We should use two names of things more frequently. These terms are “cult” and “coup.”
The core followers of Donald Trump constitute a cult. Let’s call it the Trump Cult. Some may think that Trump’s core followers are not a cult because it is not religious. However, a cult need not be religious.
The Merriam-Webster dictionary has several definitions of “cult.” The first is “a religion regarded as unorthodox,” examples being a “voodoo cult” and “a satanic cult.” The second definition in Merriam-Webster’s list is “great devotion to a person, idea, object, movement, or work” or “a small group of people characterized by such devotion.”
It is this second definition by Webster that characterizes Trump’s followers. They have “great devotion to a person.” Thus, they are cult-like, if not a cult.
Interestingly Trump has an eerie knowledge or understanding of his followers. I have been unable to figure out how he knew that if he shot a person on Fifth Avenue in New York City, he would not lose any followers. Trump said made that assertion when he was running for president in 2016. I no longer doubt him on that point, as he has done worse than shoot someone in the open, and he has not lost many if any, followers.
For example, in 2017, he gave secret intelligence about Russia to Russian leaders in the White House kind of intelligence gathered in Russia that usually causes sources to be killed, and he lost no supporters.
He befriended the murderous dictator of North Korea, and he lost no supporters.
He repeatedly accepted compensation from foreigners violating the emoluments clause by having them stay in his hotel in D.C. at very high rates. The emoluments clause prohibits gifts to the President and other American officials from foreigners.
He illegally held up weapons promised to Ukraine to pursue his crooked agenda.
He weakened NATO, one of Russia’s President Putin’s most significant objectives a reason some argue that Putin invaded Ukraine.
And the list goes on, including two impeachments and three criminal indictments. Yet the cult stays mainly intact.
The other word seldom used in discussions of current politics and Department of Justice investigations is “coup.” According to Merriam-Webster, a coup is a small group’s violent overthrow or alteration of an existing government. In other words, a forceful takeover of the government.
A correct description of what happened on and around January 6, 2021, is an attempted coup. Fortunately, it failed; however, the January 6 Committee hearings and the DOJ indictment of Donald Trump show how close it came to succeeding.
The word “insurrection” is often used to describe January 6, an inadequate term for the task. Various sources have listed many insurrections in the United States. The last five are these:
The Attica New York Prison riot in 1971 in reaction to the killing of George Jackson.
The 2014 Cliven Bundy Standoff with allies from the American militia movement (Oath Keepers and Three Percenters, etc.) over Bundy’s refusal to pay fees for grazing his cattle on federal land in Oregon.
The Occupation of the Matheur National Wildlife Refuge in 2016 by radical right militias led by Ammon Bundy over the rights to federal land.
The Capitol Hill (Seattle) occupation protest in 2020 by George Floyd protesters.
January 6, 2021, U. S. Capitol attack by supporters of then President Trump as part of the attempts to overturn the 2020 presidential election.
The January 6 attack is a different order of things compared to the preceding four. January 6 was part of an attempt to overturn the election and re-install Trump as president. Therefore, it should be called something else-a coup attempt.
From 2017 to 2019, Fiona Hill was the National Security Council’s senior director for European and Russian affairs. Just days after January 6, she explained why it was a coup attempt. Among other arguments, she went through a standard coup checklist that analysts use to evaluate coups.
The problem with not calling these things more appropriate names is that it minimizes them-not good. Instead, we should maximize their usage to force us to confront these problems now and in the future.
