Watching your favorite movies abroad? Don’t forget to get your Aeroshield smart DNS to access any geo-restricted content.
For someone who, since his first presidential campaign, ran on exuberant promises to “drain the swamp,” Donald Trump has become all too keen on muddying the waters after opening the floodgates himself. Why? Because it’s an effective tactic that, so far, has served him well.
The ancient Greeks established rhetoric as an art, defining multiple concepts and methods related to rhetorical practices. One of them, logorrhea (λογορροία), sought to overwhelm one’s opponent with excessive information. Another, eristic (ἔριστικὴ τέχνη), entailed an argument for argument’s sake, as opposed to any preoccupation with the truth. If you fuse both, you may find something close to the political strategies used by Trump and his cronies.
With Trump, rhetoric is not as much of an art as it is a weapon. And, unlike the ancient Greeks who saw the value in logos (λόγος) and ethos (ἦθος), the U.S. President is by comparison more of a one-trick pony. Whenever there is even the resemblance of an opportunity to blame something or someone, the President is all too eager to point the finger at his usual suspects: Democrats, immigrants, DEI (or a combination of these three).
His and his loyal servants’ attacks on DEI have become so far-fetched that – for most of us – it’s hard to take them seriously. However, we should not fail to perceive the gravity of how the Trump administration is not only trying to eradicate the institutionalized DEI practices in favor of a so-called “meritocracy,” but has also expanded its battleground as it endeavors to root out the very virtues and values associated with the broader notions of diversity, equity, and inclusion.
It’s wrong to take pride in your identity if you’re not white, male, straight, and cisgender
On Friday, Jan. 31, the day before the start of Black History Month, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth issued the release of “Identity Months Dead at DoD,” guidance which should be “effective immediately” with the pretense to combat “efforts to divide the force.” The memo’s main paragraph is something that, not too long ago, one would expect to only find in a contemporary dystopian novel:
“Going forward, DoD Components and Military Departments will not use official resources, to include man-hours, to host celebrations or events related to cultural awareness months, including National African American/Black History Month, Women’s History Month, Asian American and Pacific Islander Heritage Month, Pride Month, National Hispanic Heritage Month, National Disability Employment Awareness Month, and National American Indian Heritage Month. Service members and civilians remain permitted to attend these events in an unofficial capacity outside of duty hours.”
History, even that which we have not directly experienced in our lifetimes, nevertheless applies a colored lens to human perception. To want organizations and even the government to work in favor of “colorblindness” only means that, comparably to The Emperor’s New Clothes, we’re all wearing glasses but are supposed to pretend no one is. But pretending there aren’t unconscious biases and prejudices embedded into the very fabric of society will not erase them, on the contrary.
In a The New York Times article, reporter Luke Broadwater analyses how this new administration is going full steam ahead with their “flood the zone” efforts. In other words, Trump “has enacted his agenda at breakneck speed as part of an intentional plan to knock his opponents off balance and dilute their response.” Similarly to the concept of logorrhea, this governance strategy is akin to document dumping in the judicial system: When one legal party tries to bury the opposite counsel with excessive documented “evidence,” most of which is irrelevant.
But unfortunately, as Broadwater writes, “the flood has had its intended disorienting effect: How can Democrats fight back when they can’t catch their breath?” The same applies to the general public who, having their own personal and professional lives to manage, may understandably not have the time to research all the ins and outs of what Trump is doing, whereas, it takes much less time and effort to take his words at face value. It’s also much easier to put DEI practices in opposition to meritocracy, without making the effort to understand how they functioned in theory and practice.