Last week, the Oscar nominations marked the official start of awards season. However, another theatrical performance from the week demands further attention, one defined not by artistry, but by calculated divisiveness: Donald Trump’s 2025 inauguration. A meticulously staged event steeped in controversy, it ignited fierce debates over hateful gestures dismissed as “Roman salutes” and inflammatory rhetoric like “crises of trust”. While theatrics dominated headlines, the event exemplified Trump’s core strategy: the deliberate use of spectacle to distract from pressing national issues.
Donald Trump at inauguration ceremony. Pic: Reuters Sky News
Beneath the pageantry lay critical policy shifts- such as the repeal of anti-discrimination protections under Executive Order 11246, 1965 (Equal Employment Opportunity)—, which for decades ensured equal employment opportunities for women and people of colour. This rollback has left millions vulnerable to systemic discrimination, erasing years of progress in workplace equity. Meanwhile, other harmful policies were decreed to reverse Biden-era additions to the Affordable Care Act, such as overturning the extension of Obamacare which gave uninsured adults additional time to sign up, undermining healthcare access for millions.
Trump’s reliance on spectacle over substance is a hallmark of his leadership style, honed through years in reality television and two presidential campaigns. His inauguration was not a vision for America’s future but a performance designed to provoke outrage, rally his base, and obscure substantive debate. By wielding symbols—flags, religious imagery, and the infamous slogan of “Make America Great Again”—Trump reduces complex issues into binary narratives of good versus evil, patriotism versus treachery. This tactic reinforces an “us versus them” mentality that galvanises his supporters while alienating critics; fostering a culture war that sidesteps the systemic challenges of economic inequality, healthcare crises, and environmental degradation.
Act I: Theatrics of the Inauguration
Trump’s inauguration showcased his mastery of polarisation. Through a blend of patriotism and divine invocation, he elevated his image to a near-messianic status. Statements like being “saved by God” after surviving his assassination attempt, positioned him as a quasi-religious figure, echoing the ancient Roman tradition of deifying the Caesar to solidify power. This rhetorical strategy resonates deeply with his supporters, fostering a perception of Trump as a champion of the disenfranchised and a bulwark against a corrupt establishment.
But this isn’t just about loyalty—it’s about division. Trump’s ability to provoke strong reactions from his critics feeds directly into his narrative of victimhood and resistance. By weaponising cultural grievances, he framed himself as a defender of “real Americans” against perceived enemies; dissenters cast as threats to the nation. Through the use of this populist language, Trump ensures perpetual polarisation, where every critique strengthens his bond with his base.
Act II: The Distraction Game
The controversies surrounding Trump’s inauguration—his combative speech, the inflammatory presence of divisive figures such as Pete Hegseth and Javier Milei, and overt displays of nationalism—were calculated provocations designed to dominate media coverage. Declarations like: “we will declare a national energy emergency to unleash American energy production, bringing wealth and jobs back to our shores”, painted a future of fear-driven economic isolation while positioning Trump as the nation’s singular saviour. This framing served a dual purpose: energising his base with promises of revitalisation while sowing division among critics.
Far-Right Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni and Controversial Argentinian President Javier Milei. Pic: Reuters Sky News
Trump’s symbolic gestures, like his proposal to rename the Gulf of Mexico to the “Gulf of America,” epitomises his strategy of spectacle. While such proposals lack practical governance value, they resonate deeply with his supporters by projecting a sense of nationalistic pride and reclaiming territory in the cultural imagination. These gestures, though superficial, serve as effective distractions, drawing attention away from the far more consequential policy shifts occurring behind the scenes. By capturing the media’s focus with provocative statements, Trump ensures that substantive issues remain overshadowed.
Similarly, Trump's declaration of a ‘National Energy Emergency’ granted him broad executive authority to fast-track fossil fuel projects, bypassing environmental regulations and oversight by framing them as national security priorities. This move not only sidesteps established safeguards but also undermines judicial review, creating significant barriers to legal challenges. The resulting projects will often target vulnerable areas, disproportionately affecting low-income and Indigenous communities, who already bear the brunt of environmental degradation. From increased pollution to the destruction of sacred lands, these communities face heightened risks to their health, livelihoods, and cultural heritage. All of this exacerbates existing inequalities while advancing Trump’s agenda of energy dominance.
Meanwhile, the media remained fixated on Trump’s "war on culture", whilst perilous national issues are side-lined. For example, Trump’s policy plan for the Affordable Care Act is threatening the health insurance of 24 million Americans.
This deliberate strategy achieves two goals: it keeps Trump at the centre of attention while obscuring harmful policies. By framing political conflict as a culture war rather than a class war, Trump redirects outrage from systemic inequality to symbolic disputes, solidifying his base and deepening national divisions.
The media, drawn into this cycle of outrage, inadvertently amplifies Trump’s tactics while neglecting substantive policy analysis. Governance takes a backseat to theatrical controversy, leaving critical issues like healthcare reform, climate change, and economic inequality unaddressed. This endless loop of polarisation and distraction ensures that spectacle triumphs over accountability.
Act III: Who will get top billing?
Trump’s strategy of spectacle is more than a distraction—it’s a method of governance that undermines institutions and erodes democracy. His goading often targets the judiciary, the media, and political critics, delegitimising these institutions while projecting himself as the singular arbiter of truth.
Domestically, this strategy facilitates the quiet consolidation of oligarchic power. Policy decisions such as corporate tax cuts, deregulation, and the erosion of worker protections disproportionately benefit the wealthy elite, further widening economic inequality. The presence of high-profile guests like Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, and Mark Zuckerberg-whose companies have aligned with Trump’s policies- underscores this dynamic. For instance, recent moves such as Meta’s removal of tampons from men’s bathrooms, framed as a response to cultural debates, highlights how corporations leverage these flashpoints to align with Trump’s agenda. By wrapping these systemic shifts in the theatrics of cultural battles, Trump successfully deflects attention from the structural inequalities his policies exacerbate, using division and distraction as tools of governance.
The Tech giants gather. Pic: Reuters Sky News
The Curtain Call
Trump’s inauguration was more than a ceremonial event; it was a microcosm of his presidency. It encapsulated his reliance on spectacle to distract from the tangible harms of his policies. The event’s blend of provocative theatrics and harmful policy shifts illustrates how Trump weaponizes cultural identity to divide the nation while enacting policies that deepen inequality.
The broader implications of this approach are worrying. By prioritising performance over governance, Trump undermines trust in institutions and shifts the focus away from systemic challenges. Issues like health care reform, climate change, international cooperation, discrimination and economic inequality demand collective action and informed debate, yet they are side-lined in favour of drama and division.
This governance-by-spectacle threatens the foundations of democracy. It normalises a style of politics where emotional engagement eclipses accountability and polarisation becomes the primary tool of power. The long-term cost is stark: a fractured electorate, weakened institutions, and a nation ill-equipped to address its most pressing challenges.
As the curtain falls on Trump’s inauguration, the real work begins. Citizens must resist the allure of spectacle and demand accountability, transparency, and substantive action. Leadership cannot be reduced to theatrics—it demands vision, integrity, and a commitment to the common good. Without these, the curtain may rise again on an even darker act.
Edited by Charlotte Lewis
Bibliography
The Guardian. "Elon Musk, Nazi 'Roman Salute,' and the Difference at Trump's Inauguration." January 21, 2025.
BBC News. "Trump Inauguration 2025: Key Moments and Controversies."
The White House. "Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity." January 2025.
NBC News. "Trump Reverses Biden Policies on Drug Pricing and Obamacare."
LBC. "Donald Trump: 'Saved by God' and 'Make America Great Again' in Inaugural Address."
The Independent. "AOC Criticizes NRA’s Response to Assault Weapons Ban."
BBC News. "Trump’s Policies: What They Mean for Americans."
Associated Press. "Transcript: Trump's Inaugural Address."
The White House. "Restoring Names That Honor American Greatness." January 2025.
The White House. "Declaring a National Energy Emergency." January 2025.
Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. "Fossil Fuel Extraction Harming Indigenous Communities."
The Guardian. "First Thing: Trump Labels January 6 Attacks on Police ‘Very Minor Incidents’." January 23, 2025.
The New York Times. "Meta, Mark Zuckerberg, and Trump." January 10, 2025.
Sky News. "Donald Trump’s Inauguration in Pictures."
Great article if only more on msm could follow the rhetoric