The Criminal Deep State (?)

In attacking elements of the US government that sometimes make decisions or act in ways that he opposes, President Trump frequently uses the term “deep state.”  In his recent attacks on the Department of Justice, he even uses the term “criminal deep state,” implying the existence of a secret, illegal group within the US government—perhaps colluding with the “fake media”—that manipulates or even controls national policy.  That the president of the United States is stoking paranoia by affirming the existence of such a conspiracy is extraordinarily dangerous.

The President has never defined what he means by “deep state” or “criminal deep state” (or if there is a difference).  In fact, there is no generally-agreed-upon definition of the terms.

• In its most benign definition used by whistleblower Edward Snowden, deep state is “a way of referring to the career bureaucracy of government … who sit in powerful positions, who don't leave when presidents do, who watch presidents come and go; ... they impact policy, they influence presidents.”  In this sense, the existence of a deep state is obvious and hardly debatable.  In fact, something like such a bureaucracy is required for the functioning of any government.
• In a more pejorative sense, the term “is useful for understanding aspects of the national security establishment … [especially] in the United States … [that] draws power from the national security and intelligence communities, a realm where secrecy is a source of power.”  While not completely obvious, there is again little question of the existence such a deep state.
• But Trump and his allies go much further, using the term to refer to a secret criminal conspiracy involving government, non-government, military officials and elements of the fake who manipulate or direct national policy, in a sense an alternative government.  The President has used the term to refer the FBI, the Department of Justice, and the mainstream media, among others.  And when the President refers to a criminal deep state, he is moving into allegations of a different magnitude, referring to something malevolent, essentially a take-over of government.

The closest thing we’ve previously had to these kinds of allegations comes from the 1950s during the Cold War when fear of Communism was high.  Without evidence, Wisconsin Senator Joe McCarthy accused hundreds of federal government workers, entertainers, academics and others of being Communists.  Public lives and careers were shattered; families were broken up, fear was rampant.

Let’s face it, however. Many Americans—liberal and conservative—harbor some level of suspicion about government.  We see the dominance of money in politics, we understand the powers behind the thrones of many of our leaders, we have been assaulted by the stories of secret torture, and so on. The particular suspicions held by conservatives or libertarians may be different from my own, but they all work to deepen our mistrust of government.

But the President’s allegations are of a different order; accusations about a secret government are not just Trumpian throw-away lies.  They have deep implications for the unmooring of democracy.  Three-fourths of respondents to a recent Politico poll say they believe such a deep state definitely (27%) or probably (47%) exists in the federal government.  These numbers are not, of course, solely due to the Trump’s accusations, but the accusations reinforce paranoia and delegitimize government.  When a large majority of Americans believe that those running the country belong to some secret cabal, participation in the normal channels of democracy can seem futile.

References to the criminal deep state are especially pernicious because they play upon defined and undefined fears that all of us feel from time to time.  But when these fears are blown out of proportion by the country’s leader, our paranoia becomes dangerous.  I have referred to the necessity of basic trust in government frequently (here, here, here, and here).  The reality is that democracy is fragile.  It does not magically maintain itself but must be undergirded by citizens’ trust.

We do ourselves and our country great disservice if we accept the President’s distortions without meticulously examining them for what is true and what is false … and then speak out to friends, especially those on the other side of the political divide.  The fate of our democracy hangs in the balance.