The political history of the 20th century bequeathed two words that express radical and absolute evil: fascism and genocide. In the index of political malignancy, fascists and genocidal leaders sit at the top. If there is anything worse, only in the mystical and religious lexicon. Only in hell.

These words impregnated the political vocabulary in different ways. “Fascist” has become banalized as an epithet to designate any authoritarian leader who represses minorities and freedoms.

“Genocide” was not vulgarized in the same way. However, the term liberated itself from the strict bonds of the legal concept, which imposes evidentiary requirements and started to refer to diffuse actions and omissions that multiply death in specific social groups.

The habit of invoking these terms to vent repugnance and disgust affected its impact. Banalization brought distrust. This very mistrust, which was also banalized, suggests that the applicability of the concepts needs a human disaster that is quantitatively comparable to that of Europe in the 1930s. It seems to call for a new Hitler and a new Holocaust.​

Jair Bolsonaro contributed to the reinvigoration of the technical sense of these concepts. Is he a fascist? There is no shortage of Brazilian scholars to say yes. It is not a sectarian cry, but an argument. The debate about “Bolsonaro’s fascism”, “new Brazilian fascism”, “why bolsonarism is a fascism” is already growing.

If “Brazilian researchers” sound unreliable, you can turn to the top researchers on the subject in the world. Federico Finchelstein and Jason Stanley portray Bolsonaro as the most well carved example of a contemporary fascist. It’s all there: anti-intellectualism, attack on truth, construction of parallel reality, sexual anxiety, repudiation of equality, denunciation of moral degeneration, fabrication of the enemy, aesthetics of violence, mythical past, ideal of purity, tactical use of religion.

Is he also a genocidal autocrat? Bolsonaro’s well-known death drive is not enough for that legal characterization; the correlation between his attitude and, for example, the increase in police lethality is not enough; not even his choice to let citizens die and his indifference to preventable deaths in the pandemic.

In the legal sense, genocide is not any slaughter of an ethnic, racial or religious group. The crime can be punished when the intention to destroy this group, by action or inaction, is proved through appropriate evidence. It is tried by the International Criminal Court (ICC).

Bolsonaro has done his part. He fulfilled his promise of “adapt or disappear!” to the country’s indigenous peoples.[…]