It’s no longer news that Ron DeSantis’ campaign is in free-fall. He just let go 40% of his staff. He’s trailing Donald Trump by more than 33 points, according to FiveThirtyEight’s aggregation of polling. And most recently, his campaign fired an aide named Nate Hochman, who was responsible for sharing a clip online featuring Nazi imagery.
Interestingly, the reason critics of DeSantis’ campaign are floating as a potential explanation for these firings is that the campaign as a whole has become “too online.” And in one sense, that’s accurate; you’d have to be fluent in 4chan memes to fully appreciate the content that emerges from the DeSantis campaign.
Let’s spare ourselves the euphemisms. This isn’t an issue of being too online; this is an issue of using fascist content to push a political agenda.
But as far as being “too online” is concerned, here’s the thing — I am too online. Chances are that if you’re reading this, you could afford a little less screen time. So please, let’s spare ourselves the euphemisms. This isn’t an issue of being too online; this is an issue of using fascist content to push a political agenda. That’s the real problem here.
Think about it this way: Somehow, despite the inordinate amount of time I spend on the internet, I’ve managed to do so without co-opting Nazi imagery. The idea that the DeSantis campaign is a victim of some nebulous effect of being “too online” is nothing more than a desperate effort to evade responsibility. Because too online or not, people have agency. They are responsible for the content they produce, irrespective of how many hours they do or don’t spend online. Ron DeSantis and his campaign aren’t “too online”; they’re too fascist.
I say all this knowing full well that when anyone on the left uses the word “fascist,” it’s chalked up to hysterics. But consider this: If, in another county, a political leader banned acknowledging the existence of LGBTQ people in the classroom, what would you call it? If a political leader used the powers of the state to punish a private business for defending the humanity of the LGBTQ population, what would you call it? If a political leader approved rewriting history books to suggest that the heinous institution of slavery actually conferred benefits to its victims, what would you call it? If a political leader usurped the bodily autonomy of half the population to more closely comport with his theocratic agenda, what would you call it? Being a politician in the U.S. shouldn’t absolve you of being called a fascist if you opt to govern like one.
In terms of Hochman’s firing, I don’t think the issue was his beliefs; you don’t get hired to be a spokesman for a leading presidential contender if you haven’t made your stances abundantly clear. I think the issue is that he got caught. The issue is that it’s so easy for the public to see and understand the simple link between the imagery used in the video and its place in history. If the campaign had even an ounce of plausible deniability, Hochman would still be speaking on DeSantis’ behalf. In this case, he was just a tad too sloppy, but don’t be fooled into thinking his firing speaks to DeSantis’ values. It doesn’t.
Frankly, the only thing less surprising than Ron DeSantis’ behavior is his refusal to accept responsibility for it. He’s running to lead the party of personal responsibility; he might want to consider actually taking some.
