The Danger of Rhetoric: Death Threats Against Public Officials and the Rule of Law
In the era of social media, 24-hour news cycles, and echo-chamber politics, the discourse surrounding public officials often strays far from civil. However, in recent times, the line has been egregiously crossed, going from criticism to something far more sinister: death threats against public figures. The troubling developments involving threats by Donald Trump and some of his supporters against General Mark Milley, the outgoing chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, paint a dark picture of the state of political rhetoric in the United States.
The Charge of Treason and its Ramifications
Trump’s accusation that General Milley committed treason by conversing with his Chinese counterparts in the final months of Trump’s presidency is deeply concerning. Trump even suggested that Milley deserves to be executed for these actions. This is a perilous move into the realm of what experts term “stochastic terrorism,” a situation in which public figures with large followings incite violence indirectly through demonization or other forms of targeting. By bandying about the word “treason” and suggesting execution as a remedy, Trump opens the door for extremist followers to act violently against Milley, believing they’re acting patriotically or following their leader’s directive.
The Legitimacy of Milley’s Actions
On the other side of the equation, Milley has defended his actions as an attempt to de-escalate tensions with China to prevent inadvertent conflict. It’s worth noting that his conversations were authorized by Trump administration officials. The General was adhering to his constitutional responsibilities to protect the nation from external threats. To demonize these actions as treasonous is not only false but recklessly inflammatory.
A Troubling Pattern
General Milley isn’t alone. Other public officials, including prosecutors and judges, have also faced death threats for doing their jobs. This is part of a broader pattern wherein Trump and his allies, refusing to acknowledge the legitimacy of the 2020 election, are fostering a hostile environment against democratic institutions and the rule of law. This viewpoint has led to a staggering 300% increase in threats against federal law enforcement employees since August 2021, according to FBI reports.
The Costs of Violent Rhetoric
The case of Craig Robertson, a 75-year-old Trump supporter from Utah, serves as a distressing example of where such violent rhetoric can lead. Robertson was fatally shot by FBI agents after he brandished a weapon when they attempted to arrest him for threats against public officials. This serves as an ominous reminder of the real-world consequences that can flow from words uttered irresponsibly by influential individuals.
Conclusion
In a functioning democracy, there is no room for threats of violence against public servants performing their duties. The situation involving threats against General Milley, and other officials, is symptomatic of a larger ailment afflicting American democracy. The rule of law and the integrity of public institutions must be safeguarded, not undermined through malicious rhetoric.
The First Amendment protects free speech but it doesn’t grant the right to incite violence. Leaders, especially those with extensive reach and influence, have an ethical responsibility to temper their language and to not invoke or incite harm. Words have weight, and in the current polarized climate, they can act as triggers for destabilizing actions. It’s high time we hold our leaders accountable for their rhetoric, ensuring that discourse, even when heated, never descends into a dark abyss from which we may not easily return.
