Don’t Go Chasing Trial Balloons: A Response to Yonaten Zunger’s Viral Analysis of Recent Actions by the Trump Administration
[Re-Post of Original from Facebook]
I want to follow-up and engage with all of my friends on the Yonatan Zunger piece that many shared and clearly are very intrigued by — which is a good thing, by the way, congratulations Mr. Zunger and God Bless Medium for that (seriously). I want to briefly state a few issues I have with the content of the piece that, I think, reveal the limits on Mr. Zunger’s perspective at best, or some not-so-truths that he’s spreading, at worst. Then I want to touch on why what might even be worse than worse is all of us sharing the piece.
Content of the piece in terms of its narrative: for the most part, Mr. Zunger is telling you things you already know. But he’s integrating them into a larger narrative he wants to tell (I would say he’s telling it “step-by-step”, but honestly I don’t understand how his numbers for the sections make any sense). But that’s fine, that’s what journalists do too. So now we need to keep in mind Mr. Zunger is not a journalist. That’s also fine (seriously: THANK YOU Medium). But that’s also what conspiracy theorists do.
Ok, hold that thought.
Content of the piece in terms of its facts: not only does he repeat things you already know, he also repeats things that you’re not sure if you know. There are many of these, but let’s just take #4 where he claims the State Department resignations were/are a “purge” according to a “heavily sourced” Guardian article (better yet, the Guardian says they were “sacked”, which is English at its best so that’s another important takeaway that we should all be saying sacked and having more fun here!). I challenge folks to read the Guardian article and tell me how it’s more heavily sourced than the other 90% of legitimate reportage on the State Department personnel transitions that label them as ‘resignations’.
Which brings us to the State Department org chart Mr. Zunger includes. Scary, right? No one’s in charge. But here’s the thing: the org chart of every Federal Agency basically looks like that right now. And that’s basically what they looked like in January of 2009 too. So don’t be scared, for the most part, all of the usual intellectual superheroes of your federal bureaucracy are still making sure the lights stay on at Embassies from Mexico to Mauritius.
There are a bunch more, but I think you’ll get the point after a careful read: there’s a lot here that’s not-so-true. Or at least falls into the category of: more truth would be nice if you’re building to a coup conspiracy. Not that I even understand who, in Mr. Zunger’s narrative, is actually committing a coup.
Which brings us to why we’re working against our own goals by sharing this article. Wait, did I mention that we share the same goals? We do. Me and Mr. Zunger too. But on the higherarchy of needs for achieving those goals, I think it looks like this: 1. Stay focused on the goals; 2. Start communicating to the people you’re going to need to vote for those goal; and 3 through 99 are more things that don’t involve trying to piece together or disseminate coup theories.
For now, please just consider #s 1 and 2. There are so many great points in Zunger’s piece. So much that needs — and is getting — more research and reporting. Focus on how you — in whatever capacity you have — can help address the point that means the most to you.
Then find someone to communicate your side to in some productive form. Approximately 45% of the country is waiting for you. And my humble opinion: if you tell them Donald Trump is purging the government, banning Muslims, and leading a small group of Washington outsiders against the status quo elite, they’ll respond with “you forgot to mention he already started a reelection PAC that I can’t wait to donate to!!!”.
Instead, find someone among the 45% who might be a descendant of immigrants (that’ll be quick!). Talk about the long history of refugees committing acts of terrorism on our shores (that’ll be quick!). Find someone among the 45% who might be a Military Veteran and explain your concern about the dilution and (possibly) absence of Military perspective’s on President Trump’s National Security Council. Find someone among the 45% who has experience working in a large organization and discuss the implications of a boss making decisions without consulting the most experienced divisions of the organization.
Some of you have already responded to my initial message that, while a coup may not be imminent, it’s important that we need to not be blind to the possibilities of degradations to our institutions and that it’s important to sound the alarm; it’s important that we consider the worst so that we can work out what’s really happening. I want to agree with that to some degree: clerarly, I too am concerned with figuring out what’s really happening. But I don’t think unpacking a conspiracy theory is the most efficient way to figure that out. And I think this approach is even more detrimental given the prominence of social media platforms. The topic of “fake news” comes to mind here. That can also be a distraction and definitely a discussion for another time, but I’ll say that I never believed Faceboook had/has any responsibility to protect us from any kind of news. There’s good news and bad news and none of it is all the way true. Social media requires an even higher bar for sharing that news — which is really frustrating because it basically asks a lot of people who are not journalists.
Ok, thank you for reading this. All of you smarter more motivated people than me please go make change make a new president and appoint me Ambassador to Mauritius.
