Introduction
In ancient China, Confucius suggested that if he had absolute power, the first thing he would do is “rectify the names of things.” He believed that language not only describes but also prescribes, shaping thought, discourse, and consequently actions and outcomes. President Donald Trump seems to be employing language to serve his personal agenda since taking office.
Trump’s Linguistic Mandates
Since returning to the White House, Trump has issued a series of executive orders aiming to “rectify” the language of US governance. These decrees include banning federal government use of terms like “diversity,” “equity,” “inclusion,” “climate crisis,” and others related to sexual and racial identity, which he deems perpetuate a harmful “woke” ideology.
Impact on Concepts and Research
These Orwellian decrees aim to dictate outcomes by reconfiguring narratives, altering priorities, and erasing uncomfortable truths. For instance, prohibiting the term “sustainability” dismisses environmental concerns, while banning discussions on “diversity” conceals systemic inequalities.
Though some of Trump’s decrees align with public opinion (e.g., a 2023 survey showed most Americans reject the notion of more than two genders), the overall effect weakens, politicizes, and discredits existing concepts and valuable intellectual and scientific research lines. Essentially, Trump restricts Americans’ ability to analyze, learn, improve, and engage in open, informed debate necessary for a functioning democracy.
Consequences of Trump’s Linguistic Repression
Trump’s linguistic repression has already impacted the Department of Efficiency Government, formerly led by Elon Musk, resulting in the termination of 85 government contracts worth approximately $1 billion linked to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) and accessibility. This often relied on AI-powered keyword searches.
- Government websites have removed any reference to climate change.
- Research grants mentioning terms like “climate” or “racial disparities” have been frozen.
- Threats of funding cuts have been made to institutions like the Smithsonian, promoting inclusive narratives.
Companies like Walmart, Meta, and McDonald’s have scaled back their DEI programs due to fear of Trump administration retaliation.
Influence on Global Stakeholders
Larry Fink, CEO of BlackRock, previously advocated for considering environmental, social, and governance (ESG) factors when making investment decisions. However, his latest letter to investors focuses on “energy pragmatism” instead of ESG or sustainability, reflecting a broader trend among major banks and investment funds distancing themselves from sustainability commitments due to political and legal concerns.
The Dow Jones Sustainability Index, once the global standard for corporate social and environmental responsibility, has been rebranded by its owner (S&P Global) as the “Best-in-Class Index.”
These are not merely cosmetic changes but signals to investors that sustainability is no longer a priority, potentially affecting institutions, businesses, and academic research worldwide. Given the US’s economic dominance, it wields significant influence over English language norms, the international discourse’s lingua franca.
European Echoes
Extreme right European parties (e.g., Alternative für Deutschland/AfD in Germany, Rassemblement National in France, and Vox in Spain) echo Trump’s rhetoric, criticizing “woke” concepts like diversity and sustainability. AfD dismisses sustainability policies, labeling them symptoms of a “hysteria” hindering the German industry—a sentiment resonating with their growing supporter base.
Trump’s linguistic campaign may also influence European businesses and research through direct pressure. US embassies across Europe have sent letters to companies and entities doing business with the US government, demanding certification that they don’t implement DEI programs.
The Role of the European Union
The European Union, with its penchant for naming things, seems the obvious candidate to take the lead. However, the EU Commission has remained silent amidst Trump’s attacks on language. Europe misses an opportunity to demonstrate global leadership based on principles while showcasing that it defends meaningful concepts rather than empty ones.
The EU frequently speaks of sustainability and inclusion, evidenced by its “green transition” and “inclusive growth” proclamations. Yet, it often lacks the necessary resolve to translate words into actions. To reclaim Trump’s targeted terms, concrete policies are needed—for example, a binding EU sustainability framework compelling businesses to adhere to ESG standards.
Just as Trump’s lack of commitment to NATO has prompted a delayed European political awakening, his attacks on sustainability and inclusion language should catalyze European action in both areas and reinforce its international leadership. The alternative—allowing internal populist forces and external manipulation to shape Europe’s future—deepens vulnerability and fragmentation.
The Author
Ana Palacio was Spain’s foreign affairs minister and senior legal advisor/general counsel at the World Bank Group; she is currently a visiting professor at Georgetown University.
