No analogy is perfect, but I think there's more to the Alex Jones comparison than you might think. Lots of overlap in the Venn Diagram of their followers. Ditto their enemies, for whom the term "evil" is the go-to characterization. /1 https://twitter.com/benshapiro/status/1350088009908105219

Both make their money selling survival gear, brain pills, but the ultimate draw is two minutes of hate spread out over hours-long broadcasts. /2

Mass shooters have a tendency to follow both online. This does not-REPEAT: DOES NOT-mean either has "inspired" shootings. However, their style of feeding the mob another piece of meat appeals to those who ultimately do violence. /3 https://twitter.com/nathanTbernard/status/1182704128851697666

They're also big fans of taking the wackiest of their political opponents (or the easiest to paint as wacky), use them as a synecdoche for all Dems, Muslims, never-Trumpers, trans people, feminists, etc. and then paint them all as evil. /4

There's also a general style of argumentation. They dodge and weave in a manner that's honestly impressive, constantly shifting the target in the most perfect examples of Brandolini's law imaginable. /5 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandolini%27s_law

Let's not also forget their initial opposition to Trump before they both dove feet-first! /6

Jones' fabrications are more egregious than Shapiro's. But Shapiro's "let's say" arguments are a not-too-distant relative of Jones' outright fabrications. The former is blatant nonsense. The latter lets you make a point given assumptions, but still divorced from reality. /7

I could go on, but before closing I want to make something very, very clear: The differences between Jones & Shapiro are significant. Jones is orders of magnitude worse. He argues that his opponents are pedos in league with the literal Christian devil. /8

Shapiro sticks with the (comparatively) muted "evil," "stupid," "trying to undermine western values" shtick. /9

But the point must be made: when Shapiro demonizes and makes clear there's nothing redeemable about his political enemies (who happen to be the same people as Jones') he's starting them down a path. /10

Some stick with Shaprio's brand of conservatism and stay there. But being primed to think of politics as zero sum and your enemies as not only evil but actively out to get you, it's a lot easier to think of them as pedos trying to establish a one world government. /11

Similarly, it's very easy to take Jones' rhetoric, substitute "globalists" and "elites" for "Jews" and think you're listening to Father Coughlin or the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. ( @knowledge_fight did an episode about this)./ 12 https://knowledgefight.libsyn.com/knowledge-fight-protocols-of-zion

A desire to beat, destroy, and humiliate your enemies (Shapiro's admitted debate strategy & goal) rather than find common ground with them or be made smarter by them is a really dangerous impulse. It's also just...wrong. /13

I'm increasingly convinced that for the right-wingers who make money feeding the mob a piece of meat, they'd prefer to be shouted down or have their speaking engagement cancelled than actually say their peace. /14

I was a college Republican who was frequently in the minority in classroom and dorm room discussions. I also did college debate & wasn't shy about my political beliefs. Got plenty of pushback and eye-rolls, but I never inspired the vitriol that Shapiro et al get. Why? /15

1. I (at least tried to be) a generally friendly person. I made & have a lot of friends from college who disagreed with me. One of my best friends is a socialist. Not only am I grateful for their friendship, but I'm glad I have a "sparring" partner who makes me smarter. /16

2. I tried to find common ground. Do we disagree about how much regulation is necessary? Fair enough, but let's talk about CJ reform and how that can achieve goals we have in common. /17

3. I avoided playing the victim. When you go into an environment where you're in the (intellectual) minority assuming the majority is out to get you, it's easy to see disagreement as conspiracy, which isn't conducive to debate. /18

None of this is to say that I was (or am) a saint. But I can say that I am a better person than Ben Shapiro and have at least not made the world a worse place. If you're confident in your arguments, you don't need to malign your enemies to convince people. /19

A lot of right-wing online radicalization happens because anti-feminist, anti-left, etc. exploit the "camaraderie of the accused" (to use a phrase from @ContraPoints). See this video from @Dan_Arrows to explain this progression. /20

Exploiting anti-left wing sentiment, weaponizing it for clicks and brain pills, and then turning it into an addiction to outrage is Ben Shaprio & Alex Jones' basic strategy. Also, here's a totally unrelated quote from "Anatomy of Fascism." /21

This thread turned out to be much longer than expected, but to sum it up: the whole right wing media ecosystem, from Rush to Tucker to Shapiro to Jones, is about constructing political enemies, making them a threat, and making you angry about them. /22

There's nothing constructive about them. It's all destructive, all about rage. And even if your intention is just to rant (or to sell brain pills), these words matter. When your opponents are evil, the rules of engagement become far more aggressive. /23

It's not hard to see how this can get out of hand. /END