Prof. Gil Troy: “Trump’s speech broke many conventions of the swearing-in ceremonies”

“Trump’s speech yesterday (Monday) broke many of the conventions of American inauguration ceremonies,” states Prof. Gil Troy. “Instead of a visionary and poetic speech focusing on national unity, as is customary in these ceremonies, Trump chose to present a ‘State of the Union’-style speech, an annual speech that the President of the United States delivers to Congress in which he reviews the state of the country and presents his plans for the coming year – c ‘.ninth.).

He presented a detailed and poignant action plan, which included a commitment to fight illegal immigration, canceling diversity and equality programs in the federal government, and rejecting the Biden administration’s environmental agenda. In an unprecedented move, he did so in the presence of the outgoing president, and also deviated from tradition when he discussed foreign issues – which are usually absent from inauguration speeches – such as the tariffs on foreign goods, the Panama Canal, and the issue of the Israeli abductees.

Professor Gil Troy, senior researcher of North American history at the Canadian McGill University, who did all his academic studies at Harvard University, and the author of 8 books on the American presidency and 5 on Zionism. Troy, serves as the chairman of the international education committee of the “Discovery” project and is included in the list of the 100 most influential people on Jewish life by the “Allgemeiner” magazine. Troy is known to CNN viewers as a regular commentator on documentary series, and lives in Jerusalem with his family, alongside being a senior researcher at the Jewish People’s Policy Institute (JPPI).

Trump broke another record when he delivered the longest speech in the modern history of inaugural addresses. Not only that, Troy emphasizes “Trump actually gave two speeches – the official speech and another speech in the “Emancipation Hall” In the second speech, Trump revealed that his wife and deputy, J.D. Vance, prevented him from mentioning in the official speech the ‘prisoners of January 6th’ – those who attacked the Capitol after losing the previous election. From this, Troy believes that “Trump did his best to be statesmanlike”, and therefore did not include this divisive issue, but Trump also has a limit, and there is nothing to be done – his style is one that clashes with his opponents, including in a state ceremony.

On the border of the two neighborhoods: the boy from Queens, the tycoon from Manhattan

“Trump presents a fascinating dual character,” Troy explains. “On the one hand there is ‘Trump from Queens’ – the popular character who tells stories and entertains the audience, and on the other hand there is ‘Trump from Manhattan’ – the businessman in a suit who knows how to achieve, establish and promote countless projects, and in his words “to close the deal”” Troy, when Trump criticizes the elite, and makes his supporters sympathize with him because they sympathize with them, “It comes from an honest place. Trump has always felt like an outsider, a kid from Queens trying to fit in with Manhattan’s elite. This is what gives him the special instinct to understand the feelings of the average American.” Troy can understand Trump’s feeling, because although he is not the president of the United States – for now – but he also grew up in Queens, and understands Trump’s feeling of “outsiderness”.

Trump continues to break traditions

“Trump broke the tradition of unifying seven speeches,” explains Troy. “The speech that Trump gave yesterday was very different from the historical speeches of Thomas Jefferson in 1801 who said ‘We are all Republicans, we are all Federalists’, or of Lincoln who spoke about ‘With malice toward none with charity for all'” “). Instead, Trump chose to attack Biden’s policies in the presence of Biden and Harris.” However, Troy notes that the speech was more moderate than Trump’s famous ‘American Carnage’ speech in 2017″ (in which Trump described America in deep crisis, and criticized the political establishment in a defiant way, blaming the Democratic Party for it – J.T. ).

“Neither did Biden excel at being the unifying man”

Although Trump does not excel at being a unifying person, it is not certain that he is particularly unusual in the landscape of presidents. “It’s interesting that Biden’s narrative is as the ‘uniter of the nation,’ and the last state president,” says Troy. Finally, “despite his image as a man of compromise and his claim to be the last unifying president before the Trump era, he too has contributed to division,” notes Troy. The most striking example of this is when he compared the new voting laws of the Republicans to ‘Jim Crow 2.0’ – a particularly outrageous comparison, which refers to the brutal racial segregation laws that were practiced in the southern United States until the 1960s. Senator Dan Sullivan pointed out the hypocrisy of this accusation, when he showed that precisely in democratic states there are more restrictions on voting than in republican states. Although Biden made this outrageous comparison with a smile, according to Troy, ‘it still created a deep division, just in a more refined form than Trump’s.'”

The kidnapped moment is currently uniting

Despite the division present in Trump’s speech, there was also a special and different moment – “The most moving moment in the ceremony was when Trump mentioned the abductees,” says Troy. “This was the only moment when everyone present, including Kamala Harris, rose to their feet and applauded. It is interesting that Trump did not feel the need to mention that it was the Israeli kidnappers – everyone knew who it was. This symbolizes the depth of our tragedy in the American consciousness.”

In the invited audience and capital connections

“The most surprising phenomenon was in the composition of the audience,” says Troy. “Instead of the tradition of state leaders and their families, we saw in the front rows Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk and Miri Adelson. “The relationship between presidents and capitalists has always been complex,” says Troy. “As my brother, Dr. Teby Troy, wrote in his new book” The Power and the Money” (‘The Power and the Money’), there is constant tension between presidents and powerful CEOs – both, larger than life, Holding power and leadership, along with fear and suspicion of one another, combined with respect for one another.” Teby Troy, former Deputy Secretary of Health in the Bush Jr. administration and a senior at the Bipartisan Policy Institute, also shows in his book that “contrary to the common perception that Republicans have always been in favor of corporations because of their love of money , the reality is more complex – the Republicans were rather ambivalent towards the big corporations,” explains Gil Troy, as with Trump we see that he does not plan To be in favor of the corporations, in one way or another. Therefore, it is particularly interesting that Trump chose to seat Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk and Miri Adelson in the first rows of the inauguration ceremony. It’s a clear message: Trump believes that the big entrepreneurs, and not the politicians snooping in the corridors, are the ones who will make America great again.”

In the light of the great presidents

“Trump is trying to place himself in a chain of strong Republican leaders who have led revolutions,” Troy explains. “He restored McKinley’s name to a place of honor, not by chance – both are shrewd and tough businessmen. He compares himself to Teddy Roosevelt, the charismatic and rough-and-tumble Republican, and Ronald Reagan, who is seen as the one who saved America from the Carter era of weakness – just as Trump sees himself as a savior from Biden.”

“These comparisons are not accidental,” Troy continues. “Trump chose to swear on the Bible of Lincoln, the most beloved president in American history, and emphasizes the similarity between him and Reagan – for example, in the hostage deal he carried out near his inauguration. The message is clear: like Reagan, I too – Trump – move the USA from darkness to light, from slavery to redemption.”

These things are also reflected in the design of the president’s room, the “oval room”. “Trump removed the picture of Franklin Roosevelt that Biden had put there during his tenure so far, and in its place Trump hung pictures of Andrew Jackson and Abraham Lincoln, next to a rug from the Reagan era,” notes Troy. “It reminds me of Reagan himself, who chose to hang in the Oval Office a picture of Calvin Coolidge, the 30th president of the United States – a figure who was considered a failure in the eyes of the Democrats, but was a hero in Reagan’s eyes due to his belief in reducing the power of government.”

“Particularly interesting,” Troy adds, “is the case of Jackson. The academic elite hated him so much that there was a debate about whether to award him an honorary doctorate from Harvard. Trump identifies with this image of the rebel among the elites, even though today Jackson is under severe criticism Due to his attitude towards the Americans, it shows that Trump is looking for the controversial figures, the ones who terrorized the establishment.”

The religious and political dimension

“It’s interesting to see Trump, who is known as a very non-religious person, attribute his survival from assassination attempts to divine intervention – “God saved me, so I could save America”, as Trump said – and emphasizes that America needs God,” analyzes Troy. “It’s less of a theological issue And more of a smart political move – part of his attack on ‘Wokism’ and siding with the believers. In addition, such a statement fits into a long tradition of the American civil religion (civil religion), in which the founding fathers had an ambivalent and conscious attitude towards God. Troy mentions that in 1953, President Eisenhower, who was not a particularly religious man, added a prayer to the inauguration ceremony as part of strengthening that American “civil religion”. According to Troy, “The irony in Trump’s religious use is less a theological matter and more a psychological matter – it’s part of Trump’s demagogy, who sees himself as larger than life. He does it even before the ceremony because it works for him politically, especially in opposing Vocism and siding with the believers against their critics.”

The attitude towards the Afro-American and Spanish community

“Trump tried to present a more inclusive approach this time,” Troy says. “He mentioned Martin Luther King and emphasized the importance of valuing a person according to the content of his character and strength, and not the color of his skin,” alongside his thanks to immigrants from Spain and African-Americans in his speech. It’s interesting to see,” notes Troy, “how the figure of Martin Luther King has become a symbol that crosses political identity – he is no longer owned by one party, and the price of that is that political leaders can use his legacy as they see fit. However,” Troy emphasizes, “it is doubtful that King himself would have accepted Trump. The black community for the most part is still strongly opposed to him, as part of what is known as ‘Trump derangement syndrome’ (a phenomenon that refers to an obsessive hatred towards Trump that leads to extreme and irrational reactions in everything related to him – J.T.), and King’s daughter even gave a speech against him on the day that marks his legacy her father.”

The “manifest vocation” and the vision of America

In an analysis of Trump’s speech, the Washington Post highlighted Trump’s use of the concept of ‘Manifest Destiny’ – a 19th century concept used to justify the expansion of the United States. The newspaper pointed out that Trump used the term while presenting a series of expansionist plans: taking over the Panama Canal, renaming the Gulf of Mexico the ‘Gulf of America,’ renaming Mount Denali to ‘Mount McKinley,’ and planting an American flag on Mars.” In response, According to Troy, “Although this is a controversial concept from the 19th century, its role in building the liberal and great America cannot be ignored. When Trump talks about plans like taking over the Panama Canal or changing the name of the Gulf of Mexico, he tries to present America as aggressive and strong, contrary to its image – in Trump’s eyes – under Biden.”

Presidential orders and a new beginning

On Trump’s first day, the new president passed about 100 presidential orders, which received many headlines in the media. “Presidential orders are a mechanism that exists in the American tradition since the days of George Washington, and is anchored in its constitution,” Troy explains. However, Troy points out that “the use of presidential orders underwent a transformation in the 1930s, when Franklin Roosevelt signed more than 3,000 orders – a record that has not been broken to this day.” Troy points to another change that has taken place around the mechanism of presidential orders: “In the last 40 years, including during the Obama era, the orders have increasingly become a tool for increasing presidential power and ‘circumventing Congress’.” Therefore, Trump is not the only one who uses this mechanism to promote his policies. However, what sets Trump apart is the amount of orders he executed on his first day.

Trump signed about 100 presidential orders on his first day, a significant number, although less than what he planned to do in his statements, so even Trump, in one way or another, does not make excessive use of the mechanism. In any case, “the message that Trump conveys in these actions is clear: Biden’s four years were an anomaly, and now he is returning to complete the work he started in his previous term.” According to Troy, “As was written today in the Washington Post, the hysteria surrounding Trump’s announcement actually served him politically – instead of listening to the concerns of the Americans, the Democrats wasted their time reacting to his statements.” That is, Trump’s actions already on his first day, serve him reliably, while they once again bring attention and concern to the new president.

culture war

“We also saw a significant change in the field of culture,” notes Troy. “Unlike the previous Biden inauguration, where superstars such as Beyoncé and Lady Gaga appeared, this time the musical performances were more country-style. If last time it was the cultural stars who refused to come, this time it seems that Trump himself is not interested in identifying with a certain type of artists. This is part of a war culture that is happening in America now – he prefers cultural heroes who represent his world, not what he calls ‘the elite the flamboyant”.

“My ambivalence towards the ceremony is complex,” Troy concludes. “On the one hand, I am glad that Kamala Harris and her team did not win – it was very bad for Israel. On the other hand, as someone who has always supported diplomatic, proper and moral behavior, Trump did not live up to expectations. However, it is possible that in a few years we will see this as the moment when Agama was appointed “A completely new country in America.”

“Ultimately,” Troy concludes, “one must understand that Trump symbolizes a profound change in America. He may not represent the classic presidential tradition, but he certainly understands the spirit of the times and the feelings of the average American. This is what makes him such a significant political phenomenon.”