Normalizing “blood bath” or, when someone tells you who they are, believe them the first time

By Bill Fletcher, Jr.

Former President Trump has done it again, and so has much of the mainstream media! In a speech on March 16^th, 45 suggested there would be a bloodbath if he does not win the November election.  The immediate response was predictable. Democrats and others attacked the provocative nature of the comments. Trump and his allies mocked the Democrats and claimed that he was talking about the impact of his loss on the auto industry. Much of the mainstream media attempted to discern his alleged real meaning.

Throughout his political career, Trump has used the tactic of making incendiary comments and suggestions to “wink” at his supporters. In almost every case, he implies that he is being misunderstood by the media and by anti-Trumpers. Yet he never fully walks back on comments. When, for instance, he described the 2017 fascist march on Charlottesville, Virginia, as supposedly containing good people on both sides, he never stepped back to be self-critical and to point clearly at the fascists as the actual threat. His supporters knew this, and so should have the mainstream media.

The constant suggestions of violence, including his speech on January 6, 2021, represents who he is. He has been telling us. His failure to intervene when the de facto coup was unfolding on January 6^th should have confirmed for everyone the nature of the animal. Yet, in almost every case where Trump uses violent, provocative language or suggestions, the mainstream media goes elastic in attempting to explain that his actual meaning may not have been…his actual meaning.

This is a form of “normalizing.”  What the mainstream media is doing is not offering analysis. They are providing an escape hatch through which Trump and the MAGA forces can escape any accountability for their promotion of rightwing violence and terror.

The implications are significant. Treating Trump as an acceptable political candidate who is prepared to operate within the guidelines of the system stands in contrast with who he is. Consider not just his words, but the content—and intent—of the rightwing Heritage Foundation’s so-called 2025 plan. Drafted to be used by Trump, should he be elected, it calls for a radical restructuring of government, foreign policy, and basic rights—including the potential use of the 1861 Insurrection Act against opponents of a Trump administration—proposals that openly challenge the notion of Constitutional rule. It would, in effect, be a coup. The fact that the Insurrection Act is under consideration by Trumpers speaks to the opposition that the far Right anticipates and their willingness to violently crush said opposition.

There is no bluff here and this is not a drill. For those who believe there to be no difference between the Republicans and Democrats, please take a look at the Heritage Foundation’s plan and the proposals by the American Legislative Exchange Council for a Constitutional Convention,  and Trump’s language—including his evasiveness on Putin’s murder of opposition leader Navalny. Then consider the following: Recognizing that neither the Democrats nor the Republicans are parties for socialism, under which scenario will Left and progressive forces have the better chance of expanding and winning?

No, this is not about whether we prefer either party in the abstract. It is about appreciating that Trump, et al. mean what they say, and they have been more than clear about it. When they say “bloodbath,” our response cannot be “Did he really mean it?” or “That is an exaggeration.”  Rather, it needs to be, “Battle-stations; the enemy is at the gates.”

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Bill Fletcher, Jr. is a socialist, trade unionist, international solidarity activist, and writer.