# Paralipsis "Paralipsis" (also *apophasis*, *praeteritio*) is the classical rhetorical device — Greek *paráleipsis*, "a passing over" — designating the strategy of *raising* a point or accusation while simultaneously *disclaiming* having raised it. The canonical structural pattern: "I'm not saying X, but..." or "I won't even mention that..." or "Some people are saying..." The device substantially-pre-dates contemporary political-rhetorical infrastructure (it appears in classical Greek rhetorical-instruction infrastructure as standard rhetorical-vocabulary; Roman rhetoricians treated it as *praeteritio* — "passing over" — within standard rhetorical-pedagogical taxonomy), but it has been substantially-popularized in contemporary American political-discourse as Donald Trump's *signature rhetorical-technique*. Jennifer Mercieca's 2020 *Demagogue for President: The Rhetorical Genius of Donald Trump* documents the technique as principal Trump-rhetorical-strategy and provides the principal contemporary scholarly-analytical framework for understanding the technique's contemporary deployment. The word's analytical interest is its **operational function in contemporary American populist political-rhetoric**: paralipsis allows the speaker to make accusations, deploy slurs, or float conspiratorial-content while preserving rhetorical-plausible-deniability. The technique substantially-shifts accountability from the speaker (who has formally-disclaimed making the claim) to the audience (who has substantively-received the claim) and to the press (which must decide whether to characterize the formally-disclaimed-but-substantively-communicated content as having-been-said). The technique's mass-deployment in contemporary American political-discourse has substantially-eroded analytical-political-discourse engagement; the technique operates as one of the principal contemporary information-environment dysfunctions. ## Structural Pattern The paralipsis structural pattern includes several distinguishable variants: **The bald disclaimer-claim.** "I'm not saying X, but X." The speaker explicitly disclaims the claim while substantively-making it. **The hearsay disclaimer-claim.** "People are saying X." / "Many people have said X." / "I've heard X." The speaker attributes the claim to unnamed others while substantively-introducing it into the discourse. **The hypothetical disclaimer-claim.** "What if X?" / "Imagine X." The speaker presents the claim hypothetically while substantively-communicating the content. **The negation-claim.** "I won't even mention that X." / "I refuse to discuss X." The speaker explicitly refuses to discuss the claim while substantively-introducing it. **The "just asking questions" disclaimer-claim.** "I'm just asking questions about X." / "I'm just raising the issue." The speaker frames the claim as inquiry while substantively-making the claim. **The "could be wrong" disclaimer-claim.** "I'm probably wrong about this, but X." The speaker performs epistemic humility while substantively-making the claim. ## Trump-Era Operationalization Jennifer Mercieca's *Demagogue for President* (2020) documents paralipsis as Trump's signature rhetorical-technique. Documented Trump-rhetoric paralipsis deployments: - "I'm not saying anything. I don't know. Maybe he didn't have anything to do with it." (Various contexts.) - "A lot of people are talking about how..." - "I won't even bring up the fact that..." - "I don't even want to mention the name." - "Just imagine what could happen..." - "Some say..." - "Lots of people have wondered..." - "I'm just asking questions." The technique substantially-pervades Trump's documented rhetorical-output across approximately a decade of public political-deployment. Mercieca's analytical framework treats the technique as one of multiple principal demagogic-rhetorical-techniques (alongside *ad baculum* threats, *ad hominem* personal attacks, *ad populum* mass-appeal, and adjacent demagogic-rhetorical infrastructure) that Trump rhetorical-output systematically deploys. ## Operational Function Paralipsis operates several distinct rhetorical-political functions: **Plausible-deniability preservation.** The technique substantially-preserves the speaker's rhetorical-plausible-deniability about having made the substantive claim. When subsequent fact-checking, criticism, or political-accountability infrastructure attempts to hold the speaker accountable for the claim, the speaker can substantively-disclaim having made it ("I never said that — I said *some people are saying* that"). **Audience-substantive-content delivery.** The technique substantively-delivers the content to the audience while preserving the rhetorical-plausible-deniability. Audience-members substantively-receive the claim and substantively-update their beliefs-or-political-affect based on its content, even though the speaker has formally-disclaimed making the claim. **Press-engagement complication.** The technique substantially-complicates press-engagement work. Press-coverage of the technique must decide whether to characterize the formally-disclaimed-but-substantively-communicated content as having-been-said. Most press-coverage substantially-resolves the question by *quoting* the technique verbatim (including the disclaimer), substantially-allowing the technique to operate within the press-coverage register itself. **Conspiratorial-content introduction.** The technique substantially-facilitates conspiratorial-content introduction into political-discourse. Substantive conspiratorial-claims can be floated through paralipsis without the speaker's rhetorical-political-commitment to the conspiratorial-claim's truth. **[[Stochastic Terrorism]] adjacent mechanism.** The technique operates substantially as adjacent-mechanism to stochastic terrorism — paralipsis allows the speaker to substantively-introduce violence-permission-structure content while preserving rhetorical-plausible-deniability about having advocated violence. ## Why It Matters for the KB **Trump-rhetoric signature-technique documentary anchor.** Paralipsis is documented as the principal Trump rhetorical-technique. Tracking the technique is essential to understanding the broader contemporary Trump-rhetoric infrastructure. **Classical-rhetorical-device contemporary-mass-deployment case.** The technique's trajectory from classical-rhetorical-device through long-standing-rhetorical-pedagogical-presence to contemporary mass-deployment-in-political-rhetoric is one of the principal documentary cases of classical-rhetorical-infrastructure operationalization in contemporary political-discourse. **Mercieca scholarly-analytical framework.** Jennifer Mercieca's *Demagogue for President* provides the principal contemporary scholarly-analytical framework for understanding the technique's contemporary deployment. Tracking the framework is useful for engaging with broader scholarly-political-rhetoric literature. **Plausible-deniability rhetorical-political-accountability gap analytical resource.** The technique provides one of the principal documentary cases of rhetorical-political-accountability gap in contemporary American political-discourse — speakers can substantively-make claims while formally-disclaiming them and effectively avoid political-accountability for the content. Tracking the gap is useful for understanding the broader contemporary political-accountability landscape. ## See Also - [[Disinformation]] — the broader umbrella Concept - [[Stochastic Terrorism]] — adjacent rhetorical-political mechanism - [[Whataboutism]] — adjacent rhetorical-deflection technique - [[Plausible Deniability]] — the broader operational-vocabulary Concept - *Demagogue for President: The Rhetorical Genius of Donald Trump* (Jennifer Mercieca, 2020) — the principal scholarly-analytical source (not yet a vault entry) - [[Donald Trump]] — the principal contemporary deployer