There once was a republican who blamed,
Thought others were causing their pain,
But the truth they would see,
No one else could, apparently—
Peace only comes, when rage doesn’t reign.
Edited by: ElRoyPoet, 2025
What we know about the case against the man accused of fatally shooting Charlie Kirk
How Donald Trump and the MAGA Republicans Created a Rhetoric Fire Storm in America
Honest Americans are fed up with conservatives and evangelicals blaming Democrats for all the strife plaguing the nation. This reverse psychology is a false narrative spun by MAGA operatives to divert attention from their role in fostering division. They pursued power by stoking fear, grievance, and anger, using social media and conservative news channels to influence public opinion. Politics has been transformed into a reality-show spectacle, with viewers worldwide tuning in daily to get a play-by-play of who’s ahead and who’s falling behind in the game of one-upmanship between the Republican and Democratic parties—turning civic life into a bloodsport and leaving many voters disillusioned.
The Rise of Incendiary Rhetoric
Trump’s media persona, amplified by years on ‘The Celebrity Apprentice’ and decades of tabloid exposure, normalized brash, confrontational language and spectacle politics. Since launching his 2015 campaign, Trump regularly used loaded language—words chosen to evoke emotional reactions rather than reasoned debate—which research links to increased political polarization and affective hostility. Scholars have documented overlaps between several techniques of modern populist leaders and historical propaganda—scapegoating, repetition, de-legitimizing institutions—even as they caution against literal equivalence to totalitarian regimes. Yet, irrespective of his language, which often resembles that of a gangster boss, he has repeatedly tried to act like an authoritarian. Therefore, reasonable people are justified in calling him a fascist or even comparing him to Adolf Hitler, especially when he speaks in ways that incite violence or hatred. His supporters, many of whom adopt flag-waving, Nazi-like rhetoric, often echo his divisive language, creating a toxic environment that threatens the very foundations of democracy.
Throughout his political career, Trump has demonstrated a penchant for inflammatory statements. For instance, he scapegoated Mexican immigrants as “rapists” and criminals during his campaign launch on June 16, 2015—a statement that fueled their dehumanization. His repeated false claims about widespread voter fraud, culminated in the U.S. Capitol riot—because his cult followers believed the big lie that the 2020 election was stolen—have deepened distrust in the democratic process. These remarks, often delivered with a provocative flair, serve to deepen division and stir up resentment among his base.
Freedom of speech doesn’t mean freedom from the consequences. First Amendment protections guarantee that citizens won’t be arrested for speaking freely, as long as they aren’t guilty of incitement to imminent lawless action, true threats, defamation, certain obscenity, or falsely shouting “fire” in a crowded theater. Trump’s language and conduct resemble those of agitators who metaphorically shout “fire” in crowded spaces—an analogy often used to describe speech that incites panic or violence. Since 2015, he has used loaded language to stir emotions, often targeting minorities, political opponents, and the press. All activist movements are driven by emotion. Trump’s incendiary rhetoric fuels MAGA fanaticism and radicalizes the resistance. When people become emotionally charged and offended, they often seek to retaliate by punishing groups or individuals they perceive as enemies—through cancel culture, boycotts, or even violence.
Trump’s tendency to act like an authoritarian—calling critics “enemies of the people,” dismissing the free press as “fake news,” and issuing threats to political opponents—fuels a dangerous narrative. When he behaves irresponsibly, spewing incendiary rhetoric without regard for the consequences, his supporters often follow suit, blindly believing that no repercussions will come their way. His cult followers, many of whom are too blinded by loyalty to see the danger, fail to understand that fighting words are not harmless—they are weapons. When wielded recklessly, they can ignite a powder keg of anger, resentment, and violence. Moreover, Trump is arguably the worst “politically correct” offender in America, because MAGA Republicans have allowed him to spew divisive rhetoric and have provided cover for all his lies, making him the pathological liar-in-chief. Hypocritically, these same sycophants also want the government to collectively punish liberals when they feel offended, further fueling division and potential chaos.
When Trump claims he is the victim of a “witch hunt,” and warns that conservatives and evangelicals will lose their country, or suggests that if they can come for him, they can come for you, he is simply trying to manufacture a crisis. His supporters, often echo chambers on social media, amplify these narratives, further radicalizing individuals and increasing the risk of domestic terrorism. Trump has exemplified this dynamic, often dismissing critics as “enemies of the people” and fostering a narrative where political correctness is viewed as censorship rather than respect for diverse opinions.
Historically, similar patterns of rhetoric have led to violence and tyranny. Hitler’s propaganda machine manipulated mass sentiment through emotionally charged speeches and relentless scapegoating, ultimately leading to the Holocaust and World War II. Likewise, Trump’s divisive language—such as mocking political opponents and labeling immigrants as an “invasion and poisoning the blood of our country”—continues to fuel hostility and distrust.
His rhetoric encourages supporters to see political disagreement as a threat to their very existence, escalating tensions that could easily boil over into violence. For example, on August 8, 2019, Trump tweeted that four progressive Democratic congresswomen—often called “The Squad”—should “go back and help fix the totally broken and crime-infested places from which they came,” despite all four being American citizens. This racist and inflammatory comment stirred racial animosity and was widely condemned.
Another example is his campaign rallies, where he told supporters, “We have to beat the hell out of them; knock the crap out of them. I will pay for the legal fees”—referring to protesters and hecklers—an outright incitement to violence. During his presidency, his comments remained equally provocative. For instance, on September 3, 2020, during a rally in North Carolina, Trump told supporters to “liberate” states like Michigan and Virginia, which had Democratic governors, implying they should rebel against government authority. Such language is a clear call to action, emboldening supporters to act violently if they feel justified.
Perhaps most alarming was his conspiracy theory claiming that COVID-19 was “the China virus,” which fueled xenophobia and racism. His language often painted entire communities as threats, further dividing the nation. On October 22, 2020, just days before the presidential election, Trump suggested that voting by mail would lead to widespread fraud, calling it “the most corrupt election in American history,” despite a lack of evidence. Such statements undermine trust in the electoral process and threaten to incite violence or unrest if outcomes are perceived as illegitimate.
Tragically, on January 6, 2021, Trump’s repeated claims that the election was stolen culminated in a speech before the Capitol riot, where he urged his supporters to march to the Capitol and “fight like hell,” signaling them to challenge the certification of the electoral college results. His words directly contributed to the violent assault on the security officers of the Capitol building, a moment that will forever be remembered as a dark chapter in American history. His rhetoric about “stolen elections,” “rigged systems,” and “patriots fighting for their country” created an environment where his cult followers believed violence was justified to “save” the nation.
This climate of heightened polarization resembles the dangerous road rage seen in the streets—volatile, unpredictable, and destructive. Partisan narratives are as combustible as gasoline, with incendiary rhetoric increasing the risk of catastrophe. Such narratives act like tinder, easily igniting uncontrollable fires in communities. When conservative politicians and evangelical leaders engage in divisive speech, they play with fire, risking a rapid escalation that can consume everything in its path.
History warns us that such inflammatory language, if left unchecked, can lead to chaos, violence, and the erosion of democratic institutions. The danger lies not only in the words themselves but also in the willingness of followers to act on them. As a nation, it is crucial to recognize these dangerous patterns and reject rhetoric that incites violence and hatred. Only through a commitment to truth, respect, and unity can we hope to preserve the democracy we hold dear—and prevent the fires of division from consuming our entire society.
“Truth can bear any criticism, examination, or argument; it does not need censorship or propaganda to protect it. What needs censorship is propaganda—since it is a lie—and therefore, the vast majority of what MAGA sycophants and their echo chamber are expected to believe is a lie. When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth, they will either cease to be mistaken or cease to be honest by attempting to debunk the subject matter experts.”
Op-Ed: “Your suffering is never caused by the person you’re blaming.” Blame is an easy escape, but it never leads to freedom and encases you in a prison of false perception. It’s tempting to believe that suffering is caused by someone else—that their words, their actions, or their choices are the reason for the pain. But what if the real source of suffering isn’t what they did, but the way it is perceived, processed, and held onto?
The mind has a way of creating narratives. It builds stories around pain, assigning fault and attaching emotions to past wounds. But the moment blame is given away, power is also given away. Blame keeps the focus outward, waiting for someone else to change, apologize, or make things right. But what if peace doesn’t depend on their actions? What if it has always been an internal choice?
No one can control how others act. People will make mistakes, they will be unfair, they will disappoint. But what happens next—the response, the emotions carried forward, the way the situation is interpreted—is entirely within personal control. And this is where true strength lies: in realizing that suffering isn’t created by the external, but by the attachment to what cannot be changed.
Personal accountability is not about excusing others—it’s about reclaiming power. It’s the understanding that while pain is real, suffering is optional. It’s the choice to see difficult situations as lessons instead of burdens, to shift perspective from victim-hood to growth. The world will not always be kind, but inner peace is not determined by external forces.
Letting go of blame is not about denying hurt; it’s about refusing to let it define the future. When responsibility is taken for thoughts, reactions, and emotions, life no longer feels like something that happens TO YOU, but something shaped BY YOU.
Freedom begins the moment responsibility is claimed. The choice is always there: to remain bound by blame or to step forward in strength. In the end, the only true control is over oneself, and that is where real peace is found.
“The devil tempts us to bring out the worse in us, but God test us to bring out the best in us.” By: Warren Wiersbe
Commentary: When you perceive that someone is insulting you or saying something offensive, do you become upset because of what you have heard or read? Before anyone opens their mouth or types anything on social media, they must have thought about it first. In reality, the reason you become upset is not solely because of what was said; it is often because of your interpretation of another person’s thoughts. When you say, “How dare they say that,” what you really mean is, “How dare they have such a low opinion of me (or someone I care about).”
If you unfriend someone because of what you perceive they are thinking, it reflects a judgment that your thoughts are somehow more valid or ‘holier’ than theirs. And if you suspect that their thoughts are malicious or evil, you may want to disassociate yourself from them. This is unfair because you have no idea what experiences they have gone through to arrive at their current state of mind. In their life, they might have experienced happiness or endured hardships. Those experiences have shaped their thoughts, and sadly, they might still be struggling with some of them—especially considering the recent interactions they’ve had with you.
My extroverted dad once told me: “When I was younger, I could make friends easily. However, as time went by, people would see something in me they disliked, or I would discover something about them that I didn’t care for (because I would subconsciously profile them). Eventually, every time I met someone new, it would always come down to the same conclusion.” In the end, he realized that when someone unfriends you, it’s usually because they have given up trying to get you to validate them or because they no longer feel appreciated.
Experience has taught me that we need not be offended—that one of the most important signs of maturity is a refusal to take offense. We need not be angry, bitter, or insulted. We need not make our sister or brother an offender for “an inopportune word.” It really is not too difficult to look at a person’s heart—to try to understand what they meant to do, rather than what they did, or what they meant to say rather than what they actually said. Sometimes, this simply requires looking the other way and assuming the best.
“Is there a virtue more in need of application in our time than the virtue of forgiving and forgetting? There are those who would look upon this as a sign of weakness. Is it? I submit that it takes neither strength nor intelligence to brood in anger over wrongs suffered, to go through life with a spirit of vindictiveness, or to dissipate one’s abilities in planning retribution. There is no peace in nursing a grudge. There is no happiness in living for the day when you can ‘get even.’” By: Gordon B. Hinckley
Ultimately, history teaches us that temporary peace achieved through authoritarianism is often an illusion, and the true cost is the erosion of civil rights, individual freedoms, and the rule of law. Democratic societies must remain vigilant, fostering compromise and understanding, even amid polarization. Otherwise, they risk sliding into cycles of authoritarianism, where the promise of stability masks the suppression of dissent and the consolidation of power by a few.“If our democracy dies, the reason won’t be that Americans were too apathetic to save it; it will be that they voted it out of existence.” By: H. Scott Butler
“Though liberty is established by law, we must be vigilant, for liberty to enslave us is always present under that same liberty. Our Constitution speaks of the ‘general welfare of the people’. Under that phrase all sorts of excesses can be employed by [authoritarian] tyrants—to make us bondsmen.” By: Marcus Tullius Cicero
“Tyranny feeds on fear, silencing voices and binding wills; democracy prevails through courage—raising voices and resisting in the shadows.” By: A. Freeman
“Under Trump, we’ve lost decency. We’ve lost civility. We’ve lost respect for the rule of law. We’ve normalized verbal abuse on the internet. We’ve normalized bullying. As much as the woke generation tried to change that, it’s back. Out the window goes character and integrity. Nobody has great things to say about politicians, but ideally, we’re supposed to elect the best of us, not the worst. He embodies everything that’s wrong, not just with America, but with being human.” By: Jeff Daniels
“First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.” By: Pastor Martin Niemöller
elroypoet.blog 