TL/DR –
Donald Trump has been using rhetoric that depicts his political rivals and critics as criminals, suggesting that he supports outlawing political speech that contradicts his claims. During his campaign for the 2024 presidential race, Trump has been asserting that speech he disapproves of should be considered illegal, despite First Amendment protections. This rhetoric is seen by experts as mimicking authoritarian tactics, and there are concerns about its potential implications for the country if Trump is elected.
Trump Intensifies Rhetoric, Labels Opponents as Criminals
Donald Trump highlights his political adversaries as criminals, while suggesting that political speech contrary to his own is illegal, reflecting a substantial escalation in his 2024 presidential campaign. He intensified this rhetoric during a recent speech in Aurora, Colorado, where he categorically labeled Vice President Kamala Harris a criminal.
Even though Trump himself was found guilty of 34 counts of falsifying business records, he continues to vilify his critics.
In a series of messages, the former president has suggested that critiques he disapproves of should be considered illegal, regardless of their protection under the First Amendment. He condemned a cut of a Harris interview on “60 Minutes” as “illegal” in a tweet and called for CBS to have its broadcast license revoked.
Pattern of Messages Revealed
He has similarly criticized the Harris campaign for editing headlines in paid Google ads, claiming it’s “totally illegal”. Trump has also alleged that Democrats are trying to “illegally hide” part of his statement, urging protestors to remain peaceful on Jan. 6.
Trump’s pattern of criminalizing dissent has been critiqued by experts studying authoritarian regimes. They warn of serious implications if Trump returns to office. Ruth Ben-Ghiat, a historian and professor at New York University, referred to this pattern as being from the “autocratic playbook”.
Public Reaction
While some of Trump’s supporters have expressed disapproval over his revenge-based themes, they still plan to support him due to concerns about the economy and immigration. Yet, Trump continues to insist that investigations involving his conduct are illegitimate and vows retribution against the prosecutors overseeing them.
Trump’s rhetoric of illegality is sometimes plausible, as in the case where he argued that attempts to remove his name from the Colorado ballot over his role in the Jan. 6 incident were illegal. He fought and won this case in the U.S. Supreme Court.
Critics Raise Concerns
Nevertheless, his authoritarian-style language has been criticized by both political figures and the public. Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa. urges those troubled by Trump’s comments to vote for Harris. He warns against the potential wastage of votes on Green Party nominee Jill Stein and others. Fetterman believes that any vote not for Harris is indirectly aiding Trump.
The question that remains is whether Trump, if elected, could succeed in centralizing power for himself within a system built on checks and balances that previously restrained him during his first term. Ben-Ghiat says it depends on his ability to command party loyalty, intimidate critics, and utilize competent bureaucrats to further his goals.
—
Read More US Political News