10.57647/jntell.2025.0401.04

Linguistic Construction of Domination and Demonization in Political Discourse: A Critical Analysis of Donald Trump's Islamophobic Rhetoric

PDF
  • Hussamaldeen Nidhal Hadi Al-Sabbagh1,
  • Ehsan Rezvani*1,
  • Basim Jubair Kadhim Al-Jameel2,
  • Bahram Hadian1,
  1. Department of English, Isf. C., Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran
  2. The Open Educational College-Najaf Center, Ministry of Education, Najaf, Iraq

Received: 2025-02-02

Revised: 2025-02-27

Accepted: 2025-03-08

Published in Issue 2025-04-23

Copyright (c) 2025 Hussamaldeen Nidhal Hadi Al-Sabbagh, Ehsan Rezvani, D. Basim Jubair Kadhim Al-Jameel, Assistant Professor, Bahram Hadian (Author)

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

How to Cite

Nidhal Hadi Al-Sabbagh, H. ., Rezvani, E., Jubair Kadhim Al-Jameel, B. ., & Hadian, B. (2025). Linguistic Construction of Domination and Demonization in Political Discourse: A Critical Analysis of Donald Trump’s Islamophobic Rhetoric. Journal of New Trends in English Language Learning (JNTELL), 4(1). https://doi.org/10.57647/jntell.2025.0401.04
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

PDF views: 145

Abstract

This research analyzed the lexicon and rhetoric of Trump's Islamophobic tweets. The study analyzed Trump's portrayal of Muslims and the Arab world as deserving enslavement, hostile, and marked by institutionalized incivility. It also examined how his remarks reinforced biases against Muslims and Arabs.1The research analyzed how Trump's vocabulary of dominance, demonization, and incivility legitimized dehumanizing language in public discourse, tweets, and his Islamophobic rhetoric throughout the 2016 and 2024 presidential elections. The aims were achieved by a descriptive mixed-methods study including both qualitative and quantitative methodologies. Understanding the "why" and "how" of Trump's rhetoric required Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA). The Ideological Square Model and discourse macro-strategies were utilized to analyze selected Trump tweets regarding Islam, Muslims, and related subjects. The frequency of discursive tactics and their statistical significance were evaluated by frequency counts and Chi-Square analysis.1There were 87 carefully curated tweets from Trump officials concerning Muslims. This data includes his presidency from 2017 to 2021 and his re-engagement with Twitter from 2022 to 2024. Quality surpassed quantity in tweets. Alongside the tweet corpus, opinion articles, social media debates, news websites, and public statements were collected to examine Trump's address. Diverse volunteers participated in virtual focus groups to assess audience reactions to his talk. All data were analyzed with NVivo to discern patterns, themes, and discursive techniques.1Trump denigrated Muslims with inflammatory remarks, claims of superiority, derogatory depictions, and euphemism expressions. He employed "us vs. them" rhetoric to cultivate prejudices and intolerance. The study revealed that Trump's lexicon validated abusive discourse by fostering fear and distrust while emphasizing key themes. The investigation showed that Trump's divisive and contentious tweets helped reinforce extreme viewpoints, intensify echo chambers, and evoke feelings of fear and mistrust.1 Analysis showed that Trump's Islamophobia started between 2016 and 2024. Legislative actions fueled by Islamophobia started with the election campaign in 2016, but in 2024, veiled language with covert attacks was utilized in an attempt to win over Muslim and Arab electorates. Quantitative analysis showed fluctuations in the rhetoric adopted during the campaign. As language constructs social reality, it is important to counteract bias and instill tolerance and comprehension, according to current studies.

 

Keywords

  • Critical discourse analysis,
  • Demonization,
  • Domination,
  • Islamophobia,
  • Political discourse,
  • Twitter
PDF

References

  1. Akkerman, T. (2020). Populist radical right parties in Western Europe: The structure of party competition and ideological positioning. West European Politics, 43(2), 299–320. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2019.1664789
  2. Anderson, B. (1983). Imagined communities: Reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism. Verso.
  3. Bakir, V., & McStay, A. (2018). Fake news and the economy of emotions: Problems, causes, solutions. Digital Journalism, 6(2), 154–175. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2017.1345645
  4. Bennett, W. L., & Segerberg, A. (2018). The logic of connective action: Digital media and the personalization of contentious politics. Cambridge University Press.
  5. Beydoun, N. F. (2018). The Politics of Hijab in American Culture. Wayne State University.
  6. Billig, M. (1995). Banal nationalism. SAGE Publications.
  7. Brewer, J. (2020). Brewer’s dictionary of politics. Oxford University Press.
  8. Brown, W. (2022). Undoing the demos: Neoliberalism's stealth revolution. MIT Press.
  9. Brubaker, R. (2017). Between nationalism and civilizationism: The European populist moment in comparative perspective. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 40(8), 1191–1226. https://doi.org/10.1080/01419870.2017.1294700
  10. Chermak, S. M., & Gruenewald, J. (2019). The impact of hate crime on Muslim communities in the United States. American Behavioral Scientist, 63(12), 1702–1721. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764219859635
  11. Chilton, P. (2004). Analyzing political discourse: Theory and practice. Routledge.
  12. Chouliaraki, L., & Fairclough, N. (2010). Critical discourse analysis in organizational studies: Towards an integrationist methodology. Journal of management studies, 47(6), 1213-1218.
  13. Dalton, R. J. (2017). The participation gap: Social status and political inequality. Oxford University Press.
  14. Daniels, J. (2018). The algorithmic rise of the “alt-right”. Contexts, 17(1), 60–65. https://doi.org/10.1177/1536504218766547
  15. Dervin, F. (2021). Interculturality in education: Theories, policies, and practices. Palgrave Macmillan.
  16. Dunmire, P. (2012). Political discourse analysis: Exploring the language of politics and the politics of language. Language and Linguistics Compass, 6(11), 735–751. https://doi.org/10.1002/lnc3.365
  17. Ekman, J. (2022). Understanding right-wing populism: A comparative discourse analysis of European political leaders. Discourse & Society, 33(4), 487–508. https://doi.org/10.1177/09579265211057896
  18. Enli, G. (2017). Twitter as arena for the authentic outsider: Exploring the social media campaigns of Trump and Clinton in the 2016 US presidential election. European Journal of Communication, 32(1), 50–61. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323116682802
  19. Entman, R. M. (2004). Projections of power: Framing news, public opinion, and U.S. foreign policy. University of Chicago Press.
  20. Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. Longman.
  21. Fairclough, I., & Fairclough, N. (2012). Political discourse analysis: A method for advanced students. Routledge.
  22. Fairclough, N. (2010). Critical discourse analysis in organizational studies: Towards an integrationist methodology. Journal of management studies, 47(6), 1213-1218.
  23. Feldman, L. (2023). Trad rights: Making Eurasian whiteness at the “end of history”. boundary 2, 50(1), 69-104.
  24. Freelon, D., Marwick, A., & Lewis, R. (2020). Navigating the new media landscape: Hate speech, misinformation, and the role of digital platforms. Social Media & Society, 6(3), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305120948131
  25. Ghauri, M. J. (2019). Islam and Muslims in the Australian Press: Exploring the'Political Parallelism'Discourse. Journal of Communication & Religion, 42(4).
  26. Ghauri, S., & Umber, S. (2022). Trump’s demagoguery and its impact on Islamophobia: A critical discourse analysis. Journal of Political Studies, 29(1), 45–67.
  27. Gillespie, T. (2020). Content moderation, platform policies, and the hidden politics of algorithmic curation. New Media & Society, 22(6), 1036–1054. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444819872397
  28. Gounari, P. (2022). Hate speech and political discourse in the digital age. Discourse & Communication, 16(3), 345–362. https://doi.org/10.1177/17504813221037450
  29. Hatim, B., & Mason, I. (1997). The translator as communicator. Routledge.
  30. Heywood, A. (2013). Politics. Palgrave Macmillan.
  31. Hogg, M. A., & Abrams, D. (1988). Social identifications: A social psychology of intergroup relations and group processes. Routledge.
  32. Holmes, J. (2008). Discourse and ideology in language and literature. Cambridge University Press.
  33. Huntington, S. P. (1996). The clash of civilizations and the remaking of world order. Simon & Schuster.
  34. Jones, M. (2019). Political leadership and statesmanship in the modern era. Oxford University Press.
  35. Kadkhodaee, M., & Ghasemi Tari, A. (2019). Analyzing anti-Muslim rhetoric in Trump’s speeches: A linguistic and discourse perspective. Journal of Language and Politics, 18(2), 215–238. https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.18034.kad
  36. Kazi, N. (2017). Islamophobia in the age of Trump: A critical discourse analysis of presidential rhetoric. Journal of Islamic Studies, 28(4), 412–428. https://doi.org/10.1093/jis/etx045
  37. Khan, M. A. (2021). COVID-19’s impact on higher education: A rapid review of early reactive literature. Education sciences, 11(8), 421.
  38. Khoirunisa, A., & Indah, R. N. (2018). Hate speech in Donald Trump’s political rhetoric: A critical discourse analysis. Journal of Discourse & Communication, 12(4), 567–583.
  39. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. University of Chicago Press.
  40. Lewandowsky, S., Ecker, U. K. H., & Cook, J. (2020). Misinformation and its correction: Continued influence and successful debiasing. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 13(3), 106–131. https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100612451018
  41. Marsi, T. R. (2024). The Refugee Event: Negotiating European Identity, Sovereignty and Democracy.
  42. Marwick, A., & Lewis, R. (2021). Media manipulation and disinformation online. Oxford University Press.
  43. McCaw, C. T. (2016). Mindfulness ‘thick’and ‘thin’—a critical review of the uses of mindfulness in education. Oxford Review of Education, 46(2), 257-278.
  44. Miller, A. L. (2022). Reconceptualizing education grounded in the multimodal discourses of girls of color labeled with significant cognitive disabilities. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 47(3), 158-175.
  45. Millett, J. D. (1970, December). Governance and Leadership in Higher Education. In Management Forum (Vol. 3, No. 8).
  46. Moffitt, B. (2016). The global rise of populism: Performance, political style, and representation. Stanford University Press.
  47. Mral, B. (2018). The perils of perception: Why We're wrong about nearly everything. Atlantic Books.
  48. Mudde, C. (2019). The far right today. Polity Press.
  49. Orwell, G. (1946). Politics and the English language. Horizon.
  50. Ott, B. L. (2017). The age of Twitter: Donald J. Trump and the politics of debasement. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 34(1), 59–68. https://doi.org/10.1080/15295036.2016.1266686
  51. Papacharissi, Z. (2022). Affective publics and digital politics: How emotion shapes contemporary political communication. Oxford University Press.
  52. Patel, L. (2017). Reaching beyond democracy in educational policy analysis. Educational policy, 30(1), 114-127.
  53. Plato. (1997). The Republic (B. Jowett, Trans.). Oxford University Press.
  54. Pompidou, G. (1986). Entretiens et discours, 1968-1974. (No Title).
  55. Rana, A. N. J. A. L. I.(2017). The Discourse around Age Appropriate Sex Education in India. Arts & Education International Research Journal, 4(1), 56-60.
  56. Roberts, A. (2021). Predicting cognitive impairment in cerebrovascular disease using spoken discourse production. Topics in Language Disorders, 41(1), 73-98.
  57. Saeed, A. (2017). Freedom of religion, apostasy and Islam. Routledge.
  58. Shousha, S. (2010). Macroeconomic dynamics and the term structure of interest rates in emerging markets. In The Impact of the Global Financial Crisis on Emerging Financial Markets (Vol. 93, pp. 547-579). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
  59. Sides, J. (2016). Stories or science? Facts, frames, and policy attitudes. American Politics Research, 44(3), 387-414.
  60. Smith, J. (2021). Maternal linguistic input and child language in a cohort at risk of experiencing social adversity. Language Learning and Development, 17(3), 254-271.
  61. Sunstein, C. R. (2017). #Republic: Divided democracy in the age of social media. Princeton University Press.
  62. Tucker, J. A., Guess, A., Barberá, P., Vaccari, C., Siegel, A., Sanovich, S., & Nyhan, B. (2018). Social media, political polarization, and disinformation: A review of the scientific literature. Political Communication, 35(3), 409–432. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2018.1458330
  63. van Dijk, T. A. (2018). Discourse and power. Palgrave Macmillan.
  64. Van Dijk, T. A. (1996). Discourse, racism and ideology. La Laguna.
  65. Van Dijk, T. A. (Ed.). (1997). Discourse as structure and process (Vol. 1). Sage.
  66. Van Dijk, T. A. (2008). Discourse and context. A sociocognitive approach. Cambridge.
  67. Winter-Froemel, E. (2021). 6 Discourse traditions and linguistic dynamics. Manual of Discourse Traditions in Romance, 30, 143.https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4337-3491
  68. Wodak, R. (2002). Aspects of critical discourse analysis. Zeitschrift für angewandte Linguistik, 36(10), 5-31.
  69. Wodak, R. (2009). Discursive construction of national identity. Edinburgh University Press.
  70. Wodak, R. (2015). Critical discourse analysis, discourse-historical approach. The international encyclopedia of language and social interaction, 3.
  71. Wodak, R. (2021). The politics of fear: The shameless normalization of racist discourse. SAGE Publications.
  72. Wodak, R., & Meyer, M. (2009). Critical discourse analysis: History, agenda, theory and methodology. Methods of critical discourse analysis, 2(1), 1-33.