Proclaiming a jihad against a "radical left" that includes most of us, Trump and MAGA will reap the backlash
A movement that considers everyone from feminists and city dwellers to minorities and scientists to be un-American zealots is making a bad bet on mass intimidation
This piece was previously published at The Hot Screen.
In the immediate aftermath of the Charlie Kirk assassination, even before his alleged killer had been identified and arrested, the right-wing political and media firmament identified the “far left” as responsible for his murder, and howled for retribution against not just whomever pulled the trigger, but a far vaster enemy violently opposed to the continued existence of the United States and the values good Americans hold dear. The assassination was proof positive both of the existence of this irredeemable, lawless monster within, and of the necessity of the harshest state measures to crush it out of existence before it ruins America.
So although the explosion of anger and desire for revenge were surely real for many, the current of outrage aimed at long-established political adversaries. In ways both obvious and disturbing, Kirk’s death became the excuse to openly go to war with MAGA’s enemies. From the president on down, the Trump administration indicated that retribution would hardly stop with bringing the shooter to justice; in their expansive vision, all who had supposedly contributed to the shooter’s violence would also be punished. White House Deputy Chief of Staff and key Trump advisor Stephen Miller articulated as well as anyone the crackdown to come. Referring to the “radical left” as “a vast domestic terror movement, he vowed the government would
dismantle and take on the radical left organizations in this country that are fomenting violence. And we are going to do that, under President Trump’s leadership. I don’t care how. It could be a RICO charge, a conspiracy charge, conspiracy against the United States, insurrection. But we are going to do what it takes to dismantle the organizations and the entities that are fomenting riots, that are doxxing, that are trying to inspire terrorism, that are committing acts of wanton violence.And my message is, to all of the domestic terrorists in this country spreading this evil hate: you want us to live in fear, we will not live in fear, but you will live in exile, because the power of law enforcement under President Trump’s leadership will be used to find you, will be used to take away your money, take away your power, and if you’ve broken the law, take away your freedom.
This is all obviously heady stuff for the sociopathic Miller, as words like “insurrection” and “evil hate” and “exile” trip off his tongue — even as it’s equally disturbing for a vast range of Americans who hear their government proposing a vast war against portions of the citizenry. In fact, for most, it is all so sudden and dangerous-sounding that it begs the question: if a supposed “radical left” has so openly been inciting and committing violence across the land, then why hadn’t the administration already acted against it? If a malignant “they” are so transparently “fomenting riots,” where has the FBI or Justice Department been all this time? Reality answers the question: there is no such powerful radical left, and there is no such roiling, widespread violence.
Reality, however, has never been much of a concern for Donald Trump or MAGA. And in the assassination of Kirk, they appear to have glimpsed the promised land of full spectrum MAGA dominance, and a sure path to imposing their fantasy on the rest of the country. By hand-waving away distinctions between violence and speech, between fierce opponents of Trump and stone-cold killers, they clearly think they have an excuse to imprison, intimidate, and outlaw their political adversaries.
But as any criminal undone by an overly elaborate cover story can tell you, it pays to keep your fictions straight. In their enthusiastic hatred, Trump and his allies have made some especially outrageous claims that should come back to haunt them — particularly if their many, many opponents hold them to account. One small but telling detail to start with is how they’ve been so vague about the specific organizations, and illegal acts, behind the alleged left-wing violence. The problem, of course, is that once they start getting more specific, they will have to contend with actual facts to some degree. In the case of those accused of actually fomenting violence, it will raise the question of why the government did not act against such clear violations of the law before. And in the edgier cases, where they attempt to leverage language or ideas into charges of incitement of violence, they will put themselves in a position of needing to provide evidence that reporters, politicians, and ordinary Americans can examine and question. I suspect they know this, and will do what they can to distort the words and actions of the accused, but they will still have to contend with long-standing foes such as facts.
A far more substantial challenge is that while the term “radical left” might initially suggest a discrete, relatively small subset of the population, its vagueness and prior MAGA practice points to a vast array of possible targets. An essential component of MAGA politics is that, over the years, Trump and his allies have identified a range of opponents that encompasses well over half of the American population: women, minorities, the college educated, residents of big cities. Such animosity flows from how very much the Republican Party and its MAGA base wishes to roll back major aspects of modern America, from the diminished role of Christianity and the respect accorded science and expertise, to the rise of gender equality, the increase in sexual freedom, and the increasing racial diversity of our country. So while they may have particular hatred for abortion providers and gender studies professors, the truth is that MAGA arguably considers the majority of Americans to be part of the “radical left,” particularly as they expand the idea of criminality to include not just committing crimes, but contributing to the ideas purportedly driving such crimes.
This is a point that opponents of MAGA must communicate to the public, to the greatest degree possible: that to the far-right MAGA movement, everyone who opposes MAGA can be viewed as an extremist subject to persecution of some kind. Having used the amorphous term “far left” to label whomever they wish as an enemy, none who oppose them can be considered safe.
We need look no further than the events of this week, as we saw Jimmy Kimmel’s late night show suspended because the comedian dared to talk about how Trump and his allies are exploiting Kirk’s assassination for political purposes, and to tell a scathing joke about Trump’s emotionless response to the killing of a person he was supposedly close to. Jimmy Kimmel is a domestic extremist? In what non-MAGA universe does this make any sense? The bottom line is that MAGA’s “enemies” are most of us, and the label of violent extremist can be applied to any or all at the president’s discretion. If you support abortion rights, then aren’t you responsible for the deaths of millions of unborn children, whether or not you yourself are an abortion doctor? If you’re gay, or support gay rights, aren’t you responsible for perverting the laws of nature and draining the nation’s vital sap by subverting the sacred institutions of heterosexual marriage and procreation? And if you’re African-American, or Hispanic, or a white person who supports civil rights, then aren’t you abetting the Great Replacement of the white race that has become so central to MAGA thinking?
The right-wing rage-out over any supposed slights to the memory of slain Charlie Kirk provides a timely, damning guide to the sort of submission that MAGA expects from those who dissent from its core beliefs. Even those who have simply quoted Kirk directly — be it a racist rant or misogynistic assertion — have come in for online harassment, with MAGA mobs contacting citizens’ employers to get them fired. Apart from the fact that such consequences violate our most basic understandings of free speech, the underlying message is common to MAGA’s general stance of threat and intimidation towards the American majority: it is one of dominance, that holds that you cannot even speak unless you say the right thing. And Kirk’s essential noxiousness helps drive the point home: in its present frenzy, MAGA is trying to make non-MAGA Americans eat shit by forcing them either to praise a rancid white supremacist and misogynist, or to remain silent as Kirk’s retrograde views are whitewashed and presented as mainstream and laudable.
The proper response to the Trump administration’s war on the “far left” is not to simply wait for the Trump administration to start picking off vulnerable left-leaning organizers and politicians — it’s to tell the truth now that in the eyes of MAGA, all Americans who don’t subscribe to this movement’s backwards worldview are the “far left,” subject to being labeled domestic extremists for as simple an offense as providing accurate quotes of Charlie Kirk demeaning African-American women or calling for the execution of former President Biden — or for making donations to Planned Parenthood or subscribing to The Nation magazine. Opponents must take statements from people like Miller and Trump at their word, and impress on their fellow citizens that most of us are in the crosshairs of these crazies — but also, that we become stronger and more able to stand up against this onslaught the more we see our mutual danger.
After all, even if they wanted to, the White House and MAGA lack the discipline to maintain a publicly comprehensible distinction between “real” violent enemies of the left, and those millions of other anti-MAGA Americans who fall within their penumbra of disapproval. Indeed, none other than Stephen Miller himself has already illustrated how an indiscipline rooted in broad objection to actual American life can trip up MAGA’s newest push for mass submission. Earlier this month, prior to the Kirk assassination, Miller made some remarks about the Democratic opposition that highlight how the equation of political opponents with violent enemies clearly pre-dates the Kirk assassination:
The Democrat [sic] Party does not fight for, care about, or represent American citizens. It is an entity devoted exclusively [his emphasis] to the defense of hardened criminals, gang-bangers, and illegal, alien killers and terrorists. The Democrat Party is not a political party. It is a domestic extremist organization.
Yes, you read that right: Trump’s arguably most influential advisor identified the Democrats — one of the U.S.’s two major political parties — as a “domestic extremist organization.” In light of the post-Kirk assassination push to throw government resources after an ill-defined range of “far left” organizations, Democrats and others should understand that the targeting of the Democratic Party itself is almost inevitably on the way. Yet you have probably not heard about many Democrats making a big fuss over Miller’s remarks — and that is because few have. But in light of the post-assassination war on the “far left,” silence is even worse of a strategy than previously. Whether or not the Trump administration overtly pushes criminal prosecutions of the Democratic Party for existing, or against individual Democrats for allegedly illegal acts, Democrats and others should recognize that such broad-brush attacks ultimately target not just the party, but every registered Democrat, anyone who has ever voted for a Democrat, and anyone who supports positions that Democrats advocate. Whether or not the Trump administration pursues its insinuations of Democratic persecution in the near term, Democrats have massive incentives for preemptively highlighting their outlandish, fascistic assertions.
A Democratic Party committed to fighting and defeating Republican authoritarianism should see not only the political opening here, but the moral imperative to pursue it. By laying the groundwork for criminalizing or outlawing the Democratic Party, the GOP is acting in a shockingly obvious authoritarian manner — not simply by targeting the opposition party, but also by doubling down on the idea that non-MAGA Americans should be shut out of politics, without a party to vote for or to act on their behalf. Democratic politicians should call MAGA’s bluff, and assert that the Trump administration is so out of control that it now seeks to treat even the Democratic Party and politicians as violent enemies rather than democratic competitors. Democrats, if they want to win, will gladly accept their role as defenders of Americans under siege while wearing their parallel targeting by the Trump administration as a badge of honor.
By vowing to make war on a vaguely defined “far left,” and rabidly insisting that Americans honor the fallen white supremacist Charlie Kirk, the Trump administration and the larger MAGA movement have made themselves vulnerable to a potentially devastating rhetorical and political counter-attack. Intending to intimidate opponents and middle-of-the-road Americans into a passive stupor, they have instead raised the specter of a legal and cultural assault against any American who fails to submit to MAGA orthodoxy. Unable to contain themselves in their post-Kirk assassination propaganda jubilee, they are forcing Americans to eat shit or be punished. Many Americans are understandably feeling frightened as the norms of our political system shatter under the weight of authoritarian assault, but pro-democracy leadership should recognize that MAGA is creating a volatile situation in which fear can quickly turn to anger and defiance against those who wish harm upon the American majority. Trump and MAGA show their basic weakness when they attempt to intimidate their opponents into silence: it is a tacit admission that their most fundamental beliefs can never capture the hearts and minds of most Americans, but must be imposed on them via an atmosphere of propaganda and terror.