reflectivepundit

Trump’s Hateful Rhetoric and Political Violence

By Brigitte L. Nacos, Robert Y. Shapiro, and Yaeli Bloch-Elkon

On September 29, 2019, with his impeachment looming, President Donald Trump (@realDonaldTrump) retweeted a warning by the Evangelical Pastor Robert Jeffress, “If the Democrats are successful in removing the President from office it will cause a Civil War like fracture in this Nation from which our Country will never heal.” Two days later, U.S. Representative Louie Gohmert, a Republican of Texas, warned Democrats that their “coup” was “pushing America into a civil war.”[1] On far-right websites Trump supporters suggested drastic and even violent actions against the “enemy” within. Some warned that they may need to exercise their Second Amendment rights—in other words, take up arms against the traitors. Responding to one of Trump’s daily Twitter attacks on Adam Schiff, the leading U.S. Representative in the impeachment inquiry, his followers seconded the President’s rhetorical assaults. One male commenter attacked Schiff as “a co-conspiratory [sic] in a coup attempt. This is treason.” That same day, a 52-year old man in Tucson, Arizona, left a death threat on Schiff ’s voice mail. “I’m gonna f_ing blow your brains out,” he warned.[2] The would-be attacker told police officers that “he watches Fox News and likely was upset at something that he saw on the news.” He also stated that “he strongly dislikes the Democrats, and feels they are to blame for the country’s political issues.”[3] In his residence, the police found an AR-15 assault rifle, two pistols, and 700 rounds of ammunition.[4] Although these examples of hate speech and threats of violence seemed shocking, they were merely iterations of Trumpian rhetoric and signposts for significant increases in right-extreme violence and school bullying in the United States. Our research found that Trump’s online and off-line hate speech corresponded with his followers’ aggressive rhetoric, violent threats, and actual violence against Trump’s declared “enemies,” most of all, minorities, the news media, and oppositional politicians.

For the comprehensive research report on the links between Trump's aggressive words and the growth of right-extreme violence read our just published article in the online journal Perspectives on Terrorism.

Can America’s Democracy Survive the Onslaught by Trump and his Henchmen? Will the Press Act as Guardian of Democracy?

By Brigitte L. Nacos

Shamelessly like autocratic rulers at all times President Trump spelled out what he had alluded to for some time: If his opponent Joe Biden wins the election, Mr. Trump will not leave office peacefully. Worse yet, he and his henchmen are now plotting a scheme that is to assure Trump’s victory as The Atlantic reported. Asked yesterday during a news briefing whether he would commit to a peaceful transfer of power [in case he would lose the election], Mr. Trump answered, “Get rid of the ballots, and you’ll have a very — we’ll have a very peaceful, there won’t be a transfer, frankly. There’ll be a continuation.”  

In other words, 40 days before election day Donald Trump America and the world that he will remain U.S. president regardless of the election results. That is what happens in dictatorships, not in democracies. But during Trump’s presidency the rules of the games have already tilted in favor of raw presidential power.

To disregard Trump’s statements as just words would be a grave mistake. Especially when coming out of the mouths of the powerful, words matter; they tend to be followed by deeds.  

Like other autocrats, Trump signals his misdeeds by tweets or public statements. Thus, he makes no secret of the reason behind his rush to appoint and seat a replacement for Justice Bader Ginsberg: He wants a full Supreme Court dominated by GOP appointed conservatives in place to rule in his favor in case of a post-election dispute.

For more than 200 years, no sitting U.S. president declared upcoming elections to be illegitimate and refused to promise a peaceful change of power in case of defeat. It took the worst president in American history to throw his nation into an existential crisis of democracy.

The issue is no longer whether Republicans or Democrats win next month’s election, the issue is whether American democracy survives the already raging onslaught by an autocratic showman and his equally ruthless supporting cast.

Since there is little hope that other Republican leaders join Senator Mitt Romney in rejecting Trump’s power play, the leading media organizations may be the last hope to act as guardians of our democracy.

But that would take an agreement to report Trump’s threat to democracy day-in and day-out as most important news. It would mean for the press not to be distracted by Trump’s daily or even hourly launched rhetorical bombs that are minor in comparison to the existential danger. It would also mean that the failures of this presidency are highlighted every day, again and again.

Especially with respect to the Covid-19 pandemic. The president ignores the more than 200,000 Americans who died so far—more than half of them because of his mismanagement and his diabolical political calculations early on that states with Democratic majorities were mostly affected by the deadly disease.

It would mean for the press to remind the public that at this point the number of coronavirus victims is 70times higher than the number of those killed during the 9/11 attacks. Osama bin Laden, in charge of those the horrific 9/11 incidents, was called here and elsewhere in the West “evil-doer.”

I have spent much times and effort to research the central role of publicity and propaganda in terrorism and argued consistently that over-covering might well encourage more such political violence.

Concerning the coverage of President Trump now, I argue similarly that the news media must refrain from over-covering him and from reporting every aggressive and nasty word he speaks and tweets.

Instead, the news media must stick to the only matter that counts now: Most prominently reported and placed news and commentary about the existential calamity Americans faces—and must resist.

Autocratic Demagogues of the Past and Donald Trump

By Brigitte L. Nacos

For the last several weeks I minimized my news consumption and instead took time out to read brand new books and reread classics in search for food of thought as I struggled to make sense of the senseless politics and policies of Donald Trump. While I may not have succeeded to understand the narcissistic 45^th U.S. President fully, I found similarities between Trump’s and other authoritarian demagogues’ character traits.

Describing Adolf Hitler’s personality during his downfall from power, Volker Ullrich writes in his recently published second volume of his Hitler biography (Hitler: Downfall 1939-1945),

“Several of his character traits had become even more pronounced: his egocentrism, his inability to self-criticize, and his commensurate tendency to overestimate himself, his lack of scruples when choosing means to his ends, his habit of betting everything on a single card, his contempt for others and his lack of empathy.”    

This short description of Hitler’s distinct personality disorders matches Trump’s moral deficits and his disparaging rhetoric and harmful behavior perfectly. While it is well documented that Mr. Trump is a pathological liar, nothing displays his lack of public truthfulness more shockingly than the just publicized textual and audio-taped excerpts from Bob Woodward’s forthcoming book Rage.

We hear Trump’s voice as he tells Woodward in January and February and March that he was fully informed of and understood the deadly Covid-19 threat but underplayed it publicly to avoid panic. In public, he actually denied the threat, called it hoax—the Democrat’s hoax.

The President, as always, must have figured –and still does--that he knows everything better than the best experts, whether the generals or his own administration’s public health experts that are globally known as leaders in their field. He threatened and silenced those experts who stepped forth and told the truth. Instead, he recommended harmful disinfectants and unproven the hydroxychloroquine medicine to counter the virus.  

This squares with Hitler’s egocentrism, genius complex, and contempt for others. Hitler aimed to be the heroic builder of a Thousand Year Reich; Trump aims to be recognized by historians as the greatest president since Lincoln—or the greatest president ever.

Since yesterday, I have heard many talking heads bemoaning Trump’s failure to tell the American public the truth about the Covid-19 threat as early as he knew it. Of course, I agree.  He should have used every one of his press conferences to promote face masks, social distancing, and frequent washing of hands. Instead he politicized face masks by not wearing one, holding mass rallies, and praising armed militias who threatened state governments for Covid-19 measures.

But words must be accompanied by deeds. And here Donald Trump’s complete failure contributed significantly to the high number of infections and the horrific number of deaths—more than 190,000 today. The President rejected from the outset the detailed plan for managing a virus pandemic established during the George W. Bush and Barack Obama administrations. Although he knew of the highly infectious and deadly nature of Covid-19 according to the Woodward tapes, he refused to immediately order the massive and speedy production of personal protective equipment (PPE) for the medical community, testing kits, masks for the general population.

Trump and his Base: Threat of Fascist “Mobilizing Passions”

By Brigitte L. Nacos

Fifteen years ago, in his excellent book “Anatomy of Fascism,” Robert O. Paxton wrote in the last paragraph of the last chapter, “Fascism exist at the level of Stage One within all democratic countries—not excluding the United States.” Today, American democracy may have moved into a higher stage of fascist infection.

I reread Paxton’s book after (1) I saw video clips of Stormtroopers in the streets of Portland, Oregon, grabbing non-violent persons and driving them away in unmarked vehicles; (2) I learned that heavily armed agents of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) were the  “law and order” forces; (3) I read of the acting secretary of homeland security Chad Wolf tweeting that “our men and women in uniform are patriots. We will never surrender to violent extremists on my watch;” and (4) I heard Donald Trump refusing to answer the plain question, whether he would accept the election results in fall in case of his loss.

All of the above is straight out of the horror book of fascism and reminiscent of violence by Mussolini’s Black Shirts and Hitler’s Brown Shirts against political opponents during their respective leaders’ rise to dictatorial powers, and fascist leaders’ success to extend their staying power by all means.

While it seemed strange that the DHS, established after 9/11 to counter terrorism, never dispatched those agents to show their patriotism against violent right-extremists responsible for almost all domestic terrorism in the last several years, the U.S. President himself revealed that the storm trooper deployment was a partisan move to energize his movement in the forefront of the upcoming elections. “I’m going to do something — that, I can tell you,” Mr. Trump told reporters the other day. “Because we’re not going to let New York and Chicago and Philadelphia and Detroit and Baltimore and all of these — Oakland is a mess. We’re not going to let this happen in our country. All run by liberal Democrats.”

Just as the more than 140,000 Americans killed by the Trump virus have become our daily normalcy, the federal “law and order” violence in Portland and the promise of more of these storm trooper deployments did not result in massive public or elite outrage and protest. It seemed merely another illegitimate move by a president and his devoted servants.

Instead of providing a succinct definition of fascism Paxton enumerated what he calls “mobilizing passions,” among them the following:

• The belief that one’s group is a victim, a sentiment that justified any action, without legal or moral limits, against its enemies, both internal and external;
• The need for closer integration of a purer community, by consent if possible, or by exclusionary violence if necessary;
• The beauty of violence and the efficacy of will, when they are devoted to the group’s success;
• The right of the chosen people to dominate others without restrain from any kind of human or divine law…

We have not yet arrived at fascism as we know it from history, but we are witnessing in the age of Donald Trump demagogic populism with moves to illiberal democracy and now fascist traits as well.  

The acceptance of the unacceptable is the scariest aspect of the present political crisis. As Paxton notes rightly, fascist movements “could never attain power without the acquiescence or even active assent of the traditional elites…party leaders, high government officials” …”and the help of ordinary people, even conventionally good people.”

He ended the book with a somewhat optimistic chord. “We stand a much better chance of responding wisely, however, if we understand how fascism succeeded in the past,” Paxton wrote.  

I do not share that optimism and fear that most Americans did not learn the lesson of earlier fascism.

 

When a Weak Draft-Dodger Plays Military Strongman

By Brigitte L. Nacos

When civil unrest breaks out in countries ruled by authoritarian leaders, protesters are attacked, injured, and killed by heavily armed police or, more often, by military forces. In democracies top leaders recognize legitimate grievances of peaceful protesters, talk to activists, cool down the heat, and leave the law and order part to local and state leaders—especially with respect to terrorist and criminal violence perpetrated by a small minority of extremist intrudes that exploit these situations for their own causes.

In the last nine days, the U.S. President has not acted like the leader of a democracy and certainly not the American democracy. Instead of recognizing the rightful grievances of African Americans and all people of color—not only concerning the documented police violence, he exploits the violent destruction and looting of properties for his own interests.

In his tweets and public statements this president blames the radical left Antifa for carrying out violence. The fact is that some anarchists are responsible for violent acts designed to increase unrest and weaken the glue that holds citizens and their governing institutions and actors together. But this leaderless movement has at best a few hundred activists. The president does not talk at all about the more serious threat: the many extreme right groups that fit under the umbrella of the alt-right: White Supremacist, Neo-Nazis, White Nationalists—many of them heavily armed and militarily trained. Last weekend, three members of the far-right "Boogaloo" movement were arrested in Las Vegas with Molotov cocktails in their possession as they mingled with “Black Lives Matter” protesters. Boogaloo members, as some other organized right-wing extremists, want to provoke a civil war and turn it into a race war against minorities.

But neither the President nor his Attorney General are interested in countering the political violence, terrorism in other words, by intensifying the work of the very capable counterterrorism community. Instead, it seems that the President and his Enablers consider the violent part of the powerful protest movement in the streets as an opportunity. As Rush Limbaugh said last week, “Trump is having fun watching the fires.”

Fun? Opportunities?

Just think of Monday this week, when military forces were moved into Washington, D.C. and used raw force to remove peaceful protesters from Lafayette Park. The uniformed force charged the crowd, beat a team of Australian reporters, and used tear gas and rubber bullets to disperse the crowd. A blackhawk helicopter hovered low over buildings and streets to scare the hell out of ordinary citizens

For Donald Trump, the cowardly draft-dodger, this was a beautifully staged scene to pose as military strongman along the lines of all the autocrats around the world he admires.

We know that nothing will change in Trump’s rhetoric and behavior. Therefore, it is most frightening that his supporting cast plays all roles according to the president’s script. A Defense Secretary who calls American cities “battle spaces” that need to be “dominated.” By force. A chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff who marches in camouflage uniform along with the President in the park just “liberated” from citizens. For a macabre photo opportunity that is already fashioned into a campaign ad. Docile Republicans in Congress condoning Trump’s misdeeds by silence or excuses that they are “late for lunch.”

November 3^rd is Election Day. Trump mentioned this date often. I pray and hope that there are more voters on the side of our constitutional rights of “peaceably to assemble and petition the government for a redress of grievances” than on the side of a would-be strongman that commands the military.