A brief essay on the importance of a veneer of respectability, and what it may mean for a government and a political system to lose it, plus a couple current examples!

The Peeling Away

I think the most jarring part of all of this is learning just how critical the veneer of respectability is for a functioning political system, and seeing just how thin that veneer really is. It is thin and it is brittle and when scraped with aggression it breaks and it flakes and it falls away in irreparable chunks. And then it is jagged worm-eaten wood that rapidly deteriorates in the open air, turning out it has no real defenses under the veneer, and then it is wet and rotten and mucky, and when the aggressive scraping continues the wood itself begins to break away, and it is shocking to see the thing itself go - the structure that seemed so permanent decays quickly in the open without its veneer of protection, of respectability.

It turns out that ideals do matter, and respecting norms is a large part of keeping a system running. It also turns out that when one faction has complete power and strikes a deal amongst themselves to not enforce those norms, or rules, or regulations, or even laws, there is really no recourse. There have always been these nefarious handshake deals and general disregard for the greater good for furtherance of personal agendas, of course, but then there has generally remained at least some level of concern for that veneer of respectability - even if it is only in the interest of self-preservation.

“Well, we can’t be too egregious.”

“We don’t want the public backlash.”

“We at least have to think about getting reelected!”

If a system isn’t totally broken, no faction has total loyalty or permanence of power, and so there must be at least some level of concern about appearing to be so self-interested, so hypocritical, so antithetical to the essence of the founding principles of the system itself - some level of concern that too terrible of a showing will reap consequences, if not legal, as that has rarely been a meaningful threat, then psychic, moral - losing The People. Losing support.

That is certainly not the case at this juncture. This administration has moved quickly to strip the veneer of respectability from American government. It is not only a matter of not respecting norms; it is a loathing of norms. It is a rejection of diplomacy for transaction - “What’s in it for me?” Donald Trump and the people around him have sold the image of government as a business, as “the bottom line” being the ultimate truth, the only thing that matters. Everything else is fluff, extraneous, unnecessary and so to be discarded. ONLY THE BRASS TACKS! LET’S JUST GET DOWN TO THE BOTTOM LINE!

But instead of this being a practice of focus and clarity, it is reductionist. We are not getting down to the bottom line. We are simply racing to the bottom. For as it turns out, governing is not the same as conducting business, transaction cannot replace diplomacy, a nation of 350 million people is more complicated than a private organization, and appearances do matter. The veneer of respectability matters. At least acknowledging that there are guiding principles matters.

Right… but what am I really trying to say here?

Government in this country has always worked better for the elites, and the majority of our politicians have always been self-serving first and foremost. BUT! In the scheme of the world, in the scheme of history, we have had a relatively free society and a relatively well-functioning political system. We can speak our minds without fear of government reprisal. “Fuck Congress! Fuck the President!” We have regular elections and peaceful transitions of power. We have functioning courts and a functioning economy. The system is heavily flawed and skewed - I’m not attempting to bypass the obvious, only it is not the focus of this piece - but the gears continue to turn. That is my point here. We can live our lives. We have the broad strokes, even if much else is left to be desired.

The pact between Government and The People is certainly not as heady as a grade school teaching of the Founding Fathers drafting up the Constitution would have us believe. But it grinds on because the pact is honored to some degree. Norms are upheld to some degree. The veneer of respectability is kept in place. On some level, all of us - The People and the politicians - know we need it.

Well, that’s going away now.

Enemies

Just last night, Donald Trump, speaking of Charlie Kirk at his vigil said, “He did not hate his opponents; he wanted the best for them. That’s where I disagreed with Charlie. I hate my opponents! And I don’t want the best for them!”

Also quite recently, Donald Trump, publicly (intentionally or not, unclear) urged Attorney General Pam Bondi to go after his political opponents. He purported to paraphrase “over 30 statements and posts” saying, “Same old story as last time, all talk, no action. Nothing is being done. What about Comey, Adam “Shifty” Schiff, Leticia??? They’re all guilty as hell, but nothing is going to be done.” He went on to suggest one of his former personal attorneys be appointed as a U.S. attorney in Virginia to pursue these people, and then closed with, “JUSTICE MUST BE SERVED, NOW!!!” That is the President of the United States publicly instructing his Attorney General to use the full weight of the federal government to investigate and prosecute people he he personally wants revenge against.

The Kimmel Debacle

We have the FCC chairman, Brendan Carr, going on friendly right wing influencer Benny Johnson’s podcast and expressing his disdain for what he saw as Jimmy Kimmel suggesting Charlie Kirk’s killer was MAGA-inspired. Carr said, in reference to this, “But frankly, when you see stuff like this, I mean, look, we can do this the easy way or the hard way. These companies can find ways to change conduct and take action on Kimmel or there’s going to be additional work for the FCC ahead.” He went more in depth, explaining national programmers and licensed broadcasters, and how the FCC can and should take regulatory action against these broadcasters. He continued on, “So, I think again Disney needs to see some change here, but the individual licensed stations that are taking their content, it’s time for them to step up and say this, you know, garbage – to the extent that that’s what comes down the pipe in the future – isn’t something that we think serves the needs of our local communities. But, but this sort of status quo is obviously not acceptable where we are.” Subsequently, Sinclair and Nexstar, two large companies that are the exact broadcasters he spoke about, and to, the first of which is famously conservative, and the second of which is seeking special FCC approval for a multi-billionaire dollar merger granting them access to over 39% of U.S. households, announced that they would be dropping Jimmy Kimmel. Shortly after, Disney followed suit, and Jimmy Kimmel’s show was indefinitely suspended.

So we have the chairmen of the Federal Communications Commission publicly suggesting that regulatory action will be taken against broadcasters that do not answer his call for action, and that media companies should make changes. And then we have three large and influential companies almost immediately heeding his “suggestions.” Carr paints these “suggestions” as being devoid of partisanship or ideology, citing news distortion and broadcast hoaxes - it is just the FCC returning to robust enforcement in the public interest! But of course, that enforcement is cherry-picked, one-sided, and extremely petty.

It is disingenuous and weasely, as we will find is a common theme with this administration. “Teeeechnically, we’re just enforcing the rules!” Sure. But let’s use a dumb little illustration here. I’m playing a game of freeze tag. I single out one person, chase them down, and freeze them. Then I stand there so no one else can unfreeze them, and I don’t go after anyone else. There is no more freezing or tagging in this game of freeze tag. That’s all. Technically, I’m not doing anything against the rules! But do any of us really think that’s how the game is supposed to be played? And how long does anyone want to keep playing in that situation?

It’s bullshit. The chairman of the FCC is putting the FCC in the business of regulating speech, fuck the extremely thin proxy. Reading between the lines is clear: “Broadcast messages we approve of, or face regulatory action.” And the companies are either ideologically sympathetic or self-serving and cowardly, so the line is toed. Freedom of the press be damned. Freedom of speech be damned.

Disingenuous weasels.