Rhetorical Analysis Of Trump's Acceleration Speech

The United States presidential election of 2016 left many citizens expressing
feelings of bewilderment and disbelief. Donald J. Trump was elected into office under the premise that he was going to “make America great again,” implying that the country has been less than great in recent years. Throughout his campaign, Trump was repeatedly scrutinized for offensive campaign rhetoric toward religious, ethnic, and gender minorities. The popularity vote favored his opponent Hillary Clinton, while the electoral vote helped him obtain US presidency. After analyzing President Trump’s inauguration speech I was left with countless questions and concerns. Along the way I came accross multiple accounts of belief dependent realism, post-modernism, bias, self-justification, and general inconsistency. It is apparent from this speech that Trump is motivated by religion, power, and misunderstanding of the needs of the people of the United Stated of America.

Belief Dependent Realism
To start, the concept that seemed most prevalent throughout Trump’s inauguration speech is Shermer’s idea of “belief dependent realism” (Shermer, p.5). Belief dependent realism entails that human perceptions of the world are immensely susceptible to influence from their personal beliefs. This is dangerous because it can lead people to disregard the findings of science, and live their lives based on laws associated with pseudoscience (Ruscio, p.6). Trump emphasizes the presence of America’s “glorious destiny” and attempts to comfort the public by reassuring that “we will be protected by God”. It is likely that these statements triggered cognitive dissonance for many American citizens in that America prides itself in representing liberty and freedom of religion. Not to mention, the president himself is what many people are feeling afraid of at this moment in time. Trump’s assertions regarding God and destiny are an example of belief dependent realism because he is taking his first steps as a president with certainty that Christian beliefs are universal and true. These actions are also in violation of the constitution which upholds that church and state should stay separate.
Unfortunately, there was no end to Trump’s use of false logic based on Christianity. Perhaps the most explicit account of belief dependent realism on Trump’s behalf arose when he said, “The bible tells us how good and pleasant it is when god’s people live together in unity”. With this, Trump is implying that he stands for unity, and that Christian beliefs are true. Including this in his inauguration speech after the social and political turmoil that ensued during the election seems to be a form of self-justification, in that he is a good man because of his bible based beliefs, and his actions are motivated by unity.
Finally, the cherry on top of Trump’s belief-dependent-realism-sundae emerged with his assertion that, “We do not seek to impose our way of life on anyone, but rather to let it shine as an example”. Based on Donald Trump’s offensive rhetoric and prejudiced behavior toward muslims, women, etc., I can conclude that the “We” Trump is speaking of is a group of angry Christian cisgender heterosexual white males, who feel as though their power is being threatened by progress. Belief dependent realism is apparent here in that Trump is certain that his way of life is a shining example to all others, and is seemingly unaware of the fact that his perception is flawed. Also, if Trump is under the impression that his use of “we” is all inclusive to American citizens, then he has fallen subject to the false-consensus effect (Cialdini, 82) which is the tendency for people to assume that others agree with us more than they actually do.

Postmodernism
Donald Trump has made it apparent to the American people that he does not believe that climate change is an issue, and he is an advocate for creationism. His tendency to embody ideas encompassed in the concept of postmodernism (Ruscio, p.20) is consistent and worrisome. Postmodernism entails that science is only “one way of knowing”. In his inauguration speech he included the sentiment, “we must think big and dream bigger”. While this may seem innocent enough, Trump’s administration has made an effort to restrict public publishing of research. By implying that dreaming is a priority over thinking, Trump is opening the door to mass self-justification for ignorance. This statement displays postmodernism through subtly suggesting that thinking is one way of knowing, and dreaming is a more productive way of knowing. Not only is this blatantly untrue, but it is also dangerous because it leaves room for the implications of pseudoscience in the American government.
Furthermore, I believe that belief dependent realism fuels the fire that is postmodernism, on the grounds that our tendencies to perceive based on belief justify the assertion that all thoughts are equal thoughts, and science and pseudoscience are valuable in the same ways. All of the quotes from Trump that demonstrated belief dependent realism, also represent postmodern thought because his sentiments are not based on science as the best way of knowing. It is frightening to see these two concepts are now prevalent in the White House, because, “skepticism is the agent of reason against organized irrationalism” (Gabbanesch). With little to no skepticism included in Trump’s speech, it is safe to say that our government may be represented by organized irrationalism.

Inconsistency
Based on the evidence given in Donald Trump’s inauguration speech, it is obvious that Trump is no stranger to contradicting himself.

One moment he was saying, “We must protect the borders from the ravages of other countries, making our products, stealing our companies, and dissipating our jobs” and in the next paragraph he drives home the point that, “we will seek friendship with the nations of the world”. Not only is his first comment vastly exaggerated, but it is also a direct contradiction to his second quote. Trump’s inconsistency (Logical Fallacies, p.5) is evident throughout and outside of his speech. Inconsistency is a fallacy that includes directly contradicting one’s self and/or the truth. This is dangerous for a man in office because his actions and sentiments are unpredictable. Also, Trump’s assertion to make good friends with other countries has not been upkept since his inauguration. By implementing the unconstitutional “Muslim ban” Trump has angered Americans, as well as people in the 7 countries that he has

banned.
Donald Trump also displays his tendency to contradict truth throughout his speech. He states, “We will no longer accept politicians who are all talk and no action, constantly complaining and never doing anything about it”. Who is he speaking of when he says this? Does he have any examples of this actually occurring? With reference to what I know from his campaign rhetoric, I would assume that he is talking about Obama. However, President Obama was in office when Osama Bin Laden was killed, medical marijuana was legalized, and it was made legal for all people to marry regardless of their sexual orientation. With this, if Trump is talking about Obama he is contradicting the evidence that positive change was made in America under the Obama administration. In correspondence, I would like to point out that Trump did not mention climate change once in his speech, and this quote validates him in that he isn’t complaining about it, and therefore isn’t going to do anything about it.
Wrapping it Up
Overall, Donald Trump’s tendencies to depend on his beliefs, be blatantly inconsistent, and validate pseudoscience are worrisome to many citizens across the nation and people around the world. If we are blind to the truth, which is only uncovered through research, then we have no chance against climate change, capitalism, and institutionalized biases. Despite the fact that the current U.S. president will not give these issues the time of day, they are real and they are relevant. Much more real and relevant than how “good and pleasant” life is as told by the bible. If there is a positive side to this, it is that logical fallacies and gaps in cognition are being put on blast and addressed to some extent in this country. It is my hope that President Donald Trump will not do too much damage while serving as an example of how not to think critically.