Words have Power

I observed to my wife this morning that I overlooked an element of the Presidential campaign that I should have included in my 'bill of particulars' in yesterday's blog:  the unrelenting use of exaggerated rhetoric.

Donald Trump's favorite word was "disaster" -- everything was "a disaster."  Obamacare, Benghazi, Syria, Hillary's email, the Clinton Foundation -- disasters all.  For anyone who has experienced a real disaster, Trump's overwrought language must have seemed dismissive of their own personal experience of disaster.

Hillary Clinton emphasized "danger" -- it would be "dangerous" to have Trump as President.  Is it any wonder, then, that his election has created fear across the country?  Apparently, we are all in danger!

I have posted previously about the power of words.  I believe that this exaggerated rhetoric is partially to blame for the hysterical reaction by many to the results of the election.  But there is another side to be considered.

President Obama was (in my view rightly) criticized for his refusal to label the threat of "radical Islamic terrorism."  He believed that to do so would result in heightened distrust of Muslim Americans.  I suggest that his failure to do so missed the opportunity to distinguish between the vast majority of Muslims in the U.S. who pose no threat and those who have been radicalized.  I.e., by refusing to use the label, he kept all Muslims as a monolithic entity opening all to suspicion.

Similarly, when demonstrations in Ferguson MO and Baltimore MD turned violent, the President's tepid response contributed.  He failed to recognize that in voicing sympathy for their concerns and lending validity to them, he appeared to justify their anger which eventually turned to destructive behavior.  Yes, he condemned the violence.  But his words and attitude did not convey the horror felt by the victims of those violent acts.

I was saddened to read of horrible words and actions against Muslims, people of color, and LGBTQ citizens since the election.  The actors in these matters seem to have been emboldened in their misoislamism, racism and homomisia (I'll explain my terms later) by Trump's rhetoric during the campaign.  While he did not use explicit bias language, the way he spoke about Mexican immigrants and Muslims undoubtedly was heard by those populations as denigrating of an entire class of individuals.  Even his "othering" (my word) of groups of people by use of the definite article -- the Muslims, the Hispanics, the evangelicals, the blacks, etc. -- provided linguistic clues that were followed by opponents and supporters alike.

NB -- since words mean things, I avoid using the suffix '-phobia' to describe 'hatred of.'  Homophobia literally means "fear of gays"; homomisia means hatred of them.  Similarly, Islamophobia means "fear of Muslims."  The acts I have been reading about seem motivated more by hatred than fear, so I chose "misoislamism."  Following my blog yesterday, I should use "xenomisia" (hatred of the strange or foreign) rather than xenophobia, since I think it is more a matter of despising the unfamiliar than fearing it that is at play.

President-elect Trump should make a strong statement condemning the hateful acts against others undertaken by those who are ostensibly his supporters.  He should also apologize for statements made during the campaign that "otherized" (again, my word) entire groups of people.  And he should follow his pledge to be President of all people with powerful words that convey intolerance for those who speak and act intolerantly of those unlike themselves.  To do so would take a strong step in the direction of unifying the country.