Why Did Trump Appoint 'Swampy' Types to His Cabinet?
The question of why former President Donald Trump appointed individuals described as part of the 'swamp' to his cabinet, such as Secretary of Health and Human Services Alex Azar, Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin (whose background is rooted in Goldman Sachs), and Attorney General Bill Barr, has long been a topic of discussion and criticism. Critics argue that these picks are more reminiscent of a hierarchy reminiscent of feudalism, where loyalty and connections are more important than qualifications or public service. This article explores the rationale behind these appointments and their implications on governance.
Why Trump Chose 'Swampy' Types for His Cabinet
One of the paradoxes of the Trump administration is the paradoxical appointment of people from supposedly 'swampy' backgrounds. To understand this phenomenon, we need to delve into the unique political and social context of the Trump era.
2016 Paradox: Not Locking Up Hillary, but Inviting Her Guests
During the 2016 presidential campaign, Trump famously said he would "lock her up," referring to Hillary Clinton. Yet, following his victory, instead of pursuing legal action against Clinton, he appeared on a mainstream television show, "20/20," where he expressed admiration for the Clintons and said he didn't want to hurt them. For the sake of diplomatic relations, he even extended an olive branch by inviting the Clintons to his wedding, further emphasizing his lack of an intense desire to prosecute them. This behavior, while confusing to many, aligns with the Trumpian approach to politics, which prioritizes loyalty and backstabbing over principles or justice.
Trumponomics is characterized by a focus on personal loyalty over defending the integrity of institutions. His choices in appointments do not prioritize competence or ethics but rather personal affiliations and trust. This pattern is exemplified in the selection of Steve Mnuchin as Treasury Secretary, a former investment banker with deep ties to the financial industry, and Bill Barr as Attorney General, a summer law clerk for Ronald Reagan with a reputation for fierce loyalty to powerful figures in Washington and beyond.
The Feudal Society Analogy: A Reminder of Historical Feuds
Another element that reinforces the 'swamp' analogy is the concept of historical feuds. Feudalism, an economic and social system that dominated medieval Europe, centered on loyal services and interpersonal relationships. In this sense, Trump's cabinet members can be seen as allegorical figures from a feudal society, where loyalty to a master or lord was paramount. The 'swampy' elements in Trump's administration can be compared to these feudal lords, where connections and interpersonal trust trump professional qualifications.
The Case for Trump’s 'Swamp' Appointees
Some argue that Trump's choice of 'swampy' types was strategic, as it created a more cohesive and loyal inner circle. For instance, Alex Azar, the former CEO of Eli Lilly, created a bridge between the pharmaceutical industry and the government. Steve Mnuchin's connections to Wall Street ensured a continuity of economic policies and business-friendly administration. Bill Barr, with his long-standing relationship with powerful figures, played a crucial role in the Justice Department, ensuring that the administration's policies were implemented with strong backing.
Moreover, the 'swamp' concept underscores the idea that Trump's appointments were not as random but rather part of a well-thought-out strategy to neutralize potential internal and external threats. The term 'swampy' refers to these figures as being embedded in existing power structures and relationships, ensuring that they are more reliable in terms of loyalty and support than outsiders.
The Question of 'Saints' in Biden's Administration
When comparing the Trump era to the Biden administration, a stark contrast emerges. While Trump surrounded himself with 'swampy' figures, the Biden administration is often portrayed as populated by 'saints' or more ethical and principled individuals. This difference illustrates the varying ethical and management styles of the two administrations.
However, it is important to note that the simplistic 'saints vs. swampy' dichotomy does not fully capture the complexity of either administration. Both groups have their strengths and weaknesses, and the era’s political landscape is multifaceted.
The Resonance of Hierarchical Feudal Structures in Modern Governance
The concept of 'hierarchical feudalism' can also be extended to modern governance, highlighting the importance of understanding socio-political dynamics beyond just individual qualifications. In a world where interpersonal trust and loyalty play significant roles, the appointment of 'swampy' individuals can be seen as a reflection of these ancient societal structures.
The letters between Stone Age humans illustrate a completely different scenario, where geographical proximity and social cohesion dictated the nature of their interactions. In contrast, modern political appointees are often chosen based on their ability to navigate complex social networks and maintain loyalty to a powerful figure.
In conclusion, the choice of 'swampy' figures by Trump reflects a strategic attempt to build a cohesive and loyal team, rooted in a feudal-like system of feudalism. These appointments underscore the deep-seated importance of trust and loyalty in modern political and social fabric, offering a stark contrast to the image of a more principled and ethical Biden administration.
Conclusion
The appointments of 'swampy' figures to Trump's cabinet reflect a complex interplay of loyalty, trust, and strategic advantage in the realm of modern politics. Understanding these dynamics is crucial for comprehending the inner workings of the Trump administration and its lasting impact on American governance.