Most people grow out of name-calling by about the ninth grade — maybe 12th grade if you’re particularly immature. By that time, you’re likely aware that calling someone names is mean, aggressive and not actually a good way to create a positive change in a relationship.
This can’t be said, though, for Donald Trump, who purposely name-calls (like when he labels his critics and opponents “haters,” “fake,” “bad people” or “crazy”).
Experts say this is a pointed strategy. “It’s demagoguery is what he’s doing,” said Patricia Roberts-Miller, a professor emerita of rhetoric and writing who taught at the University of Texas at Austin.
There’s lots that goes into demagoguery (more on that below), but to put it simply, it’s political rhetoric that uses emotions and prejudices to push forward an agenda.
It’s proven to be an effective strategy for Trump, but is a clear red flag in what it reveals about the way he leads and views others. Here’s what to know:
There’s a method behind Trump’s name-calling, and it goes all the way back to Ancient Greece and Rome.
Trump utilizes what’s known as an “ad hominem” attack, said Jennifer Mercieca, a professor in the department of communication and journalism at Texas A&M University and author of “Demagogue for President: The Rhetorical Genius of Donald Trump.”
“That’s a Latin word, and we have been studying ad hominem attacks since way back in Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome. The word ad means ‘to’ and homonym means ‘the person’ or ‘the man,’ and so it is a distraction strategy in debate, meaning that you, instead of addressing whatever is the central issue of the debate, you reroute the audience’s attention to the person, and it is used … to discredit the opposition,” said Mercieca.
Ad hominem attacks may disqualify you from high school and collegiate debates, but Trump has successfully used them since 2015, according to Mercieca.
In 2015, he used the term “low-energy” to describe his political opponent Jeb Bush, and since then, you can likely think of countless derogatory terms he’s used to describe his opponents or critics — “sleepy Joe Biden,” “crazy Nancy” Pelosi and the “radical left,” to name a few.
“The fundamental reason why he does it is … to discredit them, but also to reinforce the us versus them mentality and polarization,” noted Mercieca.
The “us versus them” mentality, or “good guys” versus “bad guys,” is a huge part of Trump’s strategy and has become popular among many of his supporters, too, Mercieca added.
“It allows people to deride the opposition. They’re illegitimate. We shouldn’t consider what they have to say. We’ll just mock them,” she said.
Trump also uses “whataboutism” to deflect, Roberts-Miller said. He does this by bringing up the alleged past mistakes of the “bad guys.”
“It’s called the bad math of demagoguery,” she explained. “If I can find anything that a member of your group did that’s bad, it erases anything bad on the part of my group.”
Mocking opponents keeps Trump from talking about politics in a productive way, experts say.
Trump’s personal attacks are also a way to stop negotiations. Think about it: If you’re in a meeting and your colleague calls another colleague “crazy” and lists a bunch of reasons for it, you might struggle to focus on what your “crazy” colleague has to say.
It’s the same for Trump, who uses this kind of language to discredit those who don’t share his beliefs. For example, “we don’t negotiate policy with ‘lunatic left-wing [people].’ They’re irrational. You can’t trust them,” said Mercieca.
The use of negative terms such as “bad people” is also deliberate.
“You dismiss them because you dismiss their argument on the grounds that they have bad motives,” said Roberts-Miller — because who would want to take policy guidance from a “bad” person?
“And so it’s just layer upon layer of strategy that is used for the same end, which is to be an unaccountable leader.”
– Jennifer Mercieca
But political decisions require careful dialogue and opinions from people of all walks of life. “If we were really going to talk about politics usefully, there would be two axes,” said Roberts-Miller.
“One [axis] would be what your policy agenda is, and another would be your attitude for pluralism — whether you think disagreement is useful, whether you’re open to opposition arguments, and that’s actually the axis that matters,” she added.
If a leader thinks disagreement is useful and is willing to listen to different perspectives, it’s a boon for society. Conversely, if a leader believes anyone who disagrees with them is “stupid” or “evil,” “that’s going to always end up with authoritarianism,” said Roberts-Miller.
“Authoritarianism says that the ‘in group’ should be unrestricted and unaccountable for advancing its power,” she said, explaining that moreover, the “in-group” is held to a lower standard than the “out group.”
“So, you get this weird situation where the ‘in group’ claims the moral high ground while condemning an ‘out group’ for doing what it is in the middle of doing,” Roberts-Miller said, “so, for instance … pro-GOP rhetoric, calling other people haters is, in fact, a hateful thing.”
It allows Trump to become an unaccountable leader, experts say, which is dangerous.
It’ll come as a surprise to absolutely no one that Trump uses terms like “bad people” or “evil people” or “crazy people” as a way to avoid accountability.
He uses this to circumvent whatever topic he doesn’t want to talk about, said Mercieca, and doubles down to continue to skirt responsibility.
An example of this? Trump recently referred to CNN and its anchor Kaitlan Collins as “low-rated” when Collins asked about the return of a migrant who was deported to El Salvador in error. The president also said that CNN “hates our country” and questioned why it wouldn’t acknowledge that the Trump administration is “keeping criminals out of our country.”
See? No answer, no accountability, and a clear attempt to discredit a reporter and news source.
“And so it’s just layer upon layer of strategy that is used for the same end, which is to be an unaccountable leader,” noted Mercieca.
As of late, the Trump administration is being accused of defying court orders, and Trump himself has successfully avoided consequences for felony convictions.
“An unaccountable leader is dangerous in any situation, whether it’s the leader of a country or a cub scout group or the PTA, it doesn’t matter what you lead, if you’re unaccountable, then that means you can get away with doing whatever you want, and you don’t have to follow whatever the laws or rules are,” Mercieca added.
Read the full article here
