The spectacle of election debates often brings out the most sensational claims, and the recent US Presidential debate was no exception. Former President Donald Trump made the bizarre assertion that immigrants in Springfield, Ohio, were abducting, killing, and eating the pet cats and dogs of their American neighbours. Even after ABC moderator David Muir pointed out that local officials had denied any such reports, Trump doubled down, claiming he had seen it on television.
Trump’s baseless accusation of immigrants eating pets, is a stark illustration of how dehumanisation is a central tactic employed by far-right movements around the world to stoke xenophobic politics. Although outlandish, his statement fits into a broader strategy designed to demonise immigrants, exploit racial anxieties, and frame them as existential threats to “native” populations.
Across continents, from Europe to the Americas, far-right groups rely on similar tropes, portraying immigrants as criminals, cultural threats, and even subhuman. This discourse, often rooted in fear and misinformation, serves not only to justify draconian immigration policies but also to rally ultranationalism. It feeds into a dangerous politics of exclusion, where “otherness” is framed as an existential threat to the nation-state.
Justification of atrocities
The act of dehumanising specific groups is not a new phenomenon. History offers numerous examples of how dehumanisation has been weaponised to serve political ends. From colonial rule to world wartime propaganda, marginalised groups have often been depicted as less than human, whether through racist caricatures or the language of vermin and infestation. These narratives allow for the justification of atrocities, from slavery to genocide.
In the 21st century, far-right movements have revived these tactics, adjusting them to fit modern concerns around immigration and globalisation. Rather than explicit racial slurs, coded language and fearmongering claims — such as statements about migrants consuming pets — are used to dehumanise and vilify. These tactics serve to stoke fear among the electorate, convincing them that their way of life, safety, and even morality are being jeopardised by the mere presence of immigrants.
To say that immigrants are stealing and eating pets is more than just a bizarre accusation. It is an intentional act of “animalisation,” a dehumanisation technique that seeks to strip individuals of their humanity by associating them with animals. In this case, immigrants are framed as uncivilised, foreign, and fundamentally different, operating outside the moral bounds of “civilised” society.
Dehumanising immigrants serves a specific political purpose: it creates a clear “us vs. them” narrative. By casting immigrants as a threat to both cultural and physical security, far-right leaders position themselves as protectors of the nation. This tactic allows them to rally support from segments of the population who feel threatened by globalisation, demographic shifts, and economic instability.
Promoting exclusionary politics
Far-right movements across the world have employed similar strategies, using immigrants as a convenient target to distract from broader structural issues such as inequality and government corruption.
While dehumanising certain groups is not a new political strategy, far-right movements today have evolved their methods. They now rely on coded language and absurd allegations — such as Trump’s claim about immigrants eating pets — to instill fear and promote exclusionary politics.
In the Netherlands, Geert Wilders has frequently advocated for the mass deportation of Moroccan immigrants. Wilders has also called for closing mosques, casting Muslim immigrants as fundamentally dangerous and incompatible with Dutch society.
Similar patterns were observed in South Asia (where some people were dubbed ‘termites’) as well as Brazil under Jair Bolsonaro’s presidency, where indigenous peoples and Afro-Brazilians have been routinely dehumanised and marginalised.
Bolsonaro had described indigenous populations as living in a “zoo” and shown little concern for the environmental and cultural devastation they face. His immigration policies reflected this same dehumanisation, as they aim to restrict the movement of migrants, particularly those from neighbouring South American countries.
Dehumanising immigrants goes beyond rhetoric — it has serious, real-world consequences. When immigrants are portrayed as criminals, animals, or invaders, governments find it easier to justify harsh measures like family separations, detention camps, and mass deportations. This language also emboldens violence against these groups, contributing to a global rise in hate crimes.
Individuals radicalised by far-right ideologies often commit violent acts against immigrants, seeing them as invaders or enemies of the state. High-profile incidents — such as shootings, stabbings, or arson targeting refugee shelters or immigrant communities — are frequently linked to far-right rhetoric.
The harmful rhetoric undermines core liberal values of dignity and equality, leading to a more divided and violent world. To combat the growing wave of far-right xenophobia, we must reject dehumanising language that divides people based on race or immigration status and instead promote inclusive, compassionate societies.
