Tag: Politics

Trump Flags and American Rhetoric

by No Rules Cornell, posted in Opinion

by Hanna Carney //

I had the wonderful opportunity of driving through nothing but rural areas on my way from Indianapolis to Kansas City. The scenery was breathtaking. There is nothing as refreshing as seeing Trump flag after Trump flag—you can’t get that in the city. “Keep America Great,” “No More Bullshit,” “Fuck Your Feelings!” It’s comforting to know that patriotism still exists in our country. *Cue warm and fuzzy feelings*

All jokes aside, I’m afraid that the Trump flag is going to linger long after President Trump leaves office. First, his refusal to accept the results of the election will undoubtedly encourage his supporters in the delusion of voter fraud and that he is our true president. Second, the Trump flag has morphed into more than a symbol of support for a political candidate. As Paige Williams argues in The New Yorker, it has become a “rhetoric of threat” about “fighting and winning” as his flag symbolizes white supremacy, transphobia, xenophobia, nativism, and other forms of discrimination. We see this pattern of evolving, nuanced rhetoric in other flags. For example, the blue line flag has evolved from a symbol of support for law enforcement to a denunciation of the Black Lives Matter movement. The Confederate Flag represents more than “respect” for the Southern heritage; it is a defense of slavery and racism. I got into a small debate with some coworkers the other day about the implications of Trump flags and flags in general. One guy seemed to think flying one of his flags is no different than having a political yard sign or t-shirt. I would argue differently.

Trump’s campaign has rekindled a blind acceptance of the American flag as a living thing, or, at least among his supporters. On November 29, 2016, He tweeted:

Trump doesn’t call for punishment for those who burn an American flag yard sign, or for burning swim trunks decorated with the stars and stripes. He calls for the imprisonment or loss of citizenship for those who burn the flag. It is more than the symbol itself that he values—it’s the canvas that displays the symbol. This year at CPAC, Trump hugged and kissed the American flag onstage, mouthing “I love you, baby.” His Twitter tantrums and humanization (and borderline sexualization) of the American flag emphasizes the notion that a flag is a body, and it is a crime to bring harm to that body (never mind the thousands of lives lost from COVID—protect the flag!). It is no coincidence that many Trump’s supporters love waving their Trump flags. As instigated by their president, it is a living symbol of their righteousness. To be fair, some Biden supporters also have political flags. However, unlike some Trump supporters, these people do not aggressively endorse the Biden flag to be an extension of the American flag’s body and of patriotism itself.

As instigated by their president, it is a living symbol of their righteousness.

The Trump campaign was sure to have the infamous MAGA slogan burned into our brains—“make America great again.” MAGA implies that if you are not pro-Trump, you are not pro-America; the Trump party is the American party, and if you think otherwise, you’re not patriotic. As Petula Dvorak explains in The Washington Post, this way of thinking may have led to the American flag being “hijacked by the political right” for the past four years as it was “equated with a support of Trump and a rejection of the Democratic Party.” In other words, the Trump flag became the new American flag and vice versa. A couple hundred-thousand liked and retweeted Donald Trump Jr.’s tweet that reads, “Why do you never see an American flag on a house with a Biden sign in the front yard?” Well, Jr., perhaps those who are in-tune to the state of our country recognize that America is far from great, and probably never was. 

Flying a flag is a form of communication. It sends a message. If I were to drive that same highway between Kansas City and Indianapolis on January 20th, would all of those Trump flags be gone? Maybe, but maybe not. Trump leaving office will not ensure that the ideology he has instilled in his supporters will miraculously dissipate. I don’t think any of us will be surprised if Trump flags continue to wave for years to come in defiance of democracy. This American advent is far from over.

What Does Feminism Actually Mean in Politics?

by No Rules Cornell, posted in Opinion

by Aditi Hukerikar //

Women who are political figures have an important role in the feminist movement; they have both the platforms and the political power to make lasting change and promote women’s issues. However, feminism, as a concept, has been used less as a driving force for change and more as a shield against criticism for women in politics.

From Madeline Albright claiming that “there is a special place in Hell for women who don’t support each other,” at a rally for 2016 Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, to supporters of Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett denouncing women who opposed her nomination for not standing behind a woman in a position of power, candidates from both sides of the political spectrum have been participating in this weaponization. Even women who are closely involved with politics can raise the “feminism shields” to block criticism. In response to a 2019 art exhibition commenting on her role in the Trump administration, Ivanka Trump tweeted “Women can choose to knock each other down or build each other up. I choose the latter.” Women in politics are equating feminism to the notion that all women must support each other, no matter what. This notion effectively demeans women who don’t stand behind certain political figures or beliefs. 

Creating this shield against criticism turns feminism into a path for politicians to avoid accountability for their actions. Weaponizing feminism, especially against other women, defeats the purpose of promoting feminism in the first place. Aside from various demographic differences (race, sexuality, et cetera), women are diverse in their perspectives and opinions; sharing a singular gender identity does not create a homogenous population. Reducing feminism to “women supporting other women, no matter what” ignores this diversity and essentially reduces all women to their gender identity. 

Women in politics are equating feminism to the notion that all women must support each other, no matter what. This notion effectively demeans women who don’t stand behind certain political figures or beliefs. 

Supporting other women is important, but how is it a “feminist action” to push the idea that all women should think the exact same way? Politics, by nature, involves differences in opinion, and expecting all women to have the same political opinions is both illogical and unfeminist. Understanding that other women will have fundamental disagreements with each other, in politics and beyond, is something that we need to accept. Political figures are not defined solely by their gender identity; for women in politics to be treated equally, their constituents should support them based on their actions and political opinions, not on their gender alone. 

Feminism should not be seen as a tool that any woman can utilize when it’s convenient for her. It is a movement–one that requires constant attention and action.

Promoting the idea that women must support each other, no matter what, is not empowering. Instead, it promotes the idea that all women are contributing to the feminist movement, just by being women, which ignores the issue that not all women promote feminism through their actions. Feminism should not be seen as a tool that any woman can utilize when it’s convenient for her. It is a movement—one that requires constant attention and action. Simply existing as a woman does not help provide equality for other women, but taking action and actively promoting equality helps ensure that all women, today and in the future, will have the equality they deserve. Politicians have the power to do this through their work, and we need to start holding them accountable when they use feminism as a label but fail to integrate its ideals into their work.