The weaponizing of words is poisoning our body politic. Respectful dialogue with the opposition is now colluding with the enemy. Malicious name-calling governs in this Age of Rage.
Contrast the Nixon-Kennedy debates' civility with the inanity and invectives of the Trump-Biden debacles to realize how our politics have degenerated. Imagine Lincoln in debates with Stephen Douglas calling his opponent "weird." Or Lincoln referring to the Gettysburg dead as "suckers" and "losers." Sure, the sharp-elbowed, mud-slinging scrum of the American campaign hustings is a boisterous democratic tradition. Even Lincoln was reviled as an "ignoramus" and "bumpkin," which now seem quaint, like Jimmy Stewart in the film Mr. Smith Goes to Washington.
Today, obscenities scream from bumper stickers. How do we explain to our children "F— Biden" or "The Ho's Got To Go?" Profane vitriol is now normalized. Is it even possible to detox discourse and recover civil society?
Political categories of "liberal" and "conservative" have become pejoratives, the "vital center" a no man's land in this entrenched warfare of words. In reality, most Americans are conservative on some issues, liberal on others. Yet the more imminent threat to democracy is not this ideological divide, but rather the myopic one-issue voter.
If our fractured body politic is to heal, ballistic bombast must cease and our better angels must prevail over our impulse to demonize those with whom we differ. We expect the same of our children.
Here are other political categories habitually misused to assault others. And with Trump, some words fit. One can denounce Trump without demeaning his supporters. And we can respectfully disagree. (Or does that now denote weakness?) But speech is not "freedom for me but not for thee." It's a two-way street — democracy's dance.
"MARXIST"/"COMMUNIST" Trump equates liberals with communists in his apocalyptic screeds, feeding fears that Democrats will foment violent revolution, confiscate private property and persecute Christians. This is nonsense.
For Trump, anyone who wants to rein in unbridled cowboy capitalism with regulations, who defends the Constitution's First Amendment separating church and state or who wants billionaires like Elon Musk to pay their fair share of taxes is a Marxist. Trump disingenuously attacks Kamala Harris as a Marxist. Harris is offering small businesses $50,000 tax deductions, not remotely the policy of a Bolshevik.
The only "Marxists" with whom I'm acquainted are inclined to follow Groucho, not Karl. (As Irving Berlin quipped, "The world would not be in such a snarl, had Marx been Groucho instead of Karl.") They self-identify as liberal and regard any political violence, right or left, as abhorrent. They aspire to capitalism's American Dream security, same as conservatives. In a healthy democracy we can disagree on how to get there, yet legislating compels compromise, the same give-and-take essential to good partnering and parenting. Otherwise, our houses are divided by acrimonious dysfunction.
"SOCIALIST" Capitalism imploded in 1929 and 2008, caused by unregulated markets. With a Great Depression 25% unemployment rate, Soviet communism and German fascism seemed a panacea to many U.S. workers disillusioned with capitalism. Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal and subsequent socialist programs saved American capitalism. If you receive Social Security, Medicaid/Medicare, VA benefits, or farm or other subsidies, you are a beneficiary of socialism. Half of us depend on such support.
"FASCIST" Witness the 2017 "Unite the Right" march of white supremacists spewing antisemitic hate ("You will not replace us!"), whom Trump praised as "very fine people." The vile odor of Nazi storm troopers lingers as books again are burned on bonfires of vanity. And this summer, Trump's golf club twice hosted a venue featuring speeches by a neo-Nazi who compared Jews to a "plague of locusts" and who said that "Hitler should have finished the job." Trump welcomed the attendees: "You're amazing patriots."
In 2016, JD Vance compared Trump to Hitler, who imprisoned political opponents; Trump has stated that he would do the same. Hitler constructed concentration camps to torture and kill Jewish "parasites"; Trump says he will create detention camps from which immigrants, whom he calls "rapists," "insane" and "non-human," will be deported.
Retired Gen. Mark Milley — who led the Joint Chiefs of Staff during Trump's last years in the White House — calls Trump "fascist to the core."
"AUTHORITARIAN" Trump is, if anything, an authoritarian. Trump assures his audiences that as the U.S. becomes more ethnically diverse, less patriarchal and less Christian, he will reverse and rewrite history. After all, some believe the hand of God interceded and deflected an assassin's bullet and so anointed him with the mandate of heaven. Trump: "God saved me so I could save the world."
Former Vice President Dick Cheney warns, "In our 246-year history, there has never been an individual who is a greater threat to our republic than Donald Trump."
How would you describe his statements like "I will be a dictator on day one" and "I alone can fix it?" Or his proposed use of the military against the "enemy within?" And do you believe his bromances with Viktor Orban, Kim Jong Un and Vladimir Putin are benign?
In Trump v. U.S., perhaps its most egregious decision since Dred Scott, the "originalist" Supreme Court majority ruled that Trump could commit crimes with impunity if he can justify them as an "official" duty. This repudiates the rule of law on which the Founding Fathers predicated the Constitution. If Trump is elected, he could be immune from prosecution, above the law. As John Locke cautioned, "Wherever laws ends, tyranny begins."
Apart from Trump's apparent authoritarian inclinations, how would you describe his insistence that bleach is a COVID cure, that blue state doctors are euthanizing newborns or that immigrants are eating pets? This from a man who has a peculiar fascination with Hannibal Lecter. Are these the thoughts of, as Trump describes himself, "a very stable genius"? How can some excuse such delusions and lies as harmless, even humorous bluster? (See my 7/11/24 Inlander essay on the Big Lie, "A Lie is Bourne.")
And what would you call a man accused of sexual assault whose defense is, "She's not my type?" How do we explain that to our children? Or when Trump calls Harris a "bitch," how do some parents square their scolding of their children for using the word while they applaud Trump's use?
If Trump wins, Project 2025 will eviscerate the government we all depend on to maintain our American way of life. If Trump loses, will the clowns torch the circus tent and unleash the lions? And if we are torn asunder by political violence, how will some of his Christian acolytes, a generation hence, explain to their grandchildren how Jesus condoned violence?
I believe that most people are basically good. We raise our children to be good by not imitating the bad behaviors of people like Trump. And our children are learning from how we behave in this election. They will learn well if we temper our words, as the Bible says, from "swords into plowshares." ♦
John Hagney taught Spokane high school and college history for 45 years. He was a U.S. Presidential Scholar Distinguished Teacher. His oral history of Gorbachev's reforms has been translated into six languages.
