By Joseph Lane
As Donald Trump has started to fill out his Cabinet, many of the fears held by Democrats (and anti-Trump voters in general) have been confirmed.
His likely Cabinet and transition-team appointments are primarily white men such as Jeff Sessions, a man deemed too racist for a federal judgeship, and Steve Bannon, formerly of Breitbart News, a website designed for a group whose members refers to themselves as the “alt-right.”
The “alt-right” has used Breitbart to post articles with shockingly real headlines such as the following (courtesy of CNN): “Bill Kristol: Republican Spoiler, Renegade Jew,” “Hoist it High and Proud: The Confederate Flag Proclaims a Glorious Heritage,” and “Gay Rights have made us dumber, it’s time to get back in the closet.”
That is but a small sample of the horrifying headlines that Breitbart, under Bannon’s leadership, found fit to print.
The issue here isn’t Breitbart’s willingness to post these ludicrous articles but rather the absurdity of posting it under the guise of a group called the “alt-right.” The group should refer to itself and should be referred to by others as what it is: neo-Nazis.
These neo-Nazis members who refers to themselves as the “alt-right” have written articles about why they believe gay individuals (though they did not use that term) and women are lesser people than straight white men. They have called out Jews for problems in the United States. They have beaten up minority individuals at Trump rallies. They give speeches “heiling” Trump to crowds responding with Nazi salutes.
Of course, as a Jew myself, I just opened the possibility that this column may be republished on Breitbart with the headline “Arrogant Jew lashes out at Breitbart.” And that is a risk I’m more than willing to take.
In a general sense, I believe comparisons to Hitler and the Nazis to be extreme by their very nature. The atrocities that Hitler and his Nazis committed are representative of the single worst period in human history. To compare the injustices of today to the Nazi regime are often extreme and intentionally hyperbolic to prove a point. This comparison, however, is not out of place in the slightest. In fact, it isn’t even a comparison, it’s just the truth.
Webster’s dictionary defines a Neo-Nazi as “a member of a group espousing the programs and policies of Hitler’s Nazis.”
But the problem is two-fold. This group has used the name “alt-right” to gain traction among the cowardly and prejudiced, but the bigger issue is that much of the mainstream media have not fought this designation and instead has adopted it.
Though, they seem to be catching on. John Daniszewski of the Associated Press recently published a piece on its blog detailing how journalists ought to write about the group, stating to “avoid using the term generically and without definition, however, because it is not well-known and the term may exist primarily as a public-relations device to make its supporters’ actual beliefs less clear and more acceptable to a broader audience. In the past we have called such beliefs racist, neo-Nazi, or white supremacist.” They also go on to designate the use of quotations with “alt-right” to convey the misleading nature of the term.
AP is spot-on. It is the duty of news outlets and reporters to stop referring to this group of people by a made-up name that does nothing but minimize how disturbing it is.
For whatever reason, the public has felt comfortable protecting this group’s right to spread hatred by referring to them with a deceptive term. I will no longer be a part of that trend, and I hope that others will join me. From here on out, in columns and conversation, I will refer to the group that has labeled itself the “alt-right” with its real name, “neo-Nazis.” The only concern I have is that this just might please the movement.