‘Enemies of the people’: Donald Trump and the security imaginary of America First

Georg Löfflmann

doi:10.1177/13691481211048499

Abstract

The discursive domain of (in)security is integral to nationalist populism, as documented in the political rhetoric of Donald Trump. This article combines insights from political psychology on blame attribution with scholarship in International Relations on security narratives to show how the reframing of national identity through a populist security imaginary elevated internal ‘enemies of the people’ to an ontological status of equal, or even superior standing to that of external threats to national security. Portraying internal and external Others as equally existential threats endangering the ‘real’ United States informed both foreign policy choices and mobilised voters through an affective persuasion of audiences, actively dividing society for political gain. Populist appeals to resentment, fear, and anxiety constituted a shared affective space between Trump and his followers that provided a source of mutual ontological reassurance and the legitimation of America First measures from immigration restrictions to trade protectionism and a Jacksonian foreign policy.

Highlights

This article applies the analytical framework of a populist security imaginary to the political rhetoric of President Donald Trump
The analytical framework of a security imaginary allows identifying the interplay between emotive and narrative elements within populist rhetoric, and how they interlink with policy outcomes and voter appeals in the context of international politics
An analysis of post-election polls suggests that Donald Trump lost the 2020 presidential election in particular due to an erosion of support over his handling of the pandemic among White suburban voters (Haberman, 2021)

Summary

Introduction

Instead of preforming the function of a unifying national vision in presidential rhetoric, the narrative of Trump as protector of the people targeted a core constituency of White working-class and non-college-educated voters in the American heartland, amplifying partisan polarisation and internal division for political gain.

Results

Conclusion