Here Comes the Context Arguments

At this point, what would Donald Trump actually have to do for Americans to agree that he is racist?

That question matters because every new incident triggers the same ritual: denial, context laundering, and the insistence that this time really isn’t what it looks like. The most recent example is Trump sharing a video depicting Barack and Michelle Obama as monkeys. A Black congressman, Wesley Hunt, rushed to defend it. Supporters argued that the “real” message of the video was that Trump is the “king of the jungle,” and that the specific animals used to portray Black politicians were beside the point.

They aren’t.

You don’t accidentally choose monkeys. You don’t randomly stumble into one of the oldest racist tropes in Western political history. Context does not neutralize symbolism. It sharpens it. Of all the animals available, portraying the first Black president and first lady as monkeys is not a coincidence, a joke gone wrong, or an unfortunate misunderstanding. It is the message.

This is where the conversation often derails. Defenders insist we should focus on intent rather than impact, as if the two are separable. They say it’s about hierarchy, dominance, Trump as the alpha figure presiding over a political jungle. But that framing collapses under the weight of reality. Trump is not a teenager posturing online. He is the president of the United States. When he shares something, it is not idle entertainment. It is an endorsement.

And yet, when confronted, Trump did what he always does. He denied responsibility. He claimed he only watched part of the video. He said someone else posted it. He did not confirm whether that person was disciplined or fired. This is the same man who eagerly takes credit for diplomatic breakthroughs he did not negotiate, but suddenly becomes powerless when racism appears on his own social media platform.

Responsibility, it seems, only applies when it flatters him.

Senator Tim Scott responded by saying he was praying the video was fake because it was “the most racist thing” he had seen come out of the White House. That reaction is revealing, though not in the way Scott likely intended. Of course the video is fake. No one thinks Democrats were literally transformed into animals. What Scott was really hoping for was plausible deniability, a way to believe that Trump hadn’t actually shared it himself.

That hope is the problem.

The controversy isn’t that Trump crossed a line. It’s that Americans keep insisting the line exists.

There is a persistent belief that Trump is fundamentally decent, just rough around the edges. That he may flirt with ugliness but would never fully embrace it. That surely there is a point where he would stop himself, or be stopped by those around him. This belief survives despite years of evidence to the contrary.

Trump has shown repeatedly that there is no boundary he will not cross if it serves him. He does not apologize. He does not correct course. He does not discipline subordinates for racist behavior unless it inconveniences him politically. That is not impulsiveness. It is character.

Some supporters now say they regret their vote. They describe this video as a wake-up call. That, too, is telling. America has become so skilled at disguising racism that many people only recognize it when it is cartoonish and undeniable. It takes something as blatant as the Obamas depicted as monkeys for the fog to lift.

And even then, some still search for an out. Maybe Trump didn’t post it himself. Maybe it was a staffer. Maybe it was taken out of context. But even in the most charitable version of events, the conclusion is the same. If someone believed Trump would find that video amusing enough to share, that belief did not come from nowhere. It came from a pattern Trump himself created.

Racism does not always announce itself with slurs or burning crosses. Sometimes it looks like a president sharing a video and waiting to see if anyone will stop him.

You know, people argued about the context of Charlie Kirk’s most controversial messages. A former Pastor of mine from Tennessee vehemently argued that nothing Kirk ever said was racist. Like saying the Civil Rights Movement was a mistake was not racist when heard in the entire context. These are the same people who are arguing that depicting the Obamas as monkeys is not racist when watching the video in its entire context.

Yeah, and a movie shouldn’t be rated R because it includes a sex scene. If you watch the movie in its entire context it could be rated PG.