Written by Jerry Elman, August 20, 2024
After much thought and wordplay, I’ve coined the term “MAGAgelicals” to describe the fusion of MAGA (Make America Great Again) political ideology with Evangelical Christian Nationalist beliefs. This term encapsulates the blend of fervent nationalism and extreme Christian religious conservatism, forming a cultlike following that intertwines political and religious rhetoric to shape their worldview.
Although I initially believed I may have invented the term, I later discovered that others have also coined it online. So, while I can’t claim sole credit, I proudly join a select few in embracing it!
In today’s polarized political climate, language has become a crucial tool for the MAGAgelical movement to frame debates, rally supporters, and demonize opponents. These groups use specific buzzwords and labels to simplify complex issues and manipulate emotions, creating a language uniquely theirs. Thus, I now refer to them as “MAGAgelicals”—both as a group and as a language understood only within their circles.
Furthermore, I believe the Republican Party should consider renaming itself the MAGAgelical Party. This would allow the remaining real Republicans to distance themselves from this party of single-person worship and avoid being labeled RINO (Republican in Name Only).
MAGAgelicals focus on division and hate as a strategy to unify and mobilize their base by creating a clear “us versus them” narrative. This approach draws on historical political tactics, notably those used by Joseph Goebbels, the Nazi propaganda minister, who emphasized fear-based messaging, repetition, and selective framing to manipulate public opinion. By invoking fear, anger, and moral superiority, MAGAgelicals simplify complex issues, galvanize support, and suppress alternative viewpoints, thereby maintaining control and reinforcing loyalty among their followers.
Speaking MAGAgelical – Breaking their secret code!
1. Radical Left
- Intended Interpretation: This statement portrays all progressive or liberal ideas as extreme, dangerous, and a threat to traditional values.
2. Socialists
- Intended Interpretation: Labels those advocating for healthcare reform, economic equality, or other social policies as proponents of government control and wealth redistribution, implying opposition to free-market capitalism.
3. Cultural Marxists
- Intended Interpretation: Implies that those who advocate for social justice and identity politics are part of a sinister conspiracy to undermine traditional cultural values and institutions.
4. Enemies of the People
- Intended Interpretation: Labels media, political opponents, or dissenting voices as active threats to the nation’s well-being and security, suggesting they are working against the interests of the public.
5. Globalist Elitists
- Intended Interpretation: Suggests that those who support international cooperation or global governance are betraying national sovereignty and prioritizing the interests of a global elite over those of ordinary citizens. This term is often a dog whistle for antisemitic conspiracy theories, implying that Jewish people are part of a secretive global cabal.
6. Fake News
- Intended Interpretation: Used to discredit media outlets or journalists who report negatively on the movement or its leaders, implying that these sources are spreading misinformation or lies.
7. Baby Killers
- Intended Interpretation: Aims to demonize those who support reproductive rights, particularly abortion, by equating their stance with the murder of innocent children.
8. Groomers
- Intended Interpretation: Paints LGBTQ+ individuals and their allies as predatory, implying they are trying to corrupt or exploit children.
9. Hate Our Country
- Intended Interpretation: Used to marginalize and silence critics of the United States by framing their critiques as unpatriotic or anti-American.
10. Traitors
- Intended Interpretation: Implies that political opponents or those who dissent from the movement’s views are betraying their country, often used to discredit individuals on issues of national security or foreign policy.
11. Swamp Creatures
- Intended Interpretation: Refers to long-standing members of the political establishment, particularly those seen as corrupt or self-serving, suggesting they are part of a deeply entrenched and morally compromised system.
12. Leftist Mob
- Intended Interpretation: Labels groups of liberals or progressives, especially in protests, as unruly, violent, and intolerant of conservative viewpoints.
13. Hollywood Elite
- Intended Interpretation: Used to criticize celebrities and entertainment industry figures who support liberal causes, implying they are out of touch with ordinary Americans and use their influence to push a liberal agenda. This term can also carry antisemitic undertones, as it often targets prominent Jewish individuals in the entertainment industry.
14. PC Police
- Intended Interpretation: Refers to those who advocate for political correctness, suggesting they stifle free speech and enforce conformity to liberal standards of language and behavior.
15. Big Tech Censorship
- Intended Interpretation: Implies that social media companies and tech giants are deliberately suppressing conservative voices and viewpoints, often to protect or promote a liberal agenda.
16. America Last
- Intended Interpretation: Suggests that Democrats or liberals prioritize global or foreign interests over American sovereignty and well-being.
17. Crisis Actors
- Intended Interpretation: A conspiracy theory term used to discredit individuals involved in traumatic events (like mass shootings) by claiming they are hired actors being used by liberals to advance political agendas, particularly around gun control.
18. Woke
- Intended Interpretation: Critically describes those who are socially aware and advocate for social justice issues, often implying that they are overly politically correct or focused on identity politics.
19. Cancel Culture
- Intended Interpretation: Criticizes the practice of holding people or organizations accountable for offensive actions or statements, implying that liberals or progressives are excessively punitive and intolerant of differing opinions.
20. Defund the Police
- Intended Interpretation: Suggests that Democrats or liberals want to abolish or significantly reduce police forces, often mischaracterizing the broader movement for police reform as anti-law enforcement.
21. Snowflakes
- Intended Interpretation: Labels liberals or Democrats as overly sensitive or easily offended, unable to handle opposing viewpoints or criticism.
22. Cucks
- Intended Interpretation: A derogatory term short for “cuckolds,” used to insult conservatives who are seen as too accommodating or weak, especially in their dealings with liberals or Democrats.
23. SJWs (Social Justice Warriors)
- Intended Interpretation: Mocks liberals who are perceived as overly zealous in advocating for social justice issues, often implying that they are virtue signaling rather than genuinely concerned.
24. Blue State Tyranny
- Intended Interpretation: Describes Democratic-led states where strict regulations, especially around issues like COVID-19, are portrayed as authoritarian or oppressive.
25. RINO (Republican In Name Only)
- Intended Interpretation: Used to label Republicans who are perceived as not being sufficiently conservative or loyal to the MAGA movement, implying they are only superficially aligned with the Republican Party.
26. Soros-funded
- Intended Interpretation: A term often used to suggest that liberal causes or politicians are being secretly funded by George Soros, a Jewish billionaire and philanthropist. This label often carries antisemitic undertones, insinuating that Jewish money is behind a global conspiracy to control politics and undermine conservative values.
27. War on Christmas
- Intended Interpretation: Used to claim that liberals and secularists are trying to erase Christian traditions and values from public life. This term often targets those who advocate for inclusive language or policies that respect religious diversity.
28. Thugs
- Intended Interpretation: A racially charged term used to describe Black individuals, particularly in the context of protests or criminal activity, implying they are violent or criminal without acknowledging the broader social or systemic issues at play.
29. Welfare Queens
- Intended Interpretation: A derogatory term used to describe women, often Black women, who are perceived as exploiting social welfare programs. The term reinforces stereotypes about race, gender, and poverty.
30. Angry Black Woman
- Intended Interpretation: A racist and sexist stereotype used to discredit Black women who are assertive or outspoken, implying that their emotions are irrational or threatening.
31. Feminazis
- Intended Interpretation: A derogatory term combining “feminist” and “Nazi,” used to criticize feminists as being extreme, irrational, or authoritarian in their advocacy for women’s rights.
32. Illegal Aliens
- Intended Interpretation: A dehumanizing term used to describe undocumented immigrants, often used to stoke fear and anger by implying that immigrants are inherently criminal or threatening.
33. Anchor Babies
- Intended Interpretation: A derogatory term used to describe children born in the United States to non-citizen parents, implying that their birthright citizenship is a tactic used to exploit U.S. immigration laws.
34. Radical Islam
- Intended Interpretation: Used to describe all Muslims or Islamic practices as extreme or violent, often conflating terrorism with the entire Muslim community.
35. Invasion
- Intended Interpretation: A term used to describe immigration, particularly from Latin America, as a hostile takeover of the United States, intended to evoke fear of cultural or demographic change.
36. Antifa
- Intended Interpretation: Used to label and demonize all left-leaning activists as violent anarchists, often mischaracterizing peaceful protests as extremist activities.
37. Sharia Law
- Intended Interpretation: A term used to stoke fear of Muslims by suggesting that they intend to impose Islamic law in the United States, often used to justify Islamophobic policies or rhetoric.
38. White Genocide
- Intended Interpretation: A racist conspiracy theory suggesting that immigration, multiculturalism, and declining birth rates among white people are part of a deliberate plan to eradicate the white race.
39. Name-Calling
- Intended Interpretation: Involves using derogatory or insulting nicknames for political opponents, intended to belittle, mock, or delegitimize them. Examples include terms like “Crooked Hillary” or “Sleepy Joe.”
40. Deliberately Mispronouncing Names
- Intended Interpretation: A tactic used to mock or show disrespect toward political opponents by intentionally mispronouncing their names, suggesting that they are unworthy of basic respect or that they don’t belong.
Weaponizing Military Service with Buzzwords
Military service is often weaponized in political messaging by MAGA and Evangelical groups to manipulate public perception and gain political leverage.
Disparaging Opponents:
- “Fake War Hero”: Used to question the authenticity of an opponent’s military accomplishments, suggesting they are undeserving of recognition.
- “Traitor”: Implies that despite their service, the opponent’s actions or beliefs betray the nation, often tying them to perceived anti-American or globalist agendas.
- “Part of the Swamp”: Accuses them of being corrupted by Washington’s political establishment, undermining their service as tainted by association with perceived elite or bureaucratic interests.
- “Deserter”: Implies someone abandoned their duty or country, even if they retired honorably, to cast doubt on their loyalty.“
- Retired too soon”: Suggests that someone left the military prematurely, questioning their commitment or implying they avoided more difficult service.
- “Dishonorable”: Used to falsely suggest misconduct or failure, even if the individual served with distinction.
- “Not a real soldier”: Denigrates those who may not have served in combat, undermining their contributions.
Elevating Allies:
- “Patriot”: Emphasizes that the ally’s military service is a testament to their love for country, using their service as proof of their commitment to American values.
- “True Hero”: Highlights the ally’s bravery and sacrifices, often casting them as exemplary models of American strength and virtue.
- “Defender of Freedom”: Frames their service as essential to the protection of American freedoms, often linking their military past to their current political stances as guardians of traditional values.
- “Warrior”: Emphasizes the individual’s strength, bravery, and readiness to fight for the country.
- “Servant Leader”: Highlights a veteran’s ongoing commitment to public service and leadership, both in and out of uniform.
- “Defender of the Constitution”: Frames their service as a direct protection of the nation’s founding principles.
- “Battle-Tested”: Suggests that their experience in the military has prepared them to handle political or leadership challenges effectively.
- “Veteran Advocate”: Acknowledges their dedication to supporting fellow veterans, underscoring their continued commitment to military communities.
Strategic Use:
By employing this dual approach for military service, the MAGA and Evangelical movements can both undermine the credibility of their political opponents and bolster the image of their allies. This strategy allows them to dominate the narrative, casting themselves as the rightful defenders of America while portraying their adversaries as either fraudulent or compromised. This manipulation of military service in messaging capitalizes on the deep respect and reverence for the military within American culture, turning it into a potent tool for political gain.
Donald Trump
Donald Trump frequently uses phrases like “they say,” “someone said,” “everybody knows,” and similar vague expressions to communicate with hate groups and his broader base. These phrases serve several purposes:
- Ambiguity: They allow him to make provocative statements without direct accountability, as they are framed as hearsay or common knowledge.
- Dog Whistles: By being non-specific, these phrases signal support to extremist groups without explicitly endorsing them.
- Deflection: These phrases create a layer of separation between Trump and the inflammatory ideas, allowing him to distance himself if necessary.
This communication style enables Trump to engage with and energize his base, including hate groups, while maintaining plausible deniability.
Fox News
Fox News plays a significant role in amplifying and promoting the labels used by MAGAgelicals. Here’s how:
- Repetition and Reinforcement: Fox News consistently repeats terms like “Radical Left,” “Fake News,” and “Woke,” ingraining these labels in viewers’ minds.
- Selective Framing: The network frames news stories to support these labels, emphasizing aspects that fit their narrative.
- Host Commentary and Opinion Shows: Prime-time hosts like Jesse Watters, Sean Hannity, and Laura Ingraham use derogatory terms, name-calling, and conspiracy theories to describe Democrats and liberals, reflecting and reinforcing the MAGAgelical movement’s language.
- Echo Chamber Effect: Fox News creates an echo chamber that strengthens in-group versus out-group mentality, making alternative viewpoints difficult to consider.
- Influencing Political Discourse: Fox News’s widespread reach ensures that the labels it promotes influence broader political discourse, including other media outlets and political campaigns.
Evangelical Leaders
- Moral Framing: Evangelical leaders often frame political issues as moral imperatives, labeling opponents as evil or sinful. This moral framing aligns with the labels used by the MAGA movement, such as “Baby Killers” for those supporting reproductive rights or “Traitors” for those perceived as opposing Christian values.
- Pulpit and Media Influence: Many Evangelical leaders have significant platforms, whether through church pulpits, television programs, or social media. They use these platforms to repeat and reinforce the labels, often tying them to biblical principles or Christian values.
- Mobilizing Congregations: By promoting these labels, Evangelical leaders can mobilize their congregations to political action, framing voting and activism as a way to defend Christian values against the perceived threats posed by the “Radical Left” or “Globalist Elitists.”
- Echoing Conservative Media: Evangelical leaders often echo the language and labels used by conservative media like Fox News, creating a unified message that resonates across both religious and political spheres.
- Linking Faith and Patriotism: Evangelical leaders frequently link faith with patriotism, using labels like “America Last” to suggest that opponents are not only against Christian values but also against the nation itself. This linkage helps to reinforce the “us versus them” mentality.
Why Democrats and Liberals Struggle to Counter These Labels
Despite the potency of these labels, Democrats and liberals struggle to counter them effectively. There are several reasons for this:
- Complex Messaging: Democrats and liberals tend to focus on nuanced and complex policy explanations, which can be harder to communicate and less emotionally resonant than the simple, charged language used by the MAGAgelical movement.
- Reactive Rather Than Proactive: Often, Democrats and liberals respond to the labels defensively rather than setting the narrative. This reactive stance can reinforce the original framing rather than effectively challenge it.
- Fragmented Media Presence: While conservative voices have a dominant, unified platform in outlets like Fox News, liberal voices are more fragmented across various media channels, diluting the impact of their counter-messaging.
- Reluctance to Use Similar Tactics: Many Democrats and liberals are reluctant to engage in the same kind of inflammatory rhetoric, preferring to focus on facts and reasoned debate. While this can be admirable, it may be less effective in the current media landscape, where emotional appeals and ten-second messages often win out.
- Underestimating the Power of Emotional Appeal: Liberal messaging often underestimates the power of emotional appeal and identity politics, which are central to the MAGAgelical movement’s success. Without tapping into the same emotional and cultural issues, liberal responses can appear disconnected or unconvincing.
Why Democrats and Liberals Must Learn MAGAgelical
To effectively counter these labels, Democrats and liberals must learn and embrace the MAGAgelical language and tactics.
- Enhancing Messaging: Simplifying and emotionally charging their communication to connect better with a broader audience.
- Taking Control of the Narrative: Proactively framing issues and using positive, unifying labels.
- Strengthening Media Presence: Creating a more cohesive and impactful liberal media strategy.
- Appealing to Core Values: Grounding their rhetoric in shared values like fairness and justice.
- Swiftly Countering Disinformation: Developing rapid response strategies to address misleading narratives.
- Direct Community Engagement: Building strong relationships with targeted communities to ensure relevant and effective messaging.
Potential Countering Buzz Words
These are examples of terms Democrats and liberals should embrace as their language:
- Inclusive Leadership: Emphasize diversity and representation in decision-making.
- Unity in Diversity: Celebrate strength from embracing different cultures and perspectives.
- Justice for All: Highlight commitment to fairness and equality.
- Human Dignity: Advocate for respect and compassion for all individuals.
- Empowered Communities: Focus on giving communities the tools to thrive.
- Community First: Prioritize local engagement and collective well-being.
- Progressive Innovation: Highlight forward-thinking policies and solutions.
- Smart Growth: Advocate for sustainable development that benefits everyone.
- Economic Fairness: Support equity and opportunity for all.
- Tax Fairness: Ensure a fair tax system where everyone, especially the wealthy, pays their proportionate share to support public services and reduce inequality.
- Love Who You Want: Uphold the freedom to love whomever you choose, regardless of gender or sexual orientation, as a fundamental human right.
- Bodily Autonomy: Defend the right of individuals to make decisions about their own bodies, including reproductive rights and healthcare choices.
- Constitutional Democracy: Protect and uphold the principles of democracy and the Constitution, ensuring that government remains accountable, transparent, and representative of the people’s will.
By mastering these techniques and language, Democrats and liberals can more effectively challenge the rhetoric of MAGAgelicals and resonate with a much wider audience.
Conclusion
Fox News and Evangelical leaders are key players in promoting and reinforcing the divisive labels used by the MAGAgelical movement—a fusion of MAGA and Evangelical Christian nationalist ideologies. These labels have effectively shaped public perception, posing an almost insurmountable challenge for Democrats and liberals.
However, by adopting strategies focused on their own clear messaging, proactive framing, emotional appeal, and community engagement, Democrats and liberals can better counter MAGAgelical rhetoric. This approach offers a path toward more constructive, inclusive discourse and a stronger response to divisive tactics.
I am pleased to see the Harris/Walz campaign has already been taking this approach. And masses of people are connecting with this shift in approach.