Was Biden’s Speech Presentation Necessary?
Written by: Habibi Bridges
When Biden took the stage at the Independence Hall in Philadelphia, an ominous red light appeared behind him. Despite the message of the speech, the presentation was meant to show the full extent of state power and the malevolence it could accomplish.
There was nothing wrong with his speech. America does have a problem with right wing extremism, but the presentation almost felt like an endorsement of everything he was denouncing.
It was, in a way, the perfect example of America, and its persistent cultural gaslighting. He goes on to mention the significance of his location: “I speak to you tonight from sacred ground in America”, as he commemorated the landmark where the Declaration of Independence and Constitution were created two centuries ago.
The reason why he’s emphasizing Independence Hall is because of what it represents “equality and democracy–the rock upon which this nation was built.”
But anyone who has read a history book with any level of legitimate competency knows that isn’t what America was built on, it was built on the blood of workers and slaves. Blood that was as red as the lights behind him.
While I agree with his message of unity, I can’t take it very seriously. To fully respect a sitting President’s speech, you have to completely detach yourself from any understanding of history. The presentation also had full-on fascist vibes. Those aren’t the vibes I want ever, but especially when trying to denounce the rise of rightwing fascists in the United States. Seems a bit counter productive, doesn’t it?
Interestingly enough, despite the rarity of televised Biden speeches and interviews, most television networks did not broadcast the speech live. Most networks deemed Biden’s soul of the nation speech too “political” in nature and decided to continue with their regularly scheduled programming. Which is odd…
I find this to be a bit hypocritical considering the media bent over backwards to cover Donald Trump, who they knew was bad for the country, but constantly covered his events.
There were two major responses to Biden’s speech; democrats either praising Biden for confronting right wing extremism, or conservative reactionaries calling Biden’s message “divisive” and “inflammatory”. Most networks used sensational language in their media coverage of his soul of the nation speech, such as “Biden attacks Trump” or “Biden blasts MAGA philosophy” after deciding not to air his soul of the nation speech.
After reading the entire speech, I found most of what he said, despite glossing over America’s history of betraying many of the ideals President Biden says America stands for, pretty typical and nowhere near as inflammatory as a typical Trump speech.
Was the presentation necessary? Not really, but I think Biden is trying to get more “moderate” Trump voters (whatever that means) on his side. While he can’t do it with extreme language like Trump does, he can do it with a subtle nod to their limited understanding of political power.
You Might Also Like
