Charleston (USA), October 2 (The Conversation) In a recent speech, Donald Trump used the language of intelligence, or intellectual disability, as a weapon against Kamala Harris. And he used similar language about vice presidential candidate Tim Walz in a television appearance.
At a rally on September 29, 2024 in Prairie du Chien, Wisconsin, Trump told his supporters that “Joe Biden was left mentally disabled. Kamala was born that way. She was born like this. And if you think about it, only a mentally disabled person could have allowed this to happen to our country.” He made similar comments at a rally in Erie, Pennsylvania, over the same weekend.
Disability rights advocates were quick to point out that Trump's language is what's called "ableist," meaning he assumes that people with disabilities are somehow less valuable than those without them. In an attempt to fight back, “Saturday Night Live” Weekend Update host Colin Jost joked that “I can't believe Trump admitted he lost the debate to a mentally disabled person,” repeating the same ableist premise. .
And on a Sept. 30, 2024, Fox Nation show hosted by Kellyanne Conway, Trump called Walz “a complete asshole.”
While this is the latest round of personal attacks focused on a lack of intelligence, it is far from unusual. Degrading language about intelligence is a staple of bipartisan political campaigning and extends to much of American history and contemporary culture.The value of a person.
Donald Trump has repeatedly called Kamala Harris – and others – “low IQ” and recently referred to Jewish voters as “stupid” if they helped elect Harris. Harold Myerson of The American Prospect calls Trump a “dumb idiot,” and political cartoons paint Trump as something of a buffoon.
While people often stop to think about and discuss race or gender, comments about intelligence don't typically receive much sustained attention. People agree with Trump or laugh at Jost, without thinking about what it means to be called “low IQ,” “mentally disabled,” or “idiot.” To me, as a mother of a child with Down syndrome, These comments remind me of the ways in which she is consistently categorized, compared to so-called “normal” children, and considered deficient based on variations in IQ tests.
And as a mother and disability studies scholar writing a book on cognitive disability, I know that intelligence has always been defined in different ways in different societies. You can't take a number on an IQ test and use it to definitively categorize any person.
In the West, before the mid-19th century, there was no definitive distinction between “madmen,” “idiots,” and “imbeciles.” While many of these people were sent to asylums or, in the case of author Jane Austen's brother, to live with another family, it was more common to keep them at home and integrate them into the broader community. Much of this changed in the decade 1840, when Adolphe Quetelet, the Belgian mathematician, astronomer and statistician, sketched the body – complete with measurements – of the “normal” man. While focusing solely on the physical body, the idea of a norm, reinforced by the rise of statistics as a discipline, became increasingly important when it came to intellectual function.
Once statistics took off and people began the process of normalizing, or devising how the average human being should look and think, statisticians and laymen began to rely heavily on the bell curve, a useful but inaccurate means. to measure all kinds of characteristics, the main one being intelligence.
Forced sterilization, institutionalizationIn the 1880s, intelligence, now a characteristic quantified by IQ tests, was used to “prove” the inferiority of any person whose behaviors, ways of speaking, and even ways of thinking threatened the social order. That characterization was part of the theory of eugenics, in which people labeled as inferior were discouraged – or actively prevented – from having children and, in some cases, even living.
As historian Douglas Baynton notes in his 2013 essay Disability and the Justification of Inequality in American History, Ellis Island officials turned away many would-be immigrants if they had “any mental abnormality,” whether a cognitive disability, a stutter, or a stutter. or even depression.
The language becomes even more horrible when race is included. In early 19th century racial science, both the "idiot" skull and the "African" skull resembled the orangutan more than Shakespeare or Napoleon. Africans and people considered “idiots” were seen as animalistic and irrational, and needed protection from their wards or owners. In the early 20th century, these same ideas about racial and cognitive inferiority resulted in the forced sterilization of women with intellectual disabilities, as well as women of color, many of whom were considered “unfit” to give birth to the next generation of American children.
In addition to sterilization, people considered to have a low IQ or mentally disabled were placed in unhygienic institutions located in places far from populated urban centers. Unseen and unthought of, these people were kept in places like the Willowbrook State Developmental Center on Staten Island in New York Bay, where they often lacked clothing and sanitation and were subjected to abuse.
Even today there are institutions where people with intellectual disabilities are housed. The United States does not have an education system where people like my daughter can learn every day with neurotypical children, children whose brains function in a way that is considered normal. Special education classrooms are disproportionately filled with students of color, who in most cases are diagnosed with behavioral disabilities. These students often end up on the school-to-prison pipeline. These classrooms show how something as “simple” as an IQ test – something as innocuous as a label – can end up condemning the country's children to a life of segregation and social oppression.
Not just Trump's words
Temperatures are rising during this presidential election. Yet Trump's words about Harris, while extraordinarily rude and ugly for a presidential candidate, often fall between derogatory descriptions used by both sides. These phrases are part of a culture that uses measures of intelligence as a way to measure the value of a human being. Words are powerful: they can, like the literature I teach, broaden perspectives on the world or they can serve to reinforce limiting ideologies that perpetuate oppression.
Terms like “low IQ,” “idiot,” and “mentally disabled” have a traumatic history, a history that many cognitively disabled, lower-class, and minority people continue to live with today. I think politicians and their constituents should understand the destructive history of these terms and think twice before using words like these as an easy means to attack each other. (The conversation) AMS
At a rally on September 29, 2024 in Prairie du Chien, Wisconsin, Trump told his supporters that “Joe Biden was left mentally disabled. Kamala was born that way. She was born like this. And if you think about it, only a mentally disabled person could have allowed this to happen to our country.” He made similar comments at a rally in Erie, Pennsylvania, over the same weekend.
Disability rights advocates were quick to point out that Trump's language is what's called "ableist," meaning he assumes that people with disabilities are somehow less valuable than those without them. In an attempt to fight back, “Saturday Night Live” Weekend Update host Colin Jost joked that “I can't believe Trump admitted he lost the debate to a mentally disabled person,” repeating the same ableist premise. .
And on a Sept. 30, 2024, Fox Nation show hosted by Kellyanne Conway, Trump called Walz “a complete asshole.”
While this is the latest round of personal attacks focused on a lack of intelligence, it is far from unusual. Degrading language about intelligence is a staple of bipartisan political campaigning and extends to much of American history and contemporary culture.The value of a person.
Donald Trump has repeatedly called Kamala Harris – and others – “low IQ” and recently referred to Jewish voters as “stupid” if they helped elect Harris. Harold Myerson of The American Prospect calls Trump a “dumb idiot,” and political cartoons paint Trump as something of a buffoon.
While people often stop to think about and discuss race or gender, comments about intelligence don't typically receive much sustained attention. People agree with Trump or laugh at Jost, without thinking about what it means to be called “low IQ,” “mentally disabled,” or “idiot.” To me, as a mother of a child with Down syndrome, These comments remind me of the ways in which she is consistently categorized, compared to so-called “normal” children, and considered deficient based on variations in IQ tests.
And as a mother and disability studies scholar writing a book on cognitive disability, I know that intelligence has always been defined in different ways in different societies. You can't take a number on an IQ test and use it to definitively categorize any person.
In the West, before the mid-19th century, there was no definitive distinction between “madmen,” “idiots,” and “imbeciles.” While many of these people were sent to asylums or, in the case of author Jane Austen's brother, to live with another family, it was more common to keep them at home and integrate them into the broader community. Much of this changed in the decade 1840, when Adolphe Quetelet, the Belgian mathematician, astronomer and statistician, sketched the body – complete with measurements – of the “normal” man. While focusing solely on the physical body, the idea of a norm, reinforced by the rise of statistics as a discipline, became increasingly important when it came to intellectual function.
Once statistics took off and people began the process of normalizing, or devising how the average human being should look and think, statisticians and laymen began to rely heavily on the bell curve, a useful but inaccurate means. to measure all kinds of characteristics, the main one being intelligence.
Forced sterilization, institutionalizationIn the 1880s, intelligence, now a characteristic quantified by IQ tests, was used to “prove” the inferiority of any person whose behaviors, ways of speaking, and even ways of thinking threatened the social order. That characterization was part of the theory of eugenics, in which people labeled as inferior were discouraged – or actively prevented – from having children and, in some cases, even living.
As historian Douglas Baynton notes in his 2013 essay Disability and the Justification of Inequality in American History, Ellis Island officials turned away many would-be immigrants if they had “any mental abnormality,” whether a cognitive disability, a stutter, or a stutter. or even depression.
The language becomes even more horrible when race is included. In early 19th century racial science, both the "idiot" skull and the "African" skull resembled the orangutan more than Shakespeare or Napoleon. Africans and people considered “idiots” were seen as animalistic and irrational, and needed protection from their wards or owners. In the early 20th century, these same ideas about racial and cognitive inferiority resulted in the forced sterilization of women with intellectual disabilities, as well as women of color, many of whom were considered “unfit” to give birth to the next generation of American children.
In addition to sterilization, people considered to have a low IQ or mentally disabled were placed in unhygienic institutions located in places far from populated urban centers. Unseen and unthought of, these people were kept in places like the Willowbrook State Developmental Center on Staten Island in New York Bay, where they often lacked clothing and sanitation and were subjected to abuse.
Even today there are institutions where people with intellectual disabilities are housed. The United States does not have an education system where people like my daughter can learn every day with neurotypical children, children whose brains function in a way that is considered normal. Special education classrooms are disproportionately filled with students of color, who in most cases are diagnosed with behavioral disabilities. These students often end up on the school-to-prison pipeline. These classrooms show how something as “simple” as an IQ test – something as innocuous as a label – can end up condemning the country's children to a life of segregation and social oppression.
Not just Trump's words
Temperatures are rising during this presidential election. Yet Trump's words about Harris, while extraordinarily rude and ugly for a presidential candidate, often fall between derogatory descriptions used by both sides. These phrases are part of a culture that uses measures of intelligence as a way to measure the value of a human being. Words are powerful: they can, like the literature I teach, broaden perspectives on the world or they can serve to reinforce limiting ideologies that perpetuate oppression.
Terms like “low IQ,” “idiot,” and “mentally disabled” have a traumatic history, a history that many cognitively disabled, lower-class, and minority people continue to live with today. I think politicians and their constituents should understand the destructive history of these terms and think twice before using words like these as an easy means to attack each other. (The conversation) AMS
