Affective polarization and selective cohesion in the rhetoric of the extreme right: A corpus-pragmatic study of Donald Trump's discourse

Abstract

This study examines the relationship between affective polarization and selective cohesion in the political rhetoric of the extreme right, drawing on a corpus-pragmatic analysis of Donald Trump’s campaign discourse. The objective is to identify the linguistic mechanisms through which emotional confrontation coexists with strategies of group alignment. The corpus comprises approximately 47,000 words from campaign rallies. The methodology combines corpus linguistics tools (frequency and collocation analysis) with sentiment analysis using LIWC, complemented by a qualitative pragmatic study. The results show a significant predominance of negative emotional lexicon and patterns of confrontation targeting the out-group (González Gómez, 2021; Winberg, 2017). However, alongside this polarizing dynamic, there is a systematic use of resources fostering internal cohesion — most notably through the first-person plural and shared affective appeals such as nationalism, opposition to globalization, and cultural preservation (Berg, 2019; Fritsch et al., 2020; Winberg, 2017) — which reinforce in-group identity. This pattern confirms the presence of selective cohesion: a discursive mechanism that simultaneously intensifies internal solidarity and external exclusion (Campani et al., 2022). Trump’s language is characterized by hyperbole, repetition, and direct appeals to his followers, while constructing his opponents as existential threats through mockery and insults (van der Vegt et al., 2021; Wahlström et al., 2021). This dynamic is linked to a strategy of disintermediation that strengthens the direct bond between leader and audience. The study shows that the mobilizing effectiveness of this rhetoric depends not only on negativity or confrontation, but also on the strategic articulation between affective polarization and in-group cohesion.