A centuries‑old Christmas festival in Guatemala has turned into a grisly stage for anti‑Trump rage, with a decapitated effigy of the U.S. president burned as a stand‑in for “the devil” over immigration policy.
Guatemalan Christmas Ritual Turns Into Anti‑Trump Spectacle
On December 7, 2025, families in Guatemala City gathered for the annual “Burning of the Devil” festival, a colonial‑era ritual tied to the Feast of the Immaculate Conception that marks the beginning of the Christmas season. This year, the celebration featured a towering devil figure built around a Trump‑themed effigy, described in some coverage as a piñata, that was decapitated and set ablaze. Participants openly framed the stunt as a protest against U.S. immigration policies impacting Central Americans.
The neighborhood of Colonia Arrivillaga in Guatemala City served as the focal point of the event, where families traditionally gather to burn trash and symbolic effigies as a way of purging misfortune before Christmas. In past years, the centerpiece was a generic devil representing evil and bad luck. In 2025, organizers and local residents chose to fuse that devil image with a caricature of President Trump himself, signaling that they viewed his leadership as the embodiment of the region’s grievances.
From Religious Cleansing to Political Message Against U.S. Border Security
The “Burning of the Devil” began centuries ago as a Catholic‑inspired act of spiritual housecleaning, where families torched old furniture and refuse to clear out the darkness before celebrating the Virgin Mary. Over time, the ritual expanded to include large paper figures that personified vices and social ills. In recent years, Guatemalans have used the festival to lampoon corruption, crime, and specific politicians, turning a devotional tradition into a cathartic outlet for anger at modern problems.
The decision to feature Trump in 2025 reflected frustration toward tightened U.S. immigration enforcement, deportations, and tougher asylum rules affecting Central American migrants. Critics of the former Biden era often ignored how permissive border policies fueled cartels, trafficking, and chaos, but festival participants blamed Trump for the consequences of renewed enforcement. For conservative Americans, the effigy burning underscores a deeper divide: one side demands open borders, while the other insists that defending national sovereignty and the rule of law is non‑negotiable.
Media Framing and the Message to American Voters
International outlets highlighted the spectacle, emphasizing descriptions of Trump as a “little tyrant” and portraying the burning as a colorful symbol of resistance to his immigration agenda. That framing fit neatly into a familiar narrative promoted for years by globalist media: any serious attempt to secure the U.S. border or prioritize American citizens is painted as cruelty. Missing from that coverage was meaningful acknowledgment of how unchecked migration, cartel violence, and human smuggling ultimately harm both Central Americans and working‑class Americans.
For conservative readers watching from home, the episode raises important questions about whose interests are being defended. When a foreign festival turns a U.S. president into a literal devil and sets him on fire for enforcing immigration law, it reveals how far activist groups and sympathetic media will go to demonize border security. That should matter to voters who believe the Constitution, national sovereignty, and the right of a nation to control its borders are foundational, not optional or shameful.
What This Incident Signals About Immigration Battles Ahead
The Guatemalan effigy burning does not change U.S. policy on its own, but it illustrates the pressure campaign being waged against any administration that resists open‑border expectations. As Trump’s second term moves to secure the border, crack down on cartels, and prioritize American workers over illegal labor, similar symbolic protests will likely be celebrated abroad. Those theatrics are meant to stigmatize enforcement, discourage resolve, and push Washington back toward the lax approaches that produced record crossings and chaos under prior leadership.
For Americans who endured years of inflation, cultural upheaval, and erosion of the rule of law, the scene in Guatemala is less a personal insult to Trump than a reminder of the stakes. Either the United States governs immigration on its own terms, or foreign outrage, activist pressure, and media campaigns will continue to demand that American communities bear the costs. The burning effigy in a distant Christmas festival is ultimately a challenge: will the U.S. stand firm on its borders, or bow to the crowd?