Conflict rhetoric attributes barbarities to foes so that the persuaded are not self-deceived

Evidence

In the rhetoric of conflict, opinion shapers ascribe to their foes irrationalities, barbarities, and culpabilities that color public beliefs (Ivie, 1980). In these different instances, those who have been persuaded are not lying to themselves. The misleaders and the misled are different persons. — Albert Bandura, Moral Disengagement, 708

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to the immodesty/complaints moral-panics article — opinion shapers painting out-groups to color public belief. — connects to: Hostile writers assumed what harms an enemy’s cause is automatically true.; Demonizing a rival’s beliefs is a direct expression of hostility, not just propaganda.; The act of public deliberation outweighs its actual argumentative content in easing conflict — Jürgen Habermas, A New Structural Transformation of the…, 78 (+2 more)
• SEED: Angle: the rhetorical machinery of ‘faithless persuasion’ — how being misled by trusted authority is distinct from self-deception, and how this design keeps audiences morally clean.