American Dissonance

01The Architecture of Consumed Reality

When I moved to Canada, I learned of legislation that governs the content broadcast in the country. Per the legislation, approximately 55% of content that is shown on television and various media sources must be Canadian. I always thought it odd that a country would need legislation to govern the content its people consume. Why not let the free market, supply and demand, or any of these economic theories decide naturally what the market yearns for?

I found it hard to digest this legislation for a while, but a conversation with a history professor convinced me that this was less of a tactic to promote and protect Canadian-made content and more a strategy to prevent propaganda from shifting opinions and controlling the narrative. Specifically, propaganda from the United States of America.

Believe me when I say this: I was just as surprised as many of you when they mentioned “Uncle Sam” rather than any other country on the planet. I would have easily accepted North Korea had they named them as “Propaganda Central” but there was no hesitation in their thought; it was an instant response, almost like it was a reflex. The best way I can sum up what has taken me years to dissect and understand is this: We become what we consume. What we consume becomes familiar. And familiar becomes safe.

My earliest memory of watching TV is an episode of Tom and Jerry. In fact, most of what I consumed as a child was American-made content. I learned of the two-party from CNN, Vietnam War and the Gulf War from movies, and some of humanities greatest achievements were learned through the Discovery Channel and National Geographic. I know more American personalities, politicians, and policies, than I know for any other country. My choices were limited to state approved content which had a way of sucking out all life and joy from a human being and American media that had colors, explosions, effects and Star Trek.

I believe, what I think of the world, the hierarchy in the world order, the status quo, comes very strongly from the American perspective whether I like it or not. This has made it easier to accept and believe in that perspective. However, this familiarity has now entered a more dangerous phase. What began as a passive cultural filter has evolved into an active political contagion. The “American perspective” is no longer about movies and news; it has become a manufactured export, a strategic blueprint for power that politicians worldwide are now consuming and mimicking to reshape their own nations.

Today, the contemporary global political order is navigating a period of profound ideological volatility, characterized by the systematic exportation of American right-wing rhetorical strategies to international contexts. This phenomenon represents a sophisticated realignment of global conservative movements around a singular ideological blueprint developed within the United States. This blueprint, anchored in the aggressive use of anti-immigration sentiment, the pejorative deployment of “woke” labeling, and extremist nationalistic narratives, has been adopted by political actors across the Western and non-Western world to achieve domestic agendas. By analyzing the mechanisms of this spread, including institutional bridges like the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), the professionalization of digital memetics (memes), and the adoption of “parental rights” frameworks, this research identifies the emergence of a global illiberal coalition that leverages American-style culture war tactics to dismantle pluralistic democratic norms.[1]

02The American Blueprint: Rhetorical Foundations and the "Technologies of Violence"

The architecture of modern right-wing rhetoric in the United States is built upon what scholars identify as “technologies of violence”, rhetorical agents that do not merely reflect social reality but actively construct it as an arena of existential conflict.[2] This strategy relies on the systematic use of euphemisms, scapegoating, and nationalistic appeals to legitimize the exclusion and marginalization of specific social groups.[3] Central to this framework is the construction of an “us vs them” dynamic, wherein the “people” are framed as an oppressed majority fighting against a “corrupt, globalist elite” and “dangerous outsiders”.[4]

This populist rhetoric is not static; it has evolved from a niche strategy to the mainstream logic of the Republican Party, catalyzed significantly by the 2016 election and the subsequent normalization of demagogic language.[4] The rhetorical shift is characterized by an increase in dramatic and urgent language, which frames political debate as a struggle for national survival.[4] This urgency facilitates the use of dehumanizing metaphors for immigrants, labeling them as “waves,” “floods,” or “swarms,” effectively stripping individuals of their dignity and framing them as destructive forces rather than people fleeing persecution.[5]

The success of these strategies in the American context has established a “portable” ideology. This is facilitated by “terministic screens” and “ideographs”, high-order abstractions such as “radical Islam” or “freedom” that channel public anxiety into support for authoritarian or exclusionary policies.[6] As these rhetorical devices are exported, they are adapted to local grievances while retaining the structural logic of the American original.

03Canada: The Laboratory of Mimetic Radicalization

Canada serves as perhaps the most illustrative example of the rapid adoption and adaptation of American right-wing strategies. Long viewed as an exception to the populist waves sweeping the Western world, Canada is now experiencing a sharp rise in “anti-woke” politics and US-style immigration rhetoric.[5] This shift is most prominent in the leadership of the Conservative Party of Canada and various provincial administrations, where “woke” has been repurposed as a tool to delegitimize policies ranging from Indigenous reconciliation to public health measures.[7]

04The Institutionalization of "Anti-Woke" Rhetoric in Parliament

The weaponization of “woke” in Canadian politics is a calculated strategy designed to stoke fear and resentment.[8] Research analyzing Canadian parliamentary debates highlights a dramatic surge in the use of the term. In 2019, the word was mentioned only twice in Hansard records. By 2023, its usage by Conservative members had increased to 63 instances, with party leader Pierre Poilievre personally responsible for 33 of those mentions.[8] This linguistic surge aligns with Poilievre’s “Canada First” agenda, which serves as a direct rhetorical echo of the Trumpian “America First” movement.[8]

The strategic inversion of the term allows politicians to frame routine equity and inclusion work as “authoritarian threats” or “elite-driven practices”.[7] This has significant implications for Indigenous reconciliation efforts; land acknowledgments and curricular reforms are no longer discussed as legal obligations but are reframed as politically contentious interventions.[7] This “abnormalization of social justice” constrains democratic deliberation and encourages “anticipatory obedience” within public institutions, as leaders seek to avoid being targeted by the “anti-woke” label.[7]

05Provincial Adoption of the "Parental Rights" Movement

The spread of American-style rhetoric is particularly evident in the “parental rights” movement, which has moved from the US South into the legislative chambers of several Canadian provinces.[9] This movement, which gained international prominence with Florida’s “Parental Rights in Education Act” (colloquially known as the “Don’t Say Gay” law), focuses on preventing schools from using students’ preferred pronouns or names without parental consent.[9]

In Saskatchewan, Premier Scott Moe utilized the “notwithstanding clause” to protect a parental consent policy for gender identity, a move that critics argue bypasses Charter rights to enforce a socially conservative agenda.[10] Similarly, in Alberta, Premier Danielle Smith has aligned herself with “Take Back Alberta,” an activist group that characterizes gender identity curriculum as “woke ideology”.[11] The rhetoric used in these provincial debates often characterizes teachers as “activists” who are “going behind parents’ backs” or “indoctrinating” children, mirroring the language used by American governors like Ron DeSantis.[9]

06The Case of British Columbia: Aggressive Rhetoric and Historical Distortions

In British Columbia, the leader of the Conservative Party of BC, John Rustad, has demonstrated the extremist potential of imported rhetoric. Rustad has faced severe criticism for social media posts that appeared to compare the teaching of sexuality and gender identity (SOGI) in schools to the genocide of Indigenous children in residential schools.[12] By framing the state as an entity that “thinks it’s better at raising children than parents,” Rustad misappropriated the trauma of residential schools to support the modern “parental rights” movement.[12]

Furthermore, the dismissal of critiques as “hypersensitive, woke, far-left cancel culture” has become a standard defense among BC Conservative members.[12] This was exemplified when a staffer for the BC Conservative caucus, Lindsay Shepherd, referred to the Survivors’ flag, which honors residential school victims, as a “disgrace” and a “fake flag,” claiming it perpetuated “lies” about Canadian history.[13] This rejection of evidence-based history in favor of provocative, nationalistic narratives mirrors the American far-right’s attacks on Critical Race Theory and efforts to rewrite national narratives.[14]

07Europe: Civilizational Alarmism and the Assault on Supranationalism

In Europe, the American right-wing’s influence is characterized by a “mutual admiration society” between the MAGA movement and various far-right parties.[15] This alignment is built on a shared narrative of “civilizational erasure,” wherein the European Union’s model of integration and inclusivity is framed as a cultural threat that weakens national communities.[16] American leaders, including J.D. Vance, have explicitly accused European allies of “curtailing freedom of expression” by marginalizing parties like the Alternative for Germany (AfD).[15]

08Germany: The AfD and the "Queer-Woke" Moral Panic

The AfD has become a primary conduit for American-style culture war rhetoric in Germany. Party leader Alice Weidel has campaigned on the eradication of “queer-woke insanity,” promising to restrict the legal definition of family to its most traditional binary form.[17] This rhetoric is often amplified by American tech figures, such as Elon Musk, who have taken sides with the AfD on social media to frame the party as the only genuine resistance to a “left-wing hegemony”.

The center-right CDU, under the leadership of Friedrich Merz, has also begun to mimic this rhetoric in an attempt to reclaim voters from the far-right. Merz has pledged to limit “woke” policies and gender-sensitive language, distancing the party from the more moderate foundations established under Angela Merkel.[17] This “snowball effect” illustrates how the import of American rhetorical strategies can pull the entire political spectrum to the right.[17]

09France and Italy: National Sovereignty vs. "American Imports"

In France, the National Rally (RN) sees significant common ground with the US conservative movement, particularly in the “fight against immigration” and the denunciation of “woke” culture.[15] However, the French context adds a unique layer of complexity: President Emmanuel Macron has himself utilized “anti-woke” rhetoric to frame social science theories on race and gender as “foreign, American imports” that threaten French republican secularism.[17] This dual use of the term demonstrates its versatility as a tool for both far-right insurgents and mainstream leaders seeking to defend national identity.

Italy, under Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, represents the most successful institutional integration of these strategies. Meloni has utilized “anti-woke” rhetoric to champion strict legislation targeting LGBTQ+ rights, specifically moving to dismantle laws that recognize same-sex adoption.[17] By positioning herself as a defender of “traditional family values,” Meloni leverages her ideological alignment with the American right to bolster her domestic power while acting as a “bridge-builder” on the international stage.

10The United Kingdom: Manufactured Outrage and Institutional Capture

The United Kingdom has seen a rapid “normalization” of American-style culture war discourse, often facilitated by think-tanks and media outlets with deep ties to American conservative donor networks.[14] The term “woke” has become a “ball of wool” in the UK, a central keyword used to deride policies related to racial justice, environmental protections, and academic freedom.[1]

11Legislation and the "War on Woke"

The UK’s “anti-woke” agenda has manifested in several controversial legislative efforts. The “Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Bill” is framed as a measure to protect academic freedom, yet critics argue it was drafted to “weed out” progressive views on campus, particularly those related to Britain’s colonial history.[14] This mirrors the American legislative movement against “Critical Race Theory” (CRT), with UK ministers like Kemi Badenoch explicitly importing the US attack on CRT to threaten teachers with prosecution for discussing concepts like “white privilege”.[14]

Furthermore, the “abnormalization” of social justice struggles is achieved through a “Gramscian war of position,” where anti-racism and LGBTQ+ rights are framed as “extreme deviant political positions”.[18] This strategy weaponizes “freedom of speech” and the “right to offend” to protect discriminatory language while delegitimizing those who contest fascist or racist ideologies.[18]

12Public Perception and the Pejorative Shift

The success of this rhetorical import is reflected in public sentiment. By 2022, 54% of the UK public agreed that the country was divided by “culture wars,” an increase from 46% in 2020.[19] Awareness of terms like “being woke” and “cancel culture” has surged across the political spectrum.[19] Crucially, the term “woke” is now more likely to be seen as an insult (36%) than a compliment (26%), a significant shift from 2020 when the public was evenly split.[19] This negative perception is particularly strong among Conservative voters and Leave supporters, indicating a successful alignment of “anti-woke” sentiment with existing political fault lines.[19]

13Brazil: Bolsonarism and the Weaponization of Institutional Distrust

Brazil represents a primary case study in how American-style right-wing rhetoric can be used to undermine democratic institutions. Former President Jair Bolsonaro, heavily influenced by the American “Trumpian” model, utilized a sophisticated disinformation machinery to attack election integrity and democratic values.[20]

14The "Office of Hatred" and Disinformation Campaigns

The Bolsonaro administration reportedly operated a publicly funded “office of hatred” within the government, tasked with orchestrating coordinated attacks on online critics, journalists, and activists.[20] This operation relied heavily on “computational propaganda” and the spread of false news to defend the government and attack opponents.[20]

Bolsonaro’s rhetoric consistently mirrored American claims of “stolen elections.” Despite providing no concrete evidence, he and his allies used social media to undermine public trust in Brazil’s electronic voting system, leading to the antidemocratic violence in Brasília on January 8, 2023, a direct echo of the US January 6 insurrection.[21]

15The "PL das Fake News" and the Defense of Disinformation

The debate over Brazil’s “Fake News Bill” (PL 2630/2020) highlights the adoption of American-style “free speech” rhetoric to protect disinformation networks. Bolsonaro and his supporters framed the bill, which sought to establish platform accountability and transparency, as an authoritarian attempt to “criminalize content” and “undermine internet freedom”.[22] By framing regulation as “censorship,” they effectively used the language of liberal democracy to protect the mechanisms of its erosion.[22]

16The Global Institutional Bridge: CPAC and the Professionalization of the Right

The Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) has evolved from an American event into a “global phenomenon,” taking place in countries including Japan, Australia, Brazil, Hungary, and Mexico.[23] These international summits serve as critical sites for “reactionary strategic thinking and organizing,” where American-style politics are “made available for foreign audiences through explicit and overt organizing”.[23]

17The CPAC International Summit and Global Agreements

In 2024, the “CPAC International Summit” produced a landmark agreement that consolidated the global right’s grievances into a unified platform. The “Be It Resolved” Global Agreement serves as a master document for mimicry, condemning what it terms the “police state tactics” of leaders ranging from Joe Biden to Lula da Silva.[24]

This summit demonstrates how CPAC acts as a “conduit through which American-style political rhetoric and strategic organizing can be adopted by local actors”.[23] The conferences provide a platform for international right-wing “superstardom,” where speakers like Nigel Farage, Liz Truss, and Javier Milei deliver redundant but highly effective rhetoric to “rally the troops”.[23]

18J-CPAC and the "Anti-Woke" Cultural Defense in Japan

In Japan, the Japanese Conservative Union (J-CU) has adopted the CPAC model to frame cultural issues through a right-wing lens.[23] A particularly striking example of mimicry is the emergence of “anti-woke” media criticism. Self-described “anti-woke grifters” on social media have targeted Japanese media, such as the anime Beastars and the video game Donkey Kong Bananza, labeling them as “woke propaganda”.[25] These critics often mimic American counterparts like “Nerdrotic,” arguing that Western journalists are “forcing” Japanese creators to include diverse elements.[25] This demonstrates how American culture war categories are being applied to foreign cultural products that have no historical connection to US social justice movements.

19Digital Memetics and the Aestheticization of Extremism

The spread of right-wing rhetoric is heavily dependent on the “visual culture of memes” and the rise of generative AI.[26] Memes serve as versatile tools for “mimetic weaponization,” allowing radical ideologies to be condensed into “palatable” and “humorous” formats that bypass traditional barriers to hate speech.[26]

20The "Yes Chad" and "Pepe the Frog" Ecosystem

The alt-right’s use of memes has established a “cultural policy” that combines white supremacy with digital game and hacker cultures.[27] Iconic memes like “Pepe the Frog” and “Yes Chad” are used to normalize extremist beliefs by progressively exposing users to increasingly malign content concealed as “ironic parody”.[27] This strategy shifts the “Overton Window,” making previously unacceptable ideas part of the broader social consciousness.[27]

In Australia, social media accounts have used “Operation Raise the Colours” and “March for Australia” rallies to sell white supremacy under the “shield of ordinary mums and dads”.[28] These movements utilize TikTok and AI-generated imagery to create emotional responses, such as depicting the Sydney Harbour Bridge covered in Australian flags as a response to pro-Palestine rallies.[28]

The professionalization of political meme-making allows these messages to outperform traditional journalistic content across all behavioral metrics, including screen time and likes.[29] For younger audiences, these “meme-news” markets often exert more influence than traditional media, effectively altering political opinions through bite-sized, affective messages.[29]

21Conclusion: The Global Impact of Rhetorical Mimicry

The systematic mimicry of American right-wing rhetoric by international actors has fundamentally reshaped the global political environment. This “rhetorical export” model has successfully delegitimized social justice initiatives, institutionalized distrust in democratic processes, and created a unified global language for illiberalism. From the “parental rights” bills in Canadian provinces to the “anti-woke” legislative efforts in the UK and the election denialism of Brazil, the pattern is clear: American-style culture war tactics are being used as a primary strategy to achieve authoritarian and exclusionary agendas worldwide.

The “abnormalization of social justice” and the weaponization of “freedom of speech” have created an environment where evidence-based policy is increasingly subordinated to ideological performance. As international right-wing networks continue to professionalize through organizations like CPAC and the strategic use of generative AI, the challenge for democratic institutions will be to recognize that these local grievances are often nodes in a broader, transatlantic rhetorical strategy. The future of liberal democracy may depend on the ability to counter these “technologies of violence” with a discourse that restores the legitimacy of pluralism, inclusion, and the rule of law.

Sources:

1. Political correctness gone woke in polarised society: the emergence of a new keyword in an old ‘culture war’ – CentAUR, accessed 2025, https://centaur.reading.ac.uk/117030/12/6822fabddedf9.pdf
2. Communication field academic research on fascism/white nationalism, accessed 2025, https://www.natcom.org/resources-library/communication-field-academic-research-on-fascism-white-nationalism/
3. (UN)WELCOME TO AMERICA: A CRITICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS OF ANTI-IMMIGRANT RHETORIC IN TRUMP’S SPEECHES AND CONSERVATIVE MAINSTRE – CSUSB ScholarWorks, accessed 2025, https://scholarworks.lib.csusb.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1710&context=etd
4. 21st Century Right Wing Rhetoric Evolution and the Effects of Populism – SURFACE at Syracuse University, accessed 2025, https://surface.syr.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2701&context=honors_capstone
5. Beyond the Harris-Trump debate: How politicians use anti-immigrant rhetoric to mask systemic failures – York University, accessed 2025, https://www.yorku.ca/news/2024/09/16/beyond-the-harris-trump-debate-how-politicians-use-anti-immigrant-rhetoric-to-mask-systemic-failures/
6. Rhetoric of the Far Right: A Rhetorical Analysis of Donald Trump and Viktor Orbán – Fisher Digital Publications, accessed 2025, https://fisherpub.sjf.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1272&context=ur
7. When social justice becomes abnormal: the rise of ‘anti-woke’ politics in Canada, accessed 2025, https://www.hilltimes.com/story/2025/10/06/when-social-justice-becomes-abnormal-the-rise-of-anti-woke-politics-in-canada/476155/
8. The many dangers of Pierre Poilievre’s war on ‘woke’ – Policy Options, accessed 2025, https://policyoptions.irpp.org/2025/04/poilievre-woke/
9. Parental rights movement – Wikipedia, accessed 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parental_rights_movement
10. Danielle Smith’s UCP base has big demands. She’s wary of going quite that far | CBC News, accessed 2025, https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/danielle-smith-ucp-convention-parental-rights-analysis-1.7019111
11. Parental consent about new pronouns at school among policy proposals at UCP AGM – CBC, accessed 2025, https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/parental-consent-about-new-pronouns-at-school-among-policy-proposals-at-ucp-agm-1.6996131
12. B.C. Tory leader defends post that appeared to liken teaching of sexuality and gender to residential schools – CBC, accessed 2025, https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/john-rustad-sept-30-tweet-1.6984159
13. UBCIC calls for firing of B.C. Conservative staffer after comments on orange shirts, flag, accessed 2025, https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/bc-conservative-staffer-comments-orange-shirt-lindsay-shepherd-1.7646721
14. Who is behind the ‘war on woke’ : Race & Class – Ovid, accessed 2025, https://www.ovid.com/journals/racl/fulltext/10.1177/03063968221127591~who-is-behind-the-war-on-woke-an-interview-with-ralph-wilson
15. From rhetoric to alignment: US political line echoes with Europe’s far right, accessed 2025, https://europeannewsroom.com/from-rhetoric-to-alignment-us-political-line-echoes-with-europes-far-right/
16. Trump’s culture war on Europe is far from over – European Council on Foreign Relations, accessed 2025, https://ecfr.eu/article/trumps-culture-war-on-europe-is-far-from-over/
17. Battleground Europe: the rise of anti-woke movements … – Frontiers, accessed 2025, https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/political-science/articles/10.3389/fpos.2025.1568816/full
18. The abnormalisation of social justice: The ‘anti-woke culture war’ discourse in the UK – LSE Research Online, accessed 2025, https://eprints.lse.ac.uk/114596/1/09579265221095407.pdf
19. Woke, cancel culture and white privilege – the shifting terms of the UK’s “culture war” – King’s College London, accessed 2025, https://www.kcl.ac.uk/policy-institute/assets/the-shifting-terms-of-the-uks-culture-war.pdf
20. View of Content analysis of political disinformation spread by Jair Bolsonaro on Twitter/X, accessed 2025, https://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/13612/12044
21. Election Manipulation in Brazil’s 2022 General Elections – Mozilla Foundation, accessed 2025, https://www.mozillafoundation.org/en/research/library/global-elections-casebook/brazil-case-study/
22. Brazil: Freedom on the Net 2023 Country Report, accessed 2025, https://freedomhouse.org/country/brazil/freedom-net/2023
23. Rallying the Troops: CPAC and the International Far Right …, accessed 2025, https://www.illiberalism.org/rallying-the-troops-cpac-and-the-international-far-right/
24. CPAC International Summit 2024, accessed 2025, https://www.cpac.network/cpac-international-summit-2024
25. Anti Woke Criticism of Japanese Media is Painfully Shallow | Hunting Griftly Bears, accessed 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qa6d8GZB9yg
26. Comparison of AI-generated Images vs. Traditional Memes in Right-Wing Social Media Discourse, accessed 2025, https://crossingsjournal.ca/index.php/crossings/article/download/324/119
27. Memes & the Extreme Right-Wing – Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD), accessed 2025, https://www.isdglobal.org/isd-explainer/memes-the-extreme-right-wing/
28. How neo-Nazis used the shield of ‘ordinary mums and dads’ anti …, accessed 2025, https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2025/sep/02/how-neo-nazis-used-the-shield-of-ordinary-mums-and-dads-at-australia-anti-immigration-rallies-to-sell-white-supremacy-ntwnfb
29. (PDF) The emerging market of meme-news: how political Internet memes inform young adults and shape their political opinions – ResearchGate, accessed 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/395135132_The_emerging_market_of_meme-news_how_political_Internet_memes_inform_young_adults_and_shape_their_political_opinions