Ever since President Donald Trump’s inauguration, the mask has been slipping from the “deep state.” But last week, The New York Times ripped it off completely.
Now, they concede they resist Trump not because he threatens some constitutional status quo, but because he threatens their claim to rule and the persistent drift toward a political revolution they’ve been working toward for decades.
Someone once noted that all political conflicts in a community are related to “the most fundamental political controversy,” the question of who should rule.
The Rise of the Bureaucratic Technocracy
The author of the New York Times op-ed, titled “They Are Not the Resistance. They Are Not a Cabal. They Are Public Servants,” calls agents of the deep state—like the much-lauded whistleblower—“heroes.” They are heroes because they “protect the interests, not of a particular leader, but of the American people.”Kim Jong Un claims to serve the interests of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. Like Kim, deep state agents aren’t actually responsible to the people they claim to serve. But responsibility, through elections, is the only way a people can retain sovereignty.
The author claims deep state agents are “public servants.” When, however, they prefer their own policies to those of elected officials, they don’t act like servants of the public; they act like its rulers.
Further, the agents of the deep state operate by any means necessary, regardless of the Constitution. The deep state replaces the Constitution, through which the sovereign people express their will, with a bureaucracy, through which its agents dictate and justify whatever policy they want.
New Regime With New Understanding of Justice
Not only does the deep state aim to overthrow our form of government; it also aims to enforce a new understanding of justice. An earlier op-ed from The New York Times, titled “We Are Not the Resistance,” explains exactly what form of justice the technocrats of the deep state are seeking to impose on the American people.The author dislikes the word “resistance” and points out that it’s really a conservative word. She warns that merely resisting Trump might “tempt us to set our sights too low” and even “to forget our ultimate purpose and place in history.” She sees theirs as a kind of universal, religious mission.
She notes that in fact “Donald Trump is the resistance.” What is he resisting? The birth of a “new nation” that is “struggling to be born.”
The election of President Barack Obama, she says, was supposed to symbolize “the imminent birth of this new America.” But now, Trump is messing up the plan by resisting the implementation of a new understanding of justice.
The new justice of this “new nation” is exactly opposite to that of the founding of the United States. The founders held that “all men are created equal.” In the “new nation,” though, all men belong to various, unequal groups.
They call this new justice “social justice.” The peddlers of social justice try to weave together the plights of all supposedly oppressed peoples in the world into a new proletariat that history is using to overthrow the oppression by the new bourgeoisie of the cis-gendered, white, male patriarchy.
The author says plainly, “We aim ... to reimagine the meaning of justice in America.” And the dictates of social justice don’t depend on elections, which is why deep state agents feel justified disregarding election outcomes when they conflict with the “radical evolution of American democracy.”
The deep state is about as democratic as North Korea. It’s not democratic evolution; it’s political revolution.
And that’s the real irony of the deep state. Its agents claim to serve the interests of the American people by opposing Trump, forgetting that it was those same people who chose Trump in the first place, knowing full well who he was.
The deep state is undermining not the authority of Donald Trump, but that of the sovereign people of the United States. If the allies of the deep state don’t like the term “resistance,” perhaps they prefer the term “treason”?
