) who flee before the Assyrians by swimming fully dressed ...
[53]
(PDF) Enemies and Subaltern Groups in Assyrian Propaganda
Enemies and Subaltern Groups in Assyrian Propaganda. ... Propaganda – royal iconography • reliefs on palace and temple walls • reliefs on stelae • reliefs ...
[54]
Germany poster propaganda Stock Photos and Images - Alamy
WW2 ADOLF HITLER in demonic rage with bloodstained dagger WWII ...
[55]
The Extreme Danger of Dehumanizing Rhetoric - Current Affairs
Aug 22, 2024 · It's very revealing that Americans in World War Two tended not to dehumanize Germans, but certainly dehumanized Japanese people. So, we can ask ...Missing: evidence | Show results with:evidence
[56]
The Power of Psychological Warfare in World War II
Oct 24, 2018 · Dr. Jeff Logue shares how WWII was a vivid example of psychological warfare in the way it was employed by the Axis and Allied Powers to target the moral ...<|separator|>
[57]
The Many Roles of Dehumanization in Genocide - Oxford Academic
Viki, Osgood, and Phillips (2013) found that British Christians who dehumanized Muslims were more likely to support the torture of Muslim prisoners of war.
[58]
Dehumanization and mass violence: A study of mental state ...
Dehumanization is frequently cited as a precursor to mass violence, but quantitative support for this notion is scarce. The present work provides such ...
[59]
Dehumanizing the Other: Propaganda Past and Present - IranWire
Dec 18, 2020 · Dehumanization has long been used as a psychological technique to desensitize soldiers to killing. It has been used to justify war, genocide, ...<|separator|>
[60]
[PDF] Dances with Devils
Demagogues often portray the scapegoat as not just culpable but actually evil; demonizing the scapegoat by claiming the ... Godless communism. Many conservative ...
[61]
Russian & Bolshevik Propaganda | Posters, Art & Slogans - Study.com
Anti-capitalist propaganda was a common theme in Bolshevik propaganda as a means to demonize capitalists and non-communists. Over time, propaganda was created ...
[62]
China's Cultural Revolution and Mao's External Threat Inflation
May 7, 2024 · These young students were deluged by hyperbolic propaganda that demonized the “agents of the bourgeoisie” in the party who, in collaboration ...
[63]
Demonising Discourse in Mao Zedong's China: People vs Non ...
Aug 9, 2025 · This article examines the use of demonising rhetoric by the Chinese Communist Party during the first decades of the People's Republic after ...Missing: dissidents | Show results with:dissidents
[64]
The Increasing Frequency of Terms Denoting Political Extremism in ...
Apr 6, 2022 · This study leverages computational content analysis of big data to longitudinally examine (1970–2019) the prevalence of terms denoting far-right ...
[65]
[PDF] Demonization as an Electoral Strategy | NYU Law
Oct 26, 2021 · Having noted the party-level implementation and voter-level consequences of demonization, we consider when parties' incentives to demonize will ...
[66]
Goebbels' principles of propaganda - SMU Physics
Goebbels' principles derive from Hitler's own ideas of propaganda. Propaganda must be planned and executed by only one authority.
[67]
Goebbels' principles of propaganda by L Doob
1. Propagandist must have access to intelligence concerning events and public opinion. 2. Propaganda must be planned and executed by only one authority.
[68]
How liars create the 'illusion of truth' - BBC
Oct 26, 2016 · “Repeat a lie often enough and it becomes the truth”, is a law of propaganda often attributed to the Nazi Joseph Goebbels. Among psychologists ...
[69]
Blood Libel | Holocaust Encyclopedia
Blood libels were false allegations that Jews used the blood of non-Jewish children in rituals. Nazi propagandists used this false charge in their ...
[70]
Blood Libel - Jewish Virtual Library
The Nazis used the blood libel in full force for anti-Jewish propaganda. They revived old allegations and instituted reinvestigations and trials in ...
[71]
The Impact of Nazi Propaganda: Visual Essay - Facing History
Feb 5, 2024 · Propaganda was one of the most important tools the Nazis used to shape the beliefs and attitudes of the German public. Through posters, film ...
[72]
The effectiveness of Nazi propaganda during World War II
This thesis examines Nazi propaganda's overall effectiveness during Adolf Hitler's rise to power in the 1930s through the end of World War II in 1945.
[73]
Stalin's Show Trials and Purges, 1936 to 1938 - Macrohistory
The Bolshevik press, which had once claimed Trotsky as their hero, was now demonizing him. Trotsky was now to be portrayed not as a Left Deviationist as before.
[74]
[PDF] World War Two Propaganda: Analyzing and Comparing German ...
Dec 6, 2023 · They utilized these tools in strikingly similar ways to conjure up animosity against undesired groups, cultivate intense patriotism, and plant ...
[75]
Hostile State Disinformation in the Internet Age | Daedalus | MIT Press
Aug 1, 2024 · Foreign actors, particularly Russia and China, are using disinformation as a tool to sow doubts and counterfactuals within the US population.
[76]
Propaganda Experts, Intelligence, and Total War (1941–1945) | KNOW
Propaganda was one of the primary factors that transformed World War II into a “total war,” blurring the boundaries between battlefield and home front, between ...
[77]
State of Deception: The Power of Nazi Propaganda
At the same time, they demonized enemies, presenting them as threats to German society or western civilization. Nazi Germany, pursuing a racist and antisemitic ...
[78]
Defining the Enemy | Holocaust Encyclopedia
Propaganda that demonized Jews also served to prepare the German population, in the context of national emergency, for harsher measures, such as mass ...Missing: Mein Kampf
[79]
We Will Bury You (2) - The Quarterly Review
Mar 10, 2018 · ... demonization and dehumanization of kulaks in the totalitarian state media. ... kulaks as a class' (and all other class enemies). The ...
[80]
Norman Naimark: Soviets Did Genocide - Polish-Jewish Relations
Oct 14, 2021 · ... demonized the alleged social group known and identified as kulaks. They were set off from the rest of the peasant population as 'enemies of ...<|separator|>
[81]
Morality, Mobilization, and Violence in the Making of the Chinese State
This mobilization process created a moral boundary that designated a virtuous ingroup of “the masses” and a demonized outgroup of “class enemies,” mobilized the ...
[82]
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-cold-war-studies/article/abs/hitlers-strategic-miscalculations-in-operation-barbarossa/
[83]
[PDF] Marginalizing the "other" in the discourse of the Bush ...
Nov 9, 2007 · Much of Bush's demonizing is used to justify going to war in Iraq. In his attempts to link Saddam Hussein and Iraq with Al Qaeda and other ...
[84]
Dehumanizing to Demonizing: Critical Discourse Analysis of George ...
... Demonizing Critical Discourse Analysis of Bush's Speech. es.pdf. Content ... evil of dehumanization. This study analyses eight speeches of Bush for his ...
[85]
Why the US Image Declined in the Muslim World? - Nomos eLibrary
Consequently, demonizing of Islam began in the post-Cold War period ... on this statement Bush characterized Iraq, Iran and North Korea 'axis of evil'.I0.
[86]
[PDF] Illiberal response during the European Migrant Crisis of 2015 - Ceu
Jun 1, 2017 · The intensification or demonization of Refugees to Migrants became the referent object that was a 'security threat' to the nation, but also the ...
[87]
The other other. Representations and rhetorical estrangement of anti ...
Within these categories, we find manifest estrangement through demonizing and ridiculing. We call this category of rhetorical work for conspicuous estrangement.
[88]
[PDF] Street by Street: Systematic Dehumanization in Europe
These groups of people continue to suffer humiliation and dehumanization. The demonization of immigrants by politicians, and some sections of the public, has ...
[89]
Political Polarization in the American Public - Pew Research Center
Jun 12, 2014 · Republicans and Democrats are more divided along ideological lines – and partisan antipathy is deeper and more extensive – than at any point in the last two ...Missing: 2000s- 2010s demonizing language
[90]
The Effects of Political Polarization on Political Violence in the U.S. ...
The author suggests that polarization may contribute to political violence in three ways: through the dehumanization and demonization of political opponents.
[91]
Polarization, Democracy, and Political Violence in the United States
Sep 5, 2023 · Affective polarization in the United States has been rising for decades, while political violence only increased sharply in 2016.20 Affective ...
[92]
Engagement, User Satisfaction, and the Amplification of Divisive ...
Jan 3, 2024 · Twitter's engagement-based ranking algorithm amplifies emotionally charged, out-group hostile content that users say makes them feel worse about their ...Missing: 2020s | Show results with:2020s
[93]
Here's what our research says about news audiences on Twitter, the ...
Oct 25, 2023 · Research finds that like-minded echo chamber communication patterns can be observed on Twitter when it comes to online discussions of some ...
[94]
From clicks to chaos: How social media algorithms amplify extremism
Feb 13, 2025 · This article explores the mechanisms behind algorithmic amplification, its impact on the amplification of extremist narratives, and the challenges in ...Missing: 2020s | Show results with:2020s
[95]
Election officials frustrated Trump allies suddenly care about rhetoric
Jul 19, 2024 · ... Trump as a fascist “led directly to President Trump's attempted assassination.” Two days later, Trump named Vance as his running mate.
[96]
DHS Calls for Media and Far Left to Stop the Demonization of ...
Sep 17, 2025 · “This demonization is inspiring violence across the country. Our ICE officers are facing a more than 1000% increase in assaults against them. We ...Missing: figures | Show results with:figures
[97]
Voters blame 'extreme' rhetoric for contributing to attempt on Trump's ...
Sep 30, 2024 · This month, Republicans overwhelmingly said rhetoric was an important contributor to the assassination attempt against Trump, while Democrats ...
[98]
WEISS: The media's demonization of the right has consequences
Sep 20, 2025 · WEISS: The media's demonization of the right has consequences ... Anger, left unchecked, can erupt in violence. No individual act of ...Missing: DHS 2024-2025
[99]
Propaganda from World War II - Primary Sources
It also played a role in boosting troop morale and demonizing the Axis powers, often portraying them as brutal and oppressive. British propaganda, led by ...Missing: evidence | Show results with:evidence
[100]
Outgroup threat and the emergence of cohesive groups
Jul 21, 2021 · We investigated how outgroup threat galvanizes individuals to affiliate with others to form engaged units that are willing to act on behalf of their in-group.
[101]
A Defining Presidential Moment: 9/11 and the Rally Effect
Aug 6, 2025 · He did so in a manner reminiscent of President George W. Bush in the wake of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks (Schubert et al., 2002) ...
[102]
In‐group solidarity or out‐group hostility in response to terrorism in ...
Jan 26, 2020 · We, simultaneously, expect that terrorism develops support for the social foundations of liberal democracy by strengthening social cohesion, ...
[103]
Dehumanization increases instrumental violence, but not moral ...
Jul 24, 2017 · we show that dehumanization—the act of perceiving victims as not completely human—increases instrumental, but not moral, violence ...
[104]
[PDF] Dangerous Speech as an Atrocity Early Warning Indicator
Oct 2, 2024 · “'Toxification' as a More Precise Early Warning Sign for Genocide Than. Dehumanization? An Emerging Research Agenda.” Genocide Studies and ...
[105]
In Rwanda, We Know All About Dehumanizing Language
Apr 13, 2019 · The worst kind of hatred had been unleashed. What began with dehumanizing words ended in bloodshed. Yet the dehumanization had started long ...Missing: campaigns | Show results with:campaigns
[106]
Genocide: Ideology and Organization - Human Rights Watch
Genocide: Ideology and Organization. Organizers of the genocide used ideology to bring Hutu to fear and hate Tutsi. They then used the institutions of the ...Missing: campaigns | Show results with:campaigns
[107]
FBI Releases Updated 2020 Hate Crime Statistics
Oct 25, 2021 · Of the 7,750 hate crime offenses classified as crimes against persons in 2020, 53.1% were for intimidation, 27.9% were for simple assault, and ...
[108]
Hate Crime Statistics - FBI
The most common hate crimes reported to the data collection are destruction/damage/vandalism, intimidation, and simple assault. Hate Crime Biases. The Hate ...<|separator|>
[109]
How hateful rhetoric connects to real-world violence | Brookings
Apr 9, 2021 · ... demonize their political opponents. In ... studies that show correlations between increases in hostile political rhetoric and violence.
[110]
When politicians use hate speech, political violence increases
Sep 28, 2020 · When politicians use hate speech, political violence increases ... Hate speech by politicians also serves to deepen political polarization.Missing: linking | Show results with:linking
[111]
Public Trust in Government: 1958-2024 - Pew Research Center
Jun 24, 2024 · As of May 2024, 22% of Americans say they trust the government in Washington to do what is right “just about always” (2%) or “most of the time” (21%).Missing: polarization | Show results with:polarization<|separator|>
[112]
Americans' Declining Trust in Each Other and Reasons Behind It
May 8, 2025 · On both sides, views of the opposing party and its supporters have grown more negative, which may contribute to the decline in social trust.
[113]
Social Trust in Polarized Times: How Perceptions of Political ... - NIH
Mar 18, 2022 · This study examines the consequences of perceived polarization for levels of social trust in the United States.
[114]
Views of American politics, polarization and tone of political debate
Sep 19, 2023 · 8 in 10 Americans respond with a negative word or phrase. Majorities say they always or often feel exhausted (65%) and angry (55%) when thinking about politics ...Missing: 2000s- 2010s demonizing language
[115]
[PDF] Psychology Of Demonization
When demonization takes hold, it can escalate conflicts, justify discrimination, and erode trust. Polarization and Social Division. Demonizing opposing groups ...
[116]
The Hand of God or the Work of the Devil? Spiritual Appraisals and ...
Demonization and desecration are negative spiritual appraisals associated with psychological maladjustment across political and relational contexts.
[117]
US Congress is getting less productive - Reuters
Mar 12, 2024 · Reforms to bedrock programs like Medicare and Social Security are desperately needed but no closer to getting passed. Meanwhile, the House of ...
[118]
118th Congress on track to become one of the least productive in ...
Jan 10, 2024 · 118th Congress on track to become one of the least productive in US history. Only 34 bills were passed last year, according to data. ByJoe ...Missing: decline | Show results with:decline
[119]
The polarization in today's Congress has roots that go back decades
Mar 10, 2022 · A Pew Research Center analysis finds that, on average, Democrats and Republicans are farther apart ideologically today than at any time in the past 50 years.Missing: 2010s demonizing language
[120]
The Intergenerational Transmission of Party Preferences in ...
Sep 26, 2022 · We propose a model of intergenerational transmission that includes both direct effects of parents' party preferences on those of their children, as well as ...
[121]
The intergenerational transmission of need for closure underlies the ...
Our findings thus indicate that a significant portion of children's levels of authoritarianism and anti-immigrant prejudice can be explained by parent–child ...Missing: rates | Show results with:rates
[122]
[PDF] Accounting for the Child in the Transmission of Party Identification
Children learn party identification from parents, but this study proposes a two-step model: perception then adoption, where children choose to affiliate.<|separator|>
[123]
Partisanship and Political Animosity in 2016 - Pew Research Center
Jun 22, 2016 · Growing numbers see opposing party as a 'threat' ... Today, 58% of Republicans have a very unfavorable impression of the Democratic Party, up from ...
[124]
'Politics of demonization' breeding division and fear
Feb 22, 2017 · Politics of demonization drives global pushback on human rights. Seismic political shifts in 2016 exposed the potential of hateful rhetoric to ...Missing: paper | Show results with:paper
[125]
The Politics of Enemies | Journal of Democracy
A politics of enemies treats political opponents as threats who must be eliminated or destroyed. The core accusation is that the opponents aim to lay waste to ...
[126]
Islamist terrorist attacks in the world 1979-2024 - Fondapol
... Islamist violence of the 21 century. The United States and Russia have also been hit by jihadist terrorism. During the period 1979-April 2024, there were ...
[127]
[PDF] 2024 Global Terrorism Index - Institute for Economics & Peace
Feb 17, 2024 · TerrorismTracker is the most comprehensive, current and methodologically robust dedicated open-source terrorism incidents database available. It ...
[128]
Cass Review Final Report
No information is available for this page. · Learn why
[129]
False Assumptions Behind Youth Gender Transitions - SEGM
Dec 30, 2022 · Further, the high rate of childhood desistance from gender dysphoria before maturity, (61-98%) and growing evidence of desistance among youth ...
[130]
Gender medicine 'built on shaky foundations', Cass review finds
Apr 10, 2024 · Analysis finds most research underpinning clinical guidelines, hormone treatments and puberty blockers to be low quality.
[131]
[PDF] The Effectiveness of a Costs and Benefits Analysis in Making ...
An effective CBA encourages open inquiry and debate between deci- sion-makers and public administrators. These public administrators are responsible for ...
[132]
https://oxfordre.com/politics/display/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.001.0001/acrefore-9780190228637-e-1007
[133]
Community Notes help reduce the virality of false information on X ...
Sep 18, 2025 · Icons for social media apps on a smartphone. A University of Washington-led study of X found that posts with Community Notes attached were less ...
[134]
Study: Community Notes on X could be key to curbing misinformation
Nov 18, 2024 · He provides solid evidence on how effective Community Notes were at convincing X users to voluntarily retract false or misleading tweets.
[135]
Community notes increase trust in fact-checking on social media - NIH
Here, we presented n = 1,810 Americans with 36 misleading and nonmisleading social media posts and assessed their trust in different types of fact-checking ...
[136]
Political Polarization and the Classroom: Exposure Versus ...
Oct 18, 2024 · An “open classroom climate” means giving students routine opportunities to engage with opposing viewpoints across the major school subjects.<|separator|>
[137]
Countering Disinformation Effectively: An Evidence-Based Policy ...
Jan 31, 2024 · A high-level, evidence-informed guide to some of the major proposals for how democratic governments, platforms, and others can counter disinformation.