(function(doc, html, url) { var widget = doc.createElement("div"); widget.innerHTML = html; var script = doc.currentScript; // e = a.currentScript; if (!script) { var scripts = doc.scripts; for (var i = 0; i < scripts.length; ++i) { script = scripts[i]; if (script.src && script.src.indexOf(url) != -1) break; } } script.parentElement.replaceChild(widget, script); }(document, '
Our time is an apocalyptic time, but the argumentation in this apocalyptic time has hardly been studied by scholars of argumentation. This article shows how both Donald Trump and the jihadist warriors of ISIS appeal to an apocalyptic worldview in their argumentation. The three topos of evil, time and authority from Stephen O’Leary’s Arguing the Apocalypse are used in the analysis. Both Trump supporters and jihadist warriors see themselves as fighting for God and their enemies as representing evil forces. For scholars of argumentation the role of arguments woven into narratives that become whole worldviews needs to be studied more thoroughly.
To compare the followers of Trump with ISIS might seem an outright absurdity. The American evangelicals would see no similarities between themselves and the bloodthirsty jihadists who have massacred thousands of Christians in the Caliphate. Neither would the jihadists see any similarities. They regard the United States and its president as the great Satan. The similarities in the comparison above are found in the apocalyptic world- view shared by both the supporters of Trump and the jihadists in ISIS. They both see the world as beset by evil forces, but they define those forces very differently. They see themselves as threatened, and they interpret their situation in a larger framework of a fight between good and evil. Both Trump supporters and jihadist warriors see themselves as fighting for God and their enemies as representing evil forces. They feel that time is short, and that the end of the world is near. The final battle at Armageddon or Dabiq appears prominently in the propaganda. And the great leader with messianic pretentions will lead his people. The apocalyptic dimension in this argumentation has not received adequate attention in previous studies. For scholars of argumentation the role of arguments woven into narratives that become whole worldviews needs to be studied more thoroughly. One aspect here is the desperate rhetorical situation, shared by fol- lowers of Trump and jihadists, that they experience an existential evil that make them susceptible to propaganda and outrageous beliefs. Apocalyptic is the rocket fuel of religion. As such it needs to be understood and contained before it sets the whole world aflame.