Extremist rhetoric and visuals have overtaken government messaging under Trump : NPR

Stay up to date with our Politics newsletter, sent weekly.

A recent social media post from an account belonging to President Trump prompted enough outcry over its use of a familiar racist trope that the White House deleted it. The Truth Social post included an image of former President Barack Obama and former first lady Michelle Obama as apes. Despite removing the post, Trump has deflected blame to an aide.

The former president commented on it over the weekend, calling it “deeply troubling” behavior.

For scholars and civil rights advocates steeped in the language and aesthetics of white nationalism, Trump’s post was remarkable only because of how overtly racist the trope is. But they say that it fits into a pattern of extremist rhetoric, visual material and other media that have overtaken public messaging from federal agencies over the past year. They say that much of that messaging may not have been detectable to most Americans who are not immersed in the study of extremism. But to those who are, the dog whistles and coded words have been unmistakable.

“If this were just one racist image or one bad post, it wouldn’t matter much,” said Eric Ward, executive vice president of Race Forward, a civil rights organization. “What matters is that over the last year, the Trump administration [is] abusing federal authority, and the federal government has increasingly learned to speak in the emotional language of white nationalism.”

While the latest controversy is over a post from a Trump social media account, Ward and others say the Department of Homeland Security has been behind the most, and the most notable, examples of extremist themes in federal messaging. In its effort to recruit large numbers of new immigration enforcement agents, the federal agency has generated a body of propaganda that has raised alarm over its echoes of extremist movements.

“A lot of this was very much wrapped up in this kind of Norman Rockwell-style imagery of white Americana and … this idea that we need to ‘defend the homeland’ from migrants arriving from the Global South,” said Caleb Kieffer, a senior research analyst with the Southern Poverty Law Center. “And I think that one thing it’s worth noting, and what we really were alarmed by, [is] that we’ve seen this rhetoric for decades be prevalent in white nationalist circles, in anti-immigrant circles, claiming that there’s this migrant invasion happening and that we need to stop it.”

Plausible deniability

In general, the White House, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the State Department have dismissed the links between messages they have issued and white nationalist movements. A DHS spokesperson responded to questions from NPR about this with the suggestion that NPR is “manufacturing outrage.” A White House spokesperson has called journalists’ questions “bizarre” and suggested that coverage of the pattern of extremist rhetoric in federal messaging is “leftwing advocacy.” But Pete Simi, a professor of sociology at Chapman University, said this response, in itself, reflects a communication strategy that is also a mainstay of extremist movements: plausible deniability.

“It is a widespread communication style, but it’s certainly very prevalent in far-right extremist propaganda and broader types of communication,” Simi said. “And what it does is it allows you to communicate a message, but with a built-in defense that if it’s interpreted the way that it might [be] … it allows you then to turn around and say … ‘You’re just … misreading it. You’re misinterpreting it.'”

Since Trump returned to office, Simi has tracked social media output from federal agencies that echo extremist propaganda. He said he has collected a number of examples that he considers “double speak.”

“It’s a type of communication … where you have dual meanings, for folks that are in the know — and they will understand exactly the true intent of the meaning. But also another aspect is for outsiders,” Simi said. “They may not fully understand or appreciate the meaning that’s meant for insiders. And that in and of itself is a way to establish plausible deniability.”

One of the most notable examples Simi cites of this is an Immigration and Customs Enforcement recruitment ad that DHS posted in August, showing a graphic of Uncle Sam and the caption “Which way, American man?” To Simi, Kieffer and others who study white nationalism, it called back to a racist, antisemitic book titled Which Way Western Man? that is largely read within neo-Nazi circles. In a written statement, DHS did not offer comment on a question about the similarities between the post and the book title.

A DHS spokesperson wrote, “By NPR’s standards every American who posts patriotic imagery on the Fourth of July should be cancelled and labeled a Nazi. Not everything you dislike is ‘Nazi propaganda.'”

“Folks that are familiar with white supremacist propaganda would undoubtedly be familiar with that book and would see that it’s referencing the book with the slight change in the one word for outsiders, [who] probably never heard of the book,” Simi said. “And so that would not mean much to them.”

Ward said the table was set for extremism-infused public messaging before Trump began his second term. Throughout the 2024 election cycle, Trump and many Republican lawmakers’ unsubstantiated claim that Democrats were intentionally bringing in undocumented immigrants to vote illegally echoed the “great replacement” conspiracy theory.

NPR asked the White House for comment on similarities between claims from Trump and the administration’s claims about immigrants and “replacement” theory. White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson responded in writing, saying: “There is nothing racist about wanting to ensure only American citizens vote in American elections.”

Nevertheless, the characterization of immigration as an “invasion,” federal calls to “protect” or “defend the homeland,” and the promotion of “remigration” are among the examples that researchers cite when they claim that the administration has mainstreamed once-fringe concepts.

“It’s very much signaling to a lot of these white nationalist groups that their policy goals are being actualized and that they’re seeing kind of their rhetoric now showing up in the Twitter feed of a government agency,” Kieffer said.

What purpose can extremist messaging serve

While the pattern of callbacks to extremist concepts, aesthetics and language has been clear to those tracking federal propaganda over the last year, there is less clarity around what purpose it serves. Kieffer said it is possible that DHS hopes to recruit individuals affiliated with extremist groups or movements into the ranks of immigration enforcement agents. So far, however, there has been no clear evidence that this is occurring in significant numbers. DHS did not respond to a question from NPR asking whether it is using this messaging intentionally to recruit extremists to join Immigration and Customs Enforcement or Customs and Border Protection.

In fact, Ward said the number of Americans who fall into this category is so small that it would be a disproportionate focus for relatively small gain. Instead, he said he sees this messaging as accomplishing something with a much wider and lasting impact on the country.

“Propaganda doesn’t change minds. It trains reflexes,” he said. “Donald Trump is signaling because he wants to normalize this type of rhetoric both within MAGA, but he also wants the American public to become more accustomed [to it]. It is a way of testing normalization and tolerance in the larger American society.”

Simi said the propaganda is all part of an effort to create a “mood” about present-day conditions in the country.

“I think it’s important here to think about: What is the mood that’s being conveyed by these messages?” he said. “More than anything, I think they’re trying to normalize different ideas associated with the messaging that immigration is an ‘invasion,’ that we’ve been overrun by these criminal immigrants, that we face an existential crisis, we are under violent attack and that requires self-defense. And in this case, because it’s a violent attack that we’re facing, then that legitimizes the use of violence.”

Ward said that as discouraging as it may be to resist radicalizing messages from the seat of power, there are still steps that everyday Americans can take.

“The first is, don’t circulate dehumanizing content — even to criticize it,” he said. Second, Ward said, people should look critically at who is labeled as a “threat” and who is labeled as “the real people” in messages issued by federal agencies. He said people should try to understand the emotions that propaganda is trying to attach to different groups of people, such as the counterfactual effort to associate immigrants with disproportionate criminality.

“And then third is: Defend democracy locally,” he said. “And that means standing up for your most vulnerable neighbors. … Countries don’t fall because people disagree. They fall when people are taught who no longer counts.”