2024

Exchange

Tax

Cars

Ripples from boiling water: How Trump weaponises belonging


  • Ahmad Afzal Khan
  • Jan 14, 2025
Trump

The United States reached a boiling point in 2016, largely due to Donald Trump. Tempers flared, and searing water began to spill from over the brim of affected propriety, the ripples of which are being felt in full force today. Only now, the water is no longer scorching. Nor is it hot. 

It is tepid, and so it is accepted as normal. Political support has metamorphosed into unrelenting fervent fanfare. Political discourse has mutated into perpetual furious friction. Such has become so prevalent and pervasive, that it is now accepted as general political participation. 

Even so, people spew and spout claims of division at titanic highs to remind of a simpler time when both sides agreed on issues. But, is that really the case? Is the US truly divided on issues to a degree never before seen? Or is it simpler?

Maybe it is not a case of actual substance, but rather visibility. Never before have people been this open about their political affiliation. Because it is no longer merely an affiliation for most. It is an identity. One to wear and flaunt proudly. 

It is a source of belonging. 

Belonging for the Fringe

Populism has been the calling card for politicians seeking to appeal to the ‘common man’ for time immemorial. But, in Donald Trump’s first presidential bid, that philosophy, or more specifically the definition of ‘common’, was extended to perverted lengths. 

The man with the eternal orange tan, whether purposefully or not, mobilised an untapped population. People who were sick of so-called ‘politically correct’ dribble from the mouths of what Donald Trump dubbed ‘Stiffs’ on the Joe Rogan Experience. 

“They’re survivors,” Trump expounded, referring to politicians. “They have nothing,” he claimed, suggesting that many politicians simply adhere to what is most acceptable. Rogan delineated the president-elect’s point with a little more vibrance.

“They never do anything controversial, they never take any chances or speak their opinion,” Rogan expressed, a sentiment met with vehement agreement. “Yeah, yeah,” said Trump.

What Trump and Rogan allude to is the growing discontent with the way politicians communicate felt by a certain subset of people. People who feel more excluded, the larger the net of inclusion becomes. 

Diversity, equity, and inclusion – or DEI as it’s commonly known – has increasingly become the central subject of discussion in political battles. As the name suggests, the framework seeks to include the more marginalised in society. Voices who have long gone unheard. Immigrants are one example. The LGBTQ community is another. 

However, by bringing those groups into the epicenter of debate, they alienated another. A group whose fear, mongered by Trump and bolstered by worsening economic conditions, was exacerbated by an inability to connect with the political discourse. Thus, they became a group that no longer belonged, due to harbored sentiments no longer accepted. And Trump preyed on those feelings.

When diversity and immigration was the goal, Trump said Mexicans were “criminals” and “rapists”. When LGBTQ inclusion reached the limelight, Trump said that children were being transitioned and that he would end this “lunacy”.

Also read: Space tragedy: The aftermath of murder and the shirts it wears

Trump
– Courtesy of Reuters

Years ago, such sensational statements would be political suicide. At the very least it would estrange a voter base. Today, it is a bold retaliation against a, purportedly disingenuous and forced, culture of involving the marginalised. One that has provided Trump an impassioned and devoted base.

In essence, he normalised those newly situated on the fringe by making it okay for them to think the thoughts they did. And they bought in, as authority bias and desperation coalesced into an opportunity to belong. 

That opportunity is one people were willing to fight for, and thus, they came out in droves.

Trump’s rallies may as well have been concerts. The backdrop for chanted slogans that may as well have been gospel. And the merch those words adorned, may as well have been mandatory uniform. Not because of any mandate. Just prevalence. Sheer willingness to represent, all while being thankful to be represented.

This degree of zeal may feel commonplace, yet it is indubitably Trumpian. Discussion of political affiliation was a taboo for certain groups. To wit, white people. A phenomena starkly presented, with a comedic tinge, by Dave Chappelle in his special Killing Them Softly

“You’re a white guy, do you know who you’re voting for yet?” asked Chappelle to an audience member back in 2000. As Chappelle presumed, no definitive answer was given. And so he explained why.

To tell, would be to risk condemnation for one’s beliefs. At worst, ostracism. Thus, people kept politics within the private domain. Until, that fear became the reality for some.

Already hanging on the edge of the political peripheral, there was no reason to hide anymore when Trump threw them a rope. It was time to claw and climb their way back into focus. Loudly. Emphatically.

An Equal and Opposite Reaction

This shift in culture propelled by Trump was immensely effective not only for the rabid voter base it pulled from the depths, but also for the reaction it evoked across partisan lines.

Democrats were tasked with revitalising their base by creating an identity that voters would support with ardour. The problem was, and continues to be, that the left allowed themselves to be defined by the right.

In response to Republicans’ lie-fraught broadsides and their exoneration of Trump and his myriad conflagrations, Democrats devoted themselves to the rule of law. To truth and to decency. And now they find themselves in a prison of their own creation. 

Creating such rigid borders only served to paralyse themselves, as is evident in the final moments of Joe Biden’s presidency. Like any good father with a front row seat to the right’s lack of accountability, while his own kin was persecuted, Biden chose to pardon his son Hunter.

– Courtesy of Reuters

Most would do the same. But, most hadn’t repeatedly, and explicitly, pledged to not use their authority for personal gain. The pardon fueled the right’s criticism while popping a leak in their own base’s trust.

Regardless, no matter what Biden did, the Democrats were fighting a losing battle. Their opponents stood on a platform of contrariety. Pure opposition to the left buttressed by their supporters’ dire need to protect their new home.

Whether Trump’s exploitation of that need was intentional or not at first, since witnessing it bear fruit, he has made a concerted effort to rile up the veritably vulnerable. And those same people are often veritably dangerous.

Also read: Bias, bubbles, and black holes: Prejudice in political journalism

The Swamp and QAnon

“Drain the swamp,” was first said by Trump in October of 2016, but the slogan didn’t originate from him. It was first used by socialists as a criticism of capitalism, before being adopted by politicians including the likes of Ronald Reagan, Pat Buchannon, and Nancy Pelosi. Each used it to draw attention to the government’s shortcomings, yet none with the frequency of Trump. 

Even the president-elect himself couldn’t believe the degree to which the self-assessed ‘hokey’ phrase caught on. ​​ 

A throwaway line had become a campaign hallmark and shown Trump how far amplifying distrust in Washington could take him. Before long, he took that winning formula and conducted a more concentrated strike on his presidential rival, Hillary Clinton. 

Barbs regarding Hillary’s emails rocketed Trump into stratospheric heights of virality. However, the fallout from his continued success had a rather unexpected consequence. 

Radiation spread to the outskirts and further poisoned those already detached from reality. 

What emerged from beneath the rubble was QAnon. A Right-wing group that stemmed from a conspiracy theory about a paedophile ring run by the ‘deep state’. Comprised of individuals who populate online messaging boards, QAnon quickly became a bastion for Trump support. The distrust that Trump had so effortlessly sown, was now a self-sustaining machine. 

Farces ranging from election fraud to the pandemic promoted skepticism in America’s institutions, all while painting Trump as the messiah. And the former president entertained it wholeheartedly, capitalising on an easily manipulatable base craving reciprocation. The communication that the unseen are now dear.

Possibly wary of political backlash, Trump only refrained from disputing theories circulating in 2020. However, by 2022, he was openly endorsing them, even reposting an image of himself adorning a Q lapel pin with the phrase “the storm is coming” plastered across him. The storm, a reference to Trump’s rise to power and his subsequent sterilisation of rotting Washington. 

Trump
– Courtesy of AFP

He loves to stoke the flames. And then comes the ripples again. Flooding the White House on January 6, 2021, as loyalists charged its white walls. Sleeping into the children, whose radiated parents save them from tainted academia. And crashing into the shores of countries across the globe. In England, in Brazil, in Italy, in India, and in Pakistan, to name a few. 

Also read: Seeing is believing: laws that displace and narratives that paint

The Squid Game Effect

Hypocrisy runs rampant in Trump’s camp. Creating inclusion through exclusion. Pointing to a lack of order as they stage an insurrection. Crying corruption as their leader faces charges of obstructing the electoral process. Yet, as has been said, it doesn’t matter. 

This new shameless and frenetic style of political participation is more about rivalry and winning than change. A shift spawned by the right, that the left is still yet to be clued in on. Or maybe Democrats do understand, but hold on begrudgingly to a semblance of civility for the greater good. 

For they may already see the end result of such craze. Funnily enough, they may have seen it in Squid Game. The dystopian depiction of capitalism’s effects on human nature features a clause that allows contestants to end the killing game should they choose too. But, it must be a majority. 

In the second season, votes are worn on contestant’s jumpsuits. A circle for those who voted to stay, and an X for those who voted to leave. This is the essence of the shift we have seen in the US. Contestant’s faced more division than they did in the first season. Birds of a vote stuck together, both groups aiming to cull the other. 

The removal of privacy from political participation has created targets. Supposedly, only one group can belong. That is the retribution the supporters of the right seek to inflict. They seek to do what was done unto them.

Banishment onto the fringe, where their distress festered in the dark. Until they were ripe for Trump’s picking.

Also read: Stalemate: The precarious relationship between athletes and reporters

Trump
Author

Ahmad Afzal Khan

Ahmad Afzal Khan is a subeditor at HUM English Digital. He holds a BA in Political Science and Sociology from the UoT.

You May Also Like