Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

‘Insurrection,’ ‘equity’ and more − these are the words that trigger Trump supporters

Donald Trump at a campaign rally

President-elect Donald Trump looks at supporters as he walks on a stage during a campaign rally in Grand Rapids, Mich., on Nov. 5, 2024.

Kamil Krzaczynski/AFP via Getty Images

“No profanity.”

This is the one rule spelled out on a sign in Lance Walker’s barbershop in Chambersburg, Pennsylvania, where political discussion between clients can get heated.

Three weeks before the election, on Oct. 14, 2024, I watched as Walker interviewed Michele Jansen, a conservative local talk show host, and Don Marritz, a liberal legal aid attorney also living in Pennsylvania, in his podcast studio.


Jansen and Marritz discussed the difficulties they had faced in the preceding months as they struggled to draft a document called Declaration Rejecting Political Violence. Eventually, more than 250 community leaders and citizens in Franklin and Adams counties in Pennsylvania signed on.

This effort – part of a project focused on preventing political violence run by the nonprofit group Urban Rural Action, or UR Action – almost fell apart over an argument over including the word “insurrection.”

Indeed, words have become contentious on the American political landscape. They turn dinner conversations into battlefields. And they provide politicians with fuel to stoke the flames of polarization.

An anthropologist, I have long studied international political violence and its prevention. More recently, I have done related research in the U.S. that resulted in a 2021 book, “ It Can Happen Here.”

Now I’m studying toxic polarization in the U.S. and ways to reduce it. I have attended Make America Great Again events and spoken to voters who supported Kamala Harris or Donald Trump.

I have also observed the work of groups such as UR Action that try to bridge political divides.

During this research, I have found that some words are often understood differently by those on opposite sides of the political aisle. As a result, misunderstandings create tension and sometimes provoke anger.

Becoming aware of how and why certain words upset those with different political views, then, is a key step in reducing polarization. Here are five that can trigger Trump supporters and further isolate them from liberal Americans.

‘Incitement’ and ‘insurrection’

The suggestion that Trump incited an insurrection on Jan. 6, 2021, at the U.S. Capitol sparked the fight over the wording of the political violence denunciation.

Jansen later explained to me that she was concerned about widespread accusations that Trump incited violence at the U.S. Capitol – and that, more broadly, “people on the right are more targeted as hateful and using hate speech.”

Chad Collie, another conservative member of the UR Action declaration team, told me in an interview that Trump supporters “take offense” when the terms “incitement” and “insurrection” are used to describe Trump’s Jan. 6 rally. In their view, he added, Trump’s rally near the White House was a largely peaceful “protest” hijacked by a small number of violent people who stormed the Capitol.

More broadly, many Trump voters believe that the president-elect is the victim of “ lawfare,” meaning efforts to unjustly use laws to attack political opponents.

As evidence, some Trump supporters point to the defeat of both of his impeachments and various criminal court cases brought against Trump, most of which have been paused or dismissed after he won the 2024 election.

Wokeness triggers like ‘they-them’ and ‘equity’

“ Kamala is for they/them. President Trump is for you.”

Attack ads that feature phrases like this don’t necessarily win elections.

But gender identity was a nonstop talking point at the dozen or so MAGA events I attended ahead of the election. Speakers there constantly mocked the use of nonbinary pronouns and blasted the “radical left” for “ transgender insanity.” This “insanity,” in their view, includes issues such as transgender people using bathrooms that match their gender identity and participating in sports competitions.

The word “ equity ” – along with related terms such as “diversity,” “critical race theory,” “social justice,” “privilege” and “ DEI,” short for “diversity, equity and inclusion” – can also anger a Trump supporter.

They associate these words with a “woke” or even “ communist ” agenda that they think the “radical left” is trying to impose on them.

While some people think that these terms speak to efforts to recognize that groups of marginalized people, including people of color and women, have long faced discrimination, many Trump supporters think that related “woke” policies threaten their free speech and individual and family rights.

‘Racist’

Trump supporters were called “ deplorables ” by former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton in 2016.

But my interviews and observations show that no word, not even “fascist,” stings Trump supporters as much as being called a “ racist,” an accusation that is widely used against them.

As Matt Schlapp, the head of the conservative group Conservative Political Action Committee, which runs the annual CPAC conference, laments in a book, “ There is no way to escape its putrid stink.” The “racist” label, Schlapp explains from experience, shames, stigmatizes and makes a person afraid to speak.

More broadly, the use of “racist” and related terms plays into many Trump voters’ perceptions and anger that Democrats are elitist liberals who they think look down upon and even hate them.

Trump and Republican influencers frequently play on this resentment. Trump, for example, wore an orange and yellow safety vest as he sat in a garbage truck after Biden referred to them as “ garbage.” Trump’s supporters soon started wearing vests and even garbage bags to his preelection events to show their support for Trump.

No one, however, wore a shirt to a Trump rally emblazoned with the word “racist.”

Words are like bees

America’s political division is intertwined with how language – sometimes a single word – can be understood differently by liberals and conservatives and trigger a negative reaction.

This reality has policy implications.

For example, when Philanthropy for Active Civic Engagement, an organization seeking to enhance civic and democratic life, examined perceptions of civic terms starting in 2019, they found that using certain works such as “equity” is often perceived as “liberal and college educated.” Their survey found that conservatives view terms such as “diversity,” “social justice,” “racial equity” and “activism” much more negatively than liberals.

These findings have led organizations that try to decrease political polarization in the U.S. to modify their messaging and more often use terms such as “unity,” “citizens” and “liberty,” which the civics language study found appeals to both liberals and conservatives.

Words don’t just provoke, then. They can also provide a path forward.

As the saying goes, “ Words are like bees; some create honey, but others leave a sting.”The Conversation

Hinton is a distinguished professor of anthropology and director of the Center for the Study of Genocide and Human Rights at Rutgers University - Newark.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.


Read More

​A crowd gathers to take in the September 11th memorial lights in Brooklyn, NY.

A crowd gathers to take in the September 11th memorial lights in Brooklyn Bridge Park, New York City, NY.

Getty Images

Remembering 9/11 and My Pledge to Frank

A college friend called me and desperately urged me to turn on my television. I was at home in my study writing a chapter on civic faith for a new book. As I tuned in to the news, I watched a second plane ram into the north tower of the World Trade Center, where my best friend from college, Frank Reisman, worked for Cantor Fitzgerald. Hours later, another call: Frank was gone.

Twenty-five years have passed, and I remember that dreadful day as if it was yesterday. Are we a better nation? Stronger? More vibrant? Kinder?

Keep ReadingShow less
Two Yellow Speech Bubbles Overlapping Common Ground on Blue Background Front View.
A reflection on parenting, empathy, and communication in a divided world.
Getty Images, MirageC

Building Trust, One Conversation at a Time

In 2020, my friend and colleague Dr. Terrence Robinson died suddenly and unexpectedly of COVID. For five years, we had built a youth apprenticeship program together in Cleveland, raised more than half a million dollars, and trained more than 200 young people. Terrence was Black. I am Jewish. The whole time, I wanted to talk with him about the things that sat quietly underneath our friendship: race, religion, history, privilege. I never did, because I was afraid of saying the wrong thing, and the negative ramifications of saying something ignorant in the workplace. Then he was gone, and the conversation I kept postponing was gone with him.

I think about that silence often, because it is the same silence I now see between two communities that once helped change this country together.

Keep ReadingShow less
How Composting Connected Two Women Across Six Decades

An 82-year-old and 24-year-old bonded over composting—and discovered shared roots, values, and a friendship that broke every generational stereotype.e

Cavan Images/Getty Images

How Composting Connected Two Women Across Six Decades

Every day, we cross paths with people whose lives seem completely different from our own. We exchange polite greetings with neighbors, chat briefly with acquaintances, and pass strangers without ever learning their stories. Yet beneath the surface, we often share more than we realize. Sometimes, all it takes is one conversation. Jean and Bella, 82 and 24 respectively, discovered this through their interest in composting.

Bella regularly attended a Sunday morning "Cookies and Conversation" intergenerational discussion group at Hebrew SeniorLife, where Jean lives in Brookline, MA. The two had spoken before, but only in passing. Like many people meeting someone from a different generation, Bella wasn't always sure how to bridge the gap.

Keep ReadingShow less
Cropped shot of a group of people joining their hands in solidarity

A new union political director explains why labor membership has halved since 1983 even as public approval hits record highs—and what's driving the gap.

LumiNola/Getty Images

The Ongoing Fight for Bread and Roses

Last Monday, I started a new job as the political director for IBEW 569, a local electrical workers' union based here in San Diego. In talking to friends about what I’m doing–while learning, fast, in real time, how to do the job myself–it occurred to me that there’s actually quite a knowledge gap in society today regarding an understanding of what unions are and what they’re supposed to do. So let’s get into it.

A union is, at its core, a group of workers who agree to negotiate together instead of alone. One worker asking a boss for a raise has almost no leverage. A thousand workers asking together hits different. That leverage of teamwork, that collective bargaining, is how the overtime pay, workplace safety standards, and employer-sponsored health insurance all came to exist in this country. None of it was handed down out of corporate goodwill. Fair wages (bread) and dignity (roses) were won, often at real cost. In 1890, the average workweek for manufacturing employees and building tradesmen was around 100 hours or more. Workers in Chicago who rallied for an eight-hour workday faced police violence, but we have that and weekends now because people were willing to lose their jobs, and sometimes their lives, to organize for it.

Keep ReadingShow less