Why communism is not a 'mortal threat to America's liberty'

Editor's note: Anthony Moretti, a special commentator for CGTN, is an associate professor at the Department of Communication and Organizational Leadership at Robert Morris University in the US. The article reflects the author's opinions and not necessarily those of either CGTN or Robert Morris University.

What are the legitimate dangers America faces? The incomplete list would include political polarization, the negative potential of artificial intelligence, climate change, ineffective governance and a crippling national debt. What would not be on the list? Communism. Was it ever a real threat to the country? Probably not. But communism now is most definitely not "a mortal threat to American liberty."

US President Donald Trump made that claim a few days ago, during a speech leading up to the 250th anniversary of the country's birth. In an even more eye-opening moment, he asserted that he would "vanquish it quickly" and send "into exile" anyone supporting the ideology.

All of that might have made for great theater, but it also tapped into a familiar argument made by multiple US presidents. Dating to the end of World War II (WWII), consecutive administrations have suggested that communists were always eager to undermine the fabric of the US. A convenient way to rally the public, warning that "the Reds" were sneaky, deceitful and ready to pounce became especially pronounced during the Cold War.

History reminds us that British politicians, most notably Winston Churchill and Margaret Thatcher, also seemed consumed at points during their years in power with fears of an infiltration of communists into Western societies.

It is also worth remembering that the perceived threat posed by the Soviet Union and its Eastern European allies served as the primary justification for the dramatic expansion of US military spending. To ensure it was fully prepared to defeat this adversary, and any future challengers that might emerge, Washington argued that its armed forces needed an arsenal capable of overwhelming an opposing military many times over, even without taking nuclear weapons into account. The military-industrial complex laughed all the way to the bank as it took in billions and billions of dollars to build sophisticated aircraft, tanks and other weaponry.

As those weapons continued to roll off the assembly lines, it was inevitable that a war mindset grew unchecked. The idea that the US could simply bomb or invade any nation that threatened it became ingrained into the country's psyche. A "do not mess with us" attitude infected public officials and private citizens. And at times, those public officials let their guard down.

In 1984, as Ronald Reagan prepared for his weekly radio address, he joked that "we begin bombing (the USSR) in five minutes." Thankfully, nothing came of that verbal faux pas. Meanwhile it was only a little more than a year ago that the current administration hinted at "turning Iran into a parking lot" in a video that without question was unsettling.

Fair or not, every word and every action connected to a president deserves to be scrutinized. "Bombing in five minutes" and a "parking lot" occurred because the US was, and still is, overwhelmed by the idea that real or imagined foes are everywhere and military action is an appropriate response to them.

Of course, this administration has made no secret that it has the authority and the intelligence to do whatever it wants, whenever it wants. Choosing Mount Rushmore, where the faces of four former presidents – George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Theodore Roosevelt and Abraham Lincoln (representing the birth, growth, development and preservation of the United States) – are etched, allowed Trump to blast communism and to cast himself as one of the greatest men to ever occupy the White House. The symbolism was obvious: Portray himself as a modern-day guardian of the country, a mythical father figure, protecting its people from the continued "danger" – communism.

It's interesting to note that the Cold War ended nearly 30 years ago, but the fear of communism has not. The Trump administration's rhetorical gibberish also must be considered an effort to distract from the real challenges America faces in 2026. Such an examination would include recognition that policies associated with economic tariffs and an often-inhumane approach to immigration are failing. Others can be included, but let's focus only on those two.

Regarding tariffs, the evidence is everywhere: Americans are paying for them in the everyday items they buy. The commencement of a war alongside Israel and against Iran has exacerbated the financial woes. Gas prices? Up. Food prices? Up. Inflation? Up. Discontent? Up. Regarding immigration, arguing that immigrants are vile people who want to destroy America corrupts any ideal of the country as a beacon for "your tired, your poor, you're huddled masses yearning to breathe free," the words at the base of the Statue of Liberty.

"Us vs. them." It is an often-used and ridiculously flawed argumentative strategy. When used by an American president, it comes with the fact that he has the largest and loudest megaphone. He defines who "we" are and who "they" are. He can literally or figuratively shout down anyone who disagrees. He and his allies can easily cast "them" as forces committed to eroding society.

In one of the seminal books of the late 20th century, Manufacturing Consent, written by Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky and published in 1988, reminded its readers that political propaganda can easily distort reality. As the mass media are aligned with the political and business elites, they pass off propaganda as truth and dare not stray from political orthodoxy; the fear of merely being accused as un-American keeps these powerful media agencies in line.

Even though more and more US media have reduced commitment to fact and adopted ideological stances, the guardrails of acceptable opinion remain in place. So, too, does the president's ability to define the news agenda. Bashing communism is still a definite attention getter.

All US presidents seek to control the national message, and the current administration has gone further than any other since the end of WWII in attacking journalists who disagree with its convictions and claims. One wonders in the coming days how this White House will respond to domestic reporting that questions whether communism is "a mortal threat to American liberty."

What exactly does the president want to "vanquish?" And how does he intend to send "into exile" those whom he identifies as being agents of communism? Of course, it is possible that like other controversial moments in the first and second iterations of this presidency that all of this will be forgotten in a couple of days.

But even if it does, something should not be forgotten. Put rather bluntly, the Cold War, a period in which Americans were told on a daily basis that communists were out to get them, ended almost three decades ago. The corrosive mindset associated with it has not.

(If you want to contribute and have specific expertise, please contact us at opinions@cgtn.com. Follow @thouse_opinions on X to discover the latest commentaries in the CGTN Opinion Section.)