New Delhi – In a political landscape increasingly defined by hyperbole and sharp rhetoric, it takes a lot to stand out. Yet, the recent exchange between former US President Donald Trump and esteemed academic Mahmood Mamdani has cut through the noise, offering a stark glimpse into the current state of global political discourse.
The Spark: Mamdani’s ‘Fascist’ Critique
The controversy began when Mamdani, a globally renowned political theorist and public intellectual of Indian origin, delivered a scathing critique of Trump’s political style. Speaking at a panel discussion hosted by a leading European university, the Columbia University professor did not mince words.
He labelled the former president’s movement as having “clear ethno-nationalist and fascist tendencies,” pointing to its “cult of personality, disregard for democratic norms, and mobilisation of grievance politics.”
Mamdani’s comments, coming from a respected figure whose work is canonical in academic circles, quickly went viral. For critics of Trump, it was a powerful validation. For his supporters, it was yet another example of the “globalist elite” attempting to discredit a populist leader. The stage was set for a fiery rebuttal, but the expected explosion never came.
Trump’s Tarmac Rebuttal: ‘I Don’t Mind’
When cornered by reporters before boarding his private jet, Trump was asked directly about Mamdani’s “fascist” label. His response was a masterclass in the political nonchalance that has become his trademark.
With a slight shrug and a characteristic smirk, he simply said:
“I don’t mind.”
He continued, barely breaking stride, “Never heard of him. A professor, you say? Good. They can say what they want. They call you a fascist when you’re strong. They call you a fascist when you want to put your country first. The American people know what’s happening. They know who the real fascists are.”
In those few sentences, Trump neutralized the attack. He simultaneously dismissed his critic, reframed the potent slur as a backhanded compliment for being “strong,” and pivoted to a counter-accusation aimed at his own political opponents.
The ‘Teflon Don’ Strategy: Dismiss and Reframe
This reaction is emblematic of the “Teflon Don” phenomenon that has baffled political analysts for years. Historically, an accusation of fascism against a major Western political figure would trigger a frantic damage control operation. For Trump, however, it’s just another Tuesday.
The strategy appears to be twofold:
- Deny Oxygen: By refusing to engage with the substance of the critique, he denies it the oxygen of a protracted debate, signaling to his base that the accusation is too absurd to warrant a serious response.
- Co-opt the Language: He co-opts the language of his detractors. In his world, being called a “fascist” by an academic is not a mark of shame but a badge of honour—proof that he is rattling the cages of an establishment his supporters deeply distrust.
For observers worldwide, this episode is a telling sign of our times. The power of words like “fascist” seems to be eroding, either through overuse or through the deliberate efforts of politicians like Trump to render them meaningless. As the world gears up for another potentially tumultuous US election, the chasm between intellectual critique and political reality has never seemed wider.
