Donald Trump understood that politics is exceeded by the influencer: the presidents virilist speeches

Analyzing the bellicose and virile speeches of the American president, Donald Trump, with semiotician Mariette Darrigrand.

How do you analyze Donald Trump’s bellicose speeches that have been multiplying, especially since the beginning of the war in the Middle East?

Bellicose terms during war are normal. We are also in a war of rhetoric, in the popular exaggeration to instill fear and make an impression. Starting with the name of the American operation, “Epic Fury,” these are very specific terms, borrowed from the Iliad.

In the Iliad, there is a discussion between fury and strategic intelligence. Strategic intelligence, with a war ethics, also known today as international law, is defended by Athena, who has a certain sense of balance. This opposes the chaotic forces of the god of war and Dionysus, the god of disorder. Trump responds well to this god who does anything and is unpredictable.

Therefore, it is not the classical vocabulary of war. It aims to be epic, grandiose, Hollywood-like.

You dedicated a book to the virility that inflames society (Viriles comme Vénus, Éditions des Equateurs), do Trump’s words, insults, and defiance portray a virilist approach to power?

I agree, it is virilist. But it is not truly virile. Virilism is violence, a distorted virility that seeks to dominate, to self-sanctify. Trump is quite emblematic of an exaggerated form of self-expression that rejects the balance demanded by contemporary society, for gender relations, and even democracy.

This balance of democracy is difficult to build and maintain. Today, we are experiencing a glitch and do not hear enough from the forces of balance, of non-conflict. In France too, we have virilism or conflictual masculinism. Extremes are very important in our country and they seek conflict.

Can we see, in Donald Trump’s expression, what Iris describes as a hegemonic masculinity of power?

There is an abuse of power, a desire to dominate, to crush the other. It is a twisted human desire that we had suppressed within the democratic framework that balances powers. But when this balance is disturbed, this hegemonic power reasserts itself. It is the power of the emperor, of absolute monarchy.

Donald Trump also engages in personal attacks, presenting, for example, Emmanuel Macron as a man mistreated by his wife. How do you interpret this?

It’s his clownish dimension, he mocks. This is not what a powerful leader usually does, it’s what a court jester does. But Donald Trump has a visual dimension. He is an influencer. He steps out of institutional power to enter the media power which, today, is superior. That is his great strength. He has understood that the politician, the ruler, is surpassed by the influencer.

Is Emmanuel Macron adopting the right strategy by responding that he is neither “up to the task” nor “elegant”?

Being ‘up to the task’, Donald Trump doesn’t care about that, as he has changed the scale. However, elegance is interesting. Through his dances, his beautiful tie, his hairstyle, he wants to be elegant. It is not European elegance. It is the elegance of a TV presenter. It is relative. But he also wants to show that the classic elegance of Macron, a cultured European man, is outdated. He is very provocative.

Do Trump’s offensive, outrageous, populist speeches that contributed to his rise to power continue to serve him well now that he is in the White House?

I think he still has followers due to his way of speaking. He has a very strong base that was attracted by this new language. What is troubling is what is happening today with the war he mishandled, which has economic consequences for the American people.

Do his statements also harm his base: his bellicose address to the nation on Wednesday night sparked a rise in oil prices. Could his MAGA supporters eventually see the limits of such rhetoric?

Yes, the context of war changes things. This sequence is very interesting because we see that language is not performative, it does not create reality.

Trump’s new language, which plays with codes, which can be very virile or very masculinist, works in metaphorical war. But when it becomes real, it no longer works because to conduct a real war well, one must leave the hyperbolic vocabulary, the exaggeration, and be like Athena, one must enter into strategy and intelligence. Real professional soldiers know this well, but Trump does not belong to that world. Today, it shows.

In his own universe, what raises the value of a stock might be something said on a TV show. However, he may claim the war is won, but it doesn’t work in the face of the absolutely tragic reality of a real war.

Can the versatility of his discourse harm him?

The entire society operates on predictive data. We predict the end of oil, when people stop having children… we are always in prediction. Donald Trump, however, is not predictable by algorithms. So, it is said that he is unpredictable. He mainly aims to thwart any prediction, which is not the same. His unpredictability works in times of peace. But it can harm him when war is waged through good predictions, which is strategy, which is Athena.

Is Donald Trump speaking too much, as Emmanuel Macron claims?

In times of war, one must be silent. The army is the ‘big mute.’ This is what this sequence shows – Donald Trump is a president in times of peace. He can play at war, since he lives in a self-declared virtual reality, but when reality catches up with him, he is disarmed. He speaks too much, he lacks strategy. He does the opposite of what he should be doing.