When violence in language becomes a real threat
In the US Election Campaign, Insults, Threats, Fear, and Violence are Prevalent - From All Sides. The Consequences of Which are Demonstrated in Pennsylvania.
The attempted assassination against Donald Trump during a campaign appearance in the US state of Pennsylvania has brought to life the worst fears: The escalation and violence in political language during the US Presidential election campaign has become a real danger. Many had already anticipated a bloodbath beforehand. Politicians and political analysts in the US had sounded the alarm since the attempted storming of the Capitol in January 2021 that the increasingly brutal choice of words in the campaign before the US Presidential election in November could have alarming consequences for the political landscape and politicians.
The danger became apparent in 2022 when an attacker, identified with ultraconservative conspiracy circles, attacked the former democratic leader of the House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi, at home. He wanted to take Pelosi hostage and "break her kneecaps."
The political affiliation of the Saturday shooter - the 20-year-old Thomas Matthew Crooks from Philadelphia - is still unclear. However, politicians and experts immediately focused on the extreme political debate as the cause.
"Provocative Rhetoric"
For weeks, leading Democrats had been stirring up an "absurd hysteria" that a victory for Donald Trump in the election would mean the end of democracy in America, scolded the Republican majority leader in the House of Representatives, Steve Scalise. He himself had been seriously injured in a shooting incident at a congressional sports event in 2017, as he wrote on X. He denounced "far-left radicals" for their violent language. "This provocative rhetoric must stop."
Chris LaCivita, who plays an important role in Trump's campaign team, also took the language of "leftist activists, Democratic donors, and even (US President) Joe Biden" into consideration. Even the former vice presidential candidate of the Green Party, Ajamu Baraka, publicly considered whether the statements of Democratic politicians could have led the shooter to see it as his "patriotic duty" to save the country from Donald Trump. He wrote this on X.
"Monsters", "Psychos", "Mentally Ill"
No one acknowledged the fact that Trump himself was one of the most significant drivers of the degeneration of political language in the US in recent years. Many Republican politicians, whom he targeted, had to hire private security firms due to threats from militant Trump supporters - among them the Republican Senator Mitt Romney and the leading Corona expert Anthony Fauci.
Trump also caused angry reactions in the past year when he publicly pondered the execution of top military leaders of the country. In addition, he joked about the hammer attack on the Pelosis.
Trump's penchant for violence is nothing new: He had also demanded in 2020 that shootings occur during violent anti-racism protests. The prosecutors, who are leading the numerous legal proceedings against him, he described as "monsters," "psychos," and "mentally ill."
And above all, many accuse the 78-year-old of inciting his followers to the violent storming of the Capitol on January 6, 2021, to prevent the official confirmation of Joe Biden as US President. To this day, Trump has not acknowledged his election defeat from that time. Before the storming of the Capitol, he called to his followers: "Fight like hell." Five people died during the violent storming.
Violence as a legitimate means?
Republicans may accuse their political opponents of minimizing or ignoring violence from the left wing, but the far-right violence is the greater problem. What was once a taboo in political language is now commonplace among the extreme right, and even Republicans in Congress now frequently use violent language in their speeches. Threats against congressmembers reached a record high of 9625 in 2021, according to Capitol Police statistics. In 2017, there were still 3939 threats.
Robert Pape from the University of Chicago has conducted several surveys on political violence. In the latest one from last month, ten percent of the interviewees believed that the use of violence was justified to "prevent Donald Trump from becoming President." The same was said by seven percent who wanted to use violence to make Trump President again - and prevent Biden.
Political analyst Charlie Kolean is now calling on Americans to come together and condemn such violence. The attempted assassination of Trump "brings to mind the threat to our leading politicians," says the analyst from a rather conservative consulting firm. And he warns: "An attack on a Presidential candidate is an attack on our democracy."
The attempt on Donald Trump's life during his campaign rally in Pennsylvania underscores the grave concerns about the escalating violence in political discourse leading up to the United States Presidency Election 2024. This violent rhetoric, unchecked, risks becoming a norm within the United States political landscape.
Notably, the Republican majority leader in the House of Representatives, Steve Scalise, has criticized leading Democrats for stoking an "absurd hysteria" with their language, potentially fueling such violent tendencies.
In the wake of the attempted assassination of Nancy Pelosi in her home, many are scrutinizing the role of extreme political rhetoric in these violent acts. The political leaning of the perpetrator, Thomas Matthew Crooks, remains unknown, but his actions have reverberated concerns about the impact of inflammatory language on individuals and society.
