> Emotional appeals have likewise long been a facet of political campaigns. In the 1860 US presidential election, Southern politicians and newspaper editors spread fears of what a "Black Republican" win would mean, painting horrific pictures of what the emancipation of slaves would do to the country. In the 2020 US presidential election, modern-day Republicans used Cuban Americans’ fears of socialism in ads on Spanish-language radio and messaging on social media. Because of the emotions involved, many voters believed the campaigns enough to let them influence their decisions.
... where he sets up (anchors) a reprehensible example of an emotional appeal (19th century racial bigotry) to reflect a 'reprehensible' example of modern-day emotional appeal (animosity towards a social/economic philosophy.) To reinforce his point he purposefully neglects to mention it was Southern Democrats who spread fear against 'Black Republicans' and instead uses 'Republican' twice (as a callback) to tweak the more modern-day version of that political party.
The irony of Schneier using his long-standing and influential blog to insist we 'have a serious conversation about limiting the technologies of persuasion' is not lost on this reader.
Edit--Feel free to downvote, but perhaps explain where my comment is wrong?