Last month, the White House X account shared a striking illustration of President Donald Trump, showcasing him surrounded by patriotic symbols such as eagles, fireworks, and an American flag, all encapsulated by a cloud of cash. The post proclaimed, “Six months in. All gas. No brakes. The winning will continue. The deportations will continue. The memes will continue.”
Such posts have fueled ongoing debates and controversies as the administration engages with the public via social media. The White House’s X account and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) have maintained an active stream of content that celebrates the Trump administration’s policies, particularly its stringent immigration enforcement, often presented with a tone of ironic comedy. This strategy reflects the administration’s focus on redefining citizenship in the United States, while simultaneously promoting its initiatives.
In recent weeks, DHS’s social media activity has spotlighted its goal to recruit more Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents, accompanied by a variety of imagery ranging from retro recruitment posters to historical artworks that nostalgically idealize America’s past. Some of the content includes visuals reminiscent of the World War II era, while others evoke scenes depicting white settlers’ expansion at the expense of Native Americans, such as an 1872 painting that portrays this displacement in a positive light.
Among the posts are videos mimicking viral internet formats, including one from February featuring footage of immigrants boarding planes, complete with the sound of chains rattling. Titled “ASMR: Illegal Alien Deportation Flight,” this content refers to a popular genre of videos designed to evoke calmness and relaxation, creating a stark contrast with its darker subject matter.
The social media approach taken by the White House and DHS has proven divisive, resonating with segments of Donald Trump’s base while inciting criticism for its tone and implications. Ryan Milner, a communication professor at the College of Charleston who examines Internet culture, noted that this strategy seems aimed at appealing to those who revel in irreverence and respond to perceived slights against them. He suggests that the intent may be to provoke outrage among those opposed to the posts, further intensifying political divides.
Despite inquiries from NPR regarding the agency’s social media output, White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson did not offer a direct response but remarked, “The White House consistently posts banger memes” and proceeded to mock NPR.
DHS’s assistant secretary for public affairs, Tricia McLaughlin, characterized the inquiry as “deranged and delusional,” vehemently defending the administration’s portrayal of American history. McLaughlin emphasized that the administration is unabashedly proud of its heritage and implied that critics should accept this perspective.
A focus among DHS’s recent social media posts includes its initiative to hire 10,000 new ICE agents, fueled by a budget increase from Trump’s tax cuts and spending bill. The imagery utilized in these posts amalgamates patriotic art, retro recruitment styles, and visuals of armed agents, all of which cultivate a nationalistic narrative. This portrayal posits a view of America that centers on white, Eurocentric ideals, according to Heidi Beirich, co-founder of the Global Project Against Hate and Extremism.
In her assessment, the imagery invoked by DHS suggests a romanticized version of American history, one that contends that a once-thriving white civilization has since been tarnished by those deemed ‘outsiders.’ By utilizing recruitment imagery that promotes the notion that a military response is necessary to safeguard a ‘white culture,’ the posts underpin an idea of violent repulsion against perceived threats.
As a glaring example, DHS’s late July post of John Gast’s classic painting “American Progress,” accompanied by the caption “A Heritage to be proud of, a Homeland worth Defending,” has drawn significant attention. The Autry Museum of the American West, home to the original painting, received numerous inquiries following the post. Museum director Stephen Aron described the painting as providing an idealized narrative of westward expansion that conveniently omits the violence and conflict associated with that period.
This portrayal has led to criticism for glorifying a perspective that can only serve to reinforce historical injustices. Beirich described the use of such imagery for recruitment purposes as deeply troubling, further suggesting that it sends a blatant message about reclaiming white territory.
Other DHS posts have raised alarms for their potential references to neo-Nazi and extremist ideologies. One such image, which features Uncle Sam standing at a metaphorical crossroads with the caption “Which way, American man?” aligns with rhetoric used in white nationalist literature. The phrase echoes sentiments presented in the 1978 book “Which Way Western Man?” authored by William Gayley Simpson, a known advocate of violent anti-Semitic ideals.
When questioned about the post’s connection to the book, McLaughlin dismissed the concern as labeling everything undesirable as “Nazi propaganda” was tiresome. However, the DHS continued to refrain from clarifying how the predominantly white imagery it shares is intended to be interpreted.
Additionally, the agency’s recruitment-themed posts have incorporated overt Christian references, casting the mission of policing the border as one of good versus evil. A video released in late July featured armed border agents and sound from the opening monologue of the film “The Batman,” overlayed with a Bible verse from Proverbs that emphasizes courage against wickedness.
Such themes resonate with aspects of Christian nationalism, intertwining religious beliefs with law enforcement duties, further strengthening the emotional appeal to certain voter demographics. Beirich remarked that this effort bears resemblances to the rhetoric associated with the historical Crusades.
In a notable pivot, the DHS social media presence represents a continuation of the Trump administration’s trend towards provocative content and viral memes. One prior post featured an AI-generated depiction of a Dominican woman crying during her arrest, drawn in an animation style akin to that of Hayao Miyazaki’s films. Following backlash regarding the context and sentiment of the post, White House deputy communications director Kaelan Dorr pushed back against the critics by emphasizing the woman’s criminal background, reiterating, “The arrests will continue. The memes will continue.”
Meyer argues that this trolling strategy serves as an example of state power, effectively normalizing the administration’s harsh approach to immigration while mocking and antagonizing dissenters. He articulates that the administration possesses the ability to control public visualization and discourse, navigating reactions and shaping narratives.
The inflammatory nature of the posts is closely tied to a brand of humor that surfaced online, particularly on platforms like Reddit and 4chan in previous decades. This style often aims to trigger outrage among detractors while simultaneously generating attention.
Dorr’s own profile on X includes a banner that self-mockingly reads, “oMg, diD tHe wHiTE hOuSE reALLy PosT tHiS?” signaling an intent to embrace irreverence and trolling as a means of engagement.
Milner identifies attention as the ultimate currency in today’s digital landscape: clicks, views, and comments generate momentum for posts, regardless of whether individuals are responding positively or negatively. White House and DHS accounts frequently partake in sharing AI-generated artwork that blends pop culture with news headlines. Trump’s campaigns have also prominently featured similar AI-generated content during his presidential runs.
The authorship of the artwork shared by these accounts remains unclear, further amplifying concerns over the implications of utilizing such art without acknowledgment.
Milner draws parallels between the posting strategy employed by the administration and the concept of “agitprop,” a term combining agitation and propaganda that characterized Soviet communication approaches.
The intent behind these posts appears to create a narrative and cultural framework that aligns with the administration’s ideological stance.
Some artists have voiced their disapproval regarding the appropriation of their work by the administration without consent. British pop artist Jess Glynne condemned a White House video that misappropriated an audio clip from her song, expressing profound disappointment given her music’s thematic focus on unity and positivity.
The White House video, which paired the travel ad audio with deportation footage, quickly faced backlash, resulting in the audio being removed from the platform. Similarly, the band Black Rebel Motorcycle Club demanded that a DHS recruitment video featuring their music be taken down, condemning the administration’s disregard for copyright laws and artistic rights.
After a DHS post featured a painting by artist Morgan Weistling, the artist communicated his opposition to the use of his work without permission. Additionally, the Kinkade Family Foundation raised objections against the unauthorized usage of a Thomas Kinkade painting, further highlighting concerns around copyright infringement.
In addition to employing innovative imagery, the Trump administration has utilized its social media presence to attack and critique media reporting unfavorably received by its officials. Articles that portray the administration’s actions in a critical light are often labeled as “FAKE NEWS” or met with allegations of spreading false narratives regarding immigration.
DHS officials frequently target specific news outlets, underscoring their reliance on social media as a means of public relations. After a critical piece from The Washington Post labeled a DHS post as featuring an “explicitly racist painting,” McLaughlin reacted furiously, sarcastically implying that the publication had neglected its education on art history.
The White House has increasingly pointed out political contributions made by journalists as a strategy to discredit their credibility. A post from White House communications director Steven Cheung criticized The Washington Post for quoting a drone warfare expert, implying bias due to the individual’s political affiliations. This tactic serves to undermine journalists while steering public discourse in favor of the administration.
While the administration leverages allegations of partisan bias to dismiss dissenting viewpoints, it raises concerns around the implications of chilling dissent among analysts and journalists alike. Milner expressed apprehension that this pattern may deter individuals from articulating critiques of the administration for fear of being subject to online harassment or scrutiny.
The overarching concern surrounding the tactics employed by the Trump administration, particularly on social media, signals a potentially dangerous precedent: one where dissent is stifled, and public conversations remain severely polarized.
image source from：npr
