U.S. President Donald Trump takes the stage to speak at a memorial service for conservative commentator Charlie Kirk at State Farm Stadium in Glendale, Ariz., on Sept. 21.Brian Snyder/Reuters
Debra Thompson is a contributing columnist for The Globe and Mail.
In the few weeks since conservative political activist Charlie Kirk’s assassination, U.S. President Donald Trump has designated, condemned and attacked an amorphous political enemy. “I hate my opponent,” he declared at Mr. Kirk’s memorial service on Sept. 21, “and I don’t want the best for them.”
Hosting Mr. Kirk’s podcast in the days after his death, Vice-President JD Vance was only slightly more specific about the sources of “left-wing extremism.” He claimed that there are “well-funded institutions of the left” that defend and celebrate political violence. On the same podcast episode, White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller suggested that left-wing organizations were actively promoting violence as part of a “vast domestic terror movement.”
Who, exactly, Mr. Trump and his allies consider to be his political opponents is becoming clearer and, alarmingly, wider and more expansive. It is an ever-growing “they”: both a stark line drawn between “real Americans” and those who, Mr. Trump and his supporters claim, seek to destroy American society, and a net cast wide enough to potentially capture everyone who is not an active, dyed-in-the-wool Trump supporter.
Lawrence Martin: It’s humiliating to kowtow to Trump. But what choice does Carney have?
In an unusual gathering of military leaders on Sept. 30, Mr. Trump said that the military would be used against the “enemy within” and earlier this week told U.S. naval officers that “we have to take care of this little gnat that’s on our shoulder called the Democrats.” And true to his word, Mr. Trump has deployed (or attempted to deploy) the National Guard to several cities that are, uncoincidentally, longstanding Democratic strongholds with large Black, Hispanic and immigrant populations, such as Chicago, Baltimore and Los Angeles, or cities with active and grassroots left-organizing such as Portland.
The enemy is not just Democrats who live in urban centres, though – “they” are also left-leaning non-governmental organizations. So far, the Trump administration has targeted the Southern Poverty Law Center, a non-profit civil-rights organization that tracks hard-right extremist groups and regularly reported on the disparaging comments that Charlie Kirk made about Black, LGBTQ and other people.
Mr. Trump also suggested on social media that George Soros, philanthropist and founder of the Open Society Foundations, was financing violent protests and should be charged with racketeering, while Mr. Vance singled out the Ford Foundation, a philanthropic organization that supports social-justice initiatives to reduce poverty in the United States and abroad.
At times, the Trump administration’s targets seem to encompass entire sectors. The government pressure that led to Jimmy Kimmel’s brief suspension from ABC was unsuccessful in keeping him permanently off the air, but Mr. Trump has also filed lawsuits against media outlets, stripped funding from public broadcasters such as National Public Radio and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, threatened to revoke broadcast licences as punishment for coverage critical of his decisions, and implemented new rules that strip journalists of their credentials to cover the military if they do not agree to report on information that has been approved by the Department of War.
Analysis: How Charlie Kirk’s legacy and Trump’s ambitions are leading a religious resurgence
He has implied that he will use the government shutdown to cut funding to “Democrat agencies” and initiate another round of mass layoffs in the federal public service. The attacks on higher education have now been augmented by the promise of preferential funding to a select few willing to sign a compact to support and implement the administration’s vision for the sector.
Beyond the irony of using the assassination of a free speech advocate to curtail and punish the free speech of left-leaning citizens and entities, what is happening in the United States has gone well beyond mere ideological polarization. We are now concretely in the political territory of an executive that uses coercion, demonization, intimidation and punishment to dismantle the possibility of open debate, free speech, democratic participation, and free and fair political competition.
The definition of who the Trump administration considers its political enemies is purposefully broad and will undoubtedly continue to expand. At the same time, Mr. Trump and his allies will seek to animate the distinction between a loyal, patriotic “us” and a corrupt, out-of-control “them.” It is a simple logic frequently mobilized in authoritarian regimes – if you’re not with us, you’re against us. It serves the purpose of creating incentives and rewards for aligning with the would-be dictator and indiscriminately issuing punishments not only to those who challenge him, but to any who are not actively, enthusiastically on board with democracy’s demise.
To Mr. Trump, that is anyone and everyone who did not vote for him. “I call it sometimes the radical left lunatics,” Mr. Trump said in his speech at Mr. Kirk’s memorial. “But Charlie didn’t say that. He called it the left.”