Donald Trump and Post-Truth Politics

Trumpism refers to the political movement shaped by the policies and ideology of Donald Trump. It encompasses far-right politics, conservative values, and a brand of phony populism. A defining feature of Trump’s politics is its operation within a post-truth framework—one where public opinion and media narratives are increasingly detached from the realities of policy and legislative substance. This essay argues that Donald Trump’s politics is indeed a post-truth project, one that thrives through social media and emotional manipulation rather than factual discourse.

To develop this argument, three interconnected points will be explored. First, Trump’s rise to power and how his policies undermined factual integrity will be examined. This will be followed by an analysis of his calculated use of social media to engage the public through slogans, nationalist ideas, and conservative rhetoric. Finally, the discussion will explore how Trump’s politics rely on layers of falsehoods and emotionally charged messaging that sideline objective truths in favor of constructed narratives.

Before analyzing Trump’s political trajectory, it is essential to understand the concepts of post-truth and social media that underpin his communication style. The term “post-truth” was selected as the Oxford Dictionary’s word of the year in 2016, defined as “circumstances in which objective facts are less influential in shaping public opinion than appeals to emotion and personal belief.” While often seen as a modern phenomenon, its conceptual roots can be traced back to George Orwell’s 1942 essay Looking Back on the Spanish War, where he warned that “the very concept of objective truth is fading out of the world.” Similarly, Steve Tesich, in his 1992 article in The Nation, lamented society’s voluntary abandonment of truth, suggesting that people had “freely decided that we want to live in some post-truth world.” Nietzsche’s declaration that “there are no facts, only interpretations” also aligns with the epistemic instability characteristic of post-truth discourse. Within this framework, politics becomes a terrain of disinformation, revised lies, and “alternative facts,” where facts are not merely debated but strategically disregarded.

In the digital age, the amplification of post-truth politics is made possible by social media platforms like Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, and YouTube. These platforms enable users to connect globally and rapidly disseminate information. According to the Digital 2024: Global Overview Report, around 62% of the world’s population—approximately 5 billion people—use social media. Twitter, in particular, has emerged as the preferred tool for political figures to express opinions, rally support, and influence public sentiment. Scholars like Severo (2018) highlight how the internet has allowed politicians to more effectively organize supporters and circulate political messages, bypassing traditional gatekeepers like journalists and editors.

Turning to Trump’s political ascent, his 2016 presidential campaign offers clear evidence of a post-truth strategy. He adopted a persona of an outsider businessman entering politics to “save America,” claiming moral distance from the perceived corruption of the political elite. His campaign employed tactics such as vague social media posts, name-calling, attacks on media credibility, and deliberate policy contradictions. One stark example is his immigration policy. Trump implemented a travel ban targeting Muslim-majority countries, erected a wall along the US-Mexico border, and deported many immigrants—actions underpinned not by data but by prejudice and fear-mongering. These policies violated rhetorical and ethical norms, challenging values such as diversity and inclusion that are central to democratic discourse. According to Professor Michael Marmot, Trump’s use of misleading claims like “the murder rate is rising because of immigrants” exemplifies his readiness to ignore evidence and construct emotionally resonant but false narratives.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, Trump’s post-truth tendencies intensified. He routinely dismissed scientific evidence, spread misinformation about the virus’s severity, and undermined public health authorities, eroding trust in institutions. According to PolitiFact, a Pulitzer Prize-winning fact-checking site, 69% of Trump’s statements were rated as “mostly false,” “false,” or “pants on fire.” These statistics underscore the extent to which Trump abandoned factual accountability in favor of political expediency and emotional manipulation.

Closely related to this is Trump’s strategic use of social media, particularly Twitter, to engage with his base and propagate his agenda. His prolific tweeting—averaging 34.8 tweets per day at peak usage—allowed him to bypass traditional media and directly reach supporters. His messaging was crafted to evoke emotional responses, often centered on nationalist slogans such as “Make America Great Again” and the “America First” doctrine. These narratives resonated with many Americans, appealing to economic protectionism, cultural nostalgia, and military pride. His declaration that “Americanism, not globalism, will be our credo” symbolized his rejection of liberal internationalism, drawing criticism for weakening global alliances and fostering geopolitical instability. Analysts like Curran (2018) have noted that this brand of populist nationalism poses a direct challenge to the liberal international order.

Moreover, Trump’s communication style reinforced the anti-factual character of post-truth politics. He constructed a dichotomy between “the people” and “the elite,” presenting himself as a truth-teller exposing establishment lies. This approach created a feedback loop where his falsehoods were not only tolerated but celebrated by his supporters. For example, Trump denied the scientific consensus on climate change, once tweeting that global warming was a hoax “created by and for the Chinese.” His administration’s withdrawal from the Paris Climate Agreement further signaled a deliberate dismissal of scientific facts. Similarly, following the 2020 U.S. presidential election, Trump repeatedly claimed electoral fraud without evidence, asserting on Twitter that “there is NO WAY that Mail-In Ballots will be anything less than substantially fraudulent.” Despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, Trump’s claims fueled public unrest and diminished trust in democratic processes. Journalist Ari Rabin-Hart described this tactic as “a coordinated strategic assault to hide the truth, confuse the public, and create controversy where none previously existed.”

A compelling parallel to Trump’s political trajectory can be observed in the case of Imran Khan Niazi, the former Prime Minister of Pakistan. Like Trump, Khan is lionized by his supporters as an incorruptible leader who entered politics to rescue the nation. His charismatic appeal, coupled with a strong social media presence, has enabled him to construct emotionally resonant but factually tenuous narratives. Throughout his career, he has consistently blamed previous governments for Pakistan’s economic woes, oversimplifying complex problems such as inflation and debt. His rhetoric often includes labeling political opponents as “corrupt” and engaging in personal attacks, thereby creating a binary of moral purity versus moral decay.

Khan’s use of social media has also played a central role in his political strategy. With millions of followers on Twitter and Instagram, he has effectively mobilized supporters around emotionally charged slogans such as “Naya Pakistan” and “Haqeeqi Azadi.” His adoption of religious symbolism—referring to the creation of a “Riyasat-e-Madina,” his spiritualized public image, and his use of religious rhetoric—has further solidified his emotional bond with the public. His calls for mass gatherings, made via social media, often result in large-scale participation, underscoring the powerful connection between political messaging and emotional mobilization.

In terms of promoting misinformation, Khan has echoed many of the tactics used by Trump. He has claimed electoral fraud without evidence, frequently changed political positions, and constructed elaborate conspiracy theories—most notably the U.S.-backed conspiracy narrative surrounding his ousting via a no-confidence motion in 2022. Although the claims were ultimately disproven, they succeeded in polarizing public opinion and eroding trust in Pakistan’s democratic institutions. Even while imprisoned on corruption charges, Khan continues to galvanize his base through social media, with supporters staging disruptive protests in his name. These developments, rooted in phony populism, emotional manipulation, and factual distortion, illustrate the extent to which his politics align with the post-truth paradigm.

In light of the above, it is evident that Donald Trump’s political strategy is a textbook example of post-truth politics—characterized by emotional appeals, disinformation, and strategic deception. His calculated use of social media, his repeated attacks on factual integrity, and his cultivation of a loyal base indifferent to objective truth have collectively reshaped American political discourse. The comparative case of Imran Khan demonstrates that this model of post-truth populism is not confined to the United States but has global resonance. Ultimately, the rise of such politics underscores the urgent need to reassert the value of truth, objectivity, and democratic norms in an increasingly polarized world.

Shazeen Saeed 

 The writer is a women's rights activist and an advocate for climate change.

This author does not have any more posts.