Journalists would no longer have the role of parrots, simple repeaters, rapporteurs instead of reporters? Obviously not. More advanced analyses can offer an often fine understanding of how political speech works, or even reveal the underground meanderings of this same speech by putting information and testimonies into perspective by highlighting reality. But at what price?
The flow of lies remains largely impossible to stem with the Trumpist speech. Any sincere question about the legitimacy of this discourse seems impossible to formulate, because everything is absorbed into the black hole of this tautological discourse. However, we must talk about Donald Trump, even if, as he himself has declared, he does not need publicity.
At first glance, it seems farcical to play his game. What would be the point of rewarding him with other observations about him? What advantages are there in measuring oneself against his degraded and insolent speech? How can one keep speaking in the face of this non-place of thought made of slander, baseness, caricature and bitterness?
How to write in this vicious circle of perverse speech? Trumpist speech is tautological and hegemonic. Imperious, it remains incontestable, even if all the rules of its discourse are based on deception. Sovereign by its capacity to rework all realities, Trumpist speech remains absolutely foreign to any substantial revitalization. This speech goes even further, using fraud to fill its cultural void by illegally appropriating the mythical songs of big stars of the moment like Celine Dion, Taylor Swift or the group ABBA.
It seems that Kamala Harris has chosen to limit this speech as much as possible, first by ignoring it, as she did during her CNN interview by asking to move on to the next question when we wanted to know her thoughts on the latest attacks by the conspiracy theorist billionaire. But also by denouncing its triviality (she did it on the X network) and by condemning Trump’s subversive, even scandalous, behavior, as when he let his team push around an army employee who wanted to prevent him from being the star at Arlington Cemetery out of respect for the 400,000 American soldiers buried there.
Tim Walz the storyteller
By speaking with his “heart on his sleeve,” Democratic running mate Tim Walz manages to get around the Trumpist discourse. By speaking publicly about his family, he shows that there is a world where compassion and mutual aid have their place. It is a good strategy. In other words, to thwart the Trumpist speech, we must speak on another level and continue to believe in our language, in the expression of our feelings, our difficulties and our joys.
It is remarkable to hear the running mate talk about his relationship, his problems, but also to see him and his wife talk about their experience as teachers. Beyond any desire to shine or strut, their positive words contrast with the bitterness of the deleterious resentment carried by Donald Trump’s spiteful, vengeful and poisonous words.
Tim Walz’s oratorical talent is that of a teacher. His oratorical style contrasts with that of Donald Trump, who often displays a heavy and pedantic style, massive and redundant. Walz’s speech is on the contrary that of a storyteller who follows a logical sequence, in a demonstrative style that convinces and is in solidarity with popular speech. He can thus oppose Trump’s vain, selfish and arrogant theater with a lively story, a series of cleverly told adventures. It’s all there, in the affirmation of life and the existence of millions of people left behind by Trump’s speech.
Captive Republican Voters
It is surprising that despite a deliberately unthought-out discourse, absent of any logic and displaying a program of systematic destruction of democracy, approximately 45% of the electorate in the United States remains prisoner of this language. Captives of the Trumpist ruts, these voters are walking towards the precipice. It seems almost impossible to deconstruct the erroneous image of a providential Donald Trump. The consequences of this corrupt and corrupting, unequal and violent speech are the alteration of a naturally fertile expression of popular language.
To disenchant this poisonous speech, we must return to the reality lurking at the heart of life in order to allow the critical spirit to exercise itself without chimera, outside the sterile blindness of totalitarian speech. It is fortunate, for example, that The Duty sent the excellent Fabien Deglise to the capital event of the Democratic convention in Chicago. His interviews conducted on site gave us the voice of the crowd, allowing us to directly take the pulse of politics, to weigh the degree of penetration of religious, social, political theses other than through the distorted echoes of social networks.
In order for a project contrary to Trump’s to be supported, but especially to counter his immense power of perversion of language, it is imperative to put it into perspective in order to thwart it. This is the role of an honest and conscious press. Our role, the readership, is to support this press and to sustain it.