Trump Administration's "Propaganda of the Deed" Strategy Erodes Democracy

The Trump administration's embrace of "propaganda of the deed" represents a fundamental assault on the post-World War II international order, prioritizing spectacle and immediate impact over the deliberative processes that underpin democratic governance and international law. This approach, characterized by a disdain for established norms and institutions, reveals a dangerous shift towards unilateral action and a disregard for long-term consequences. Those who wish to understand the erosion of global stability and the mechanisms of modern autocracy will find critical insights here, offering a distinct advantage in navigating an increasingly unpredictable geopolitical landscape.

The Spectacle as Strategy: Decapitating Regimes, Ignoring the Aftermath

The Trump administration's foreign policy, particularly its actions in Venezuela, can be understood through the lens of "propaganda of the deed"--a concept originating from 20th-century anarchism, where spectacular acts of direct action were intended to shock populations and inspire copycats. Masha Gessen argues that while not anarchists, the Trump administration employed a similar strategy, favoring grand, attention-grabbing spectacles over the "dull work of rules and laws and legislation and deliberation." The intervention in Venezuela, for instance, was framed as a decisive blow against the Maduro regime, a dramatic spectacle designed to convey a message of American power. However, Gessen points out the critical flaw: the administration "do not seem to have planned for the aftermath," leaving the regime largely intact while creating a vacuum of understanding about America's role. This isn't merely about regime change; it's about demonstrating a new modus operandi that bypasses established international frameworks.

"The propaganda of the deed was that there were these forms of direct action and many of them violent assassinations bombings that when you did them they were so spectacular everybody would hear about them and when everybody heard about them there would be copycats by making the impossible possible by making clear that society did not work how you thought it worked that the state did not have the power you thought it had that could rupture society itself and create the possibility of a moment of revolutionary upheaval."

This approach extends beyond foreign policy. The administration's response to the fentanyl crisis, for example, eschewed legislative solutions in favor of "very high profile bombings of alleged drug boats." These were deeds, not deliberative policies, designed for maximum visibility and impact. Gessen contends that the Trump administration operates "not so often through the dull work of rules and laws and legislation and deliberation, but through spectacle and through the meaning of particular spectacles." This constant performance of power, as opposed to the exercise of it through established channels, has profound implications for the durability of American influence and the stability of the international order. The immediate payoff of a dramatic action distracts from the complex, long-term work of governance and diplomacy, creating a system that is brittle and reactive.

The Aesthetic of Autocracy: Beauty, Power, and the Erosion of Deliberation

Beyond the strategic use of spectacle, Gessen highlights a deeper, more insidious element: a deliberate cultivation of aesthetics that mirrors authoritarian and fascist movements. This is not merely a superficial preference for certain visual styles; it is a fundamental aspect of how power is conceived and wielded. Gessen notes the administration's obsession with "a particular aesthetic of strength, a particular aesthetic of dominance and organization," evident in everything from military parades to the redecoration of the White House. This fascination with visual displays of power, Gessen argues, is directly tied to a rejection of deliberation.

"I think there's the level of this love of a particular aesthetic of strength a particular aesthetic of dominance and organization that trump seems to be instinctively drawn to right and we've known that since his first term right he has obsession with military parades and the spectacle of the transformation of the white house both the gold leaf and the destruction of the east wing right the demonstration of dominance and and power."

This aesthetic preference is linked to a vision of the world where "strength, and by force, and by power" are the governing principles, echoing historical autocrats like Putin. The embrace of classical architecture, the focus on physical fitness in the military, and even the naming of institutions after the leader all serve to project an image of order, control, and timeless power. This is in stark contrast to the "dull work" of democratic processes, which are inherently messy, slow, and often unglamorous. Gessen contrasts this with liberal politics, which often fails to "see itself as having a relationship really to beauty," leaving a vacuum that authoritarian movements readily fill. The appeal of these aesthetics, Gessen suggests, is rooted in a desire to return to an imagined, idealized past, often defined by a white, masculine ideal. This aesthetic dimension is not a secondary concern; it is integral to the administration's project of redefining what it means to be a superpower and, by extension, how a man should act.

The Shrinking Space for Action: From Protest to Political Violence

The "propaganda of the deed" and the aesthetic of authoritarianism culminate in a dangerous shrinking of the space for dissent and political action. The tragic execution of Rene Good by ICE agents, framed by the administration as a necessary act of law enforcement against a dangerous agitator, exemplifies this chilling trend. Gessen meticulously traces how the administration's consistent rhetoric--labeling protesters as criminals, enemies, and threats--created the conditions for such an event. This was not an isolated incident but a predictable outcome of a deliberate strategy to delegitimise and suppress opposition.

"The real insurrectionists are the people who stormed the capitol on january 6th they got pardoned but now there's this language that anybody trying to protest etcetera that the trump administration is the enemy needs to be dealt with you know at least as the internal logic of this looks by force and when that happens they're not going to investigate or say this is a great tragedy we need to see what happened they're going to say you were the enemy and we were right to kill you."

The administration's defense of Good's killing, and Trump's own commentary on social media, further solidifies this pattern: political opposition is framed as an existential threat to be met with force. This mirrors the tactics of totalitarian regimes, which constantly expand their definition of the "enemy within" to maintain perpetual war footing. The speed at which this transformation is occurring in the United States is particularly alarming. Gessen notes that while autocratic shifts in other countries have been studied, "I don't have any tools for understanding the rate at which this country is being transformed." This rapid erosion of democratic norms and the increasing normalization of political violence create an urgent imperative for action. The message is clear: the window for engagement and resistance is closing, and the consequences of inaction are dire.

Key Action Items:

• Immediate Actions (Within the next quarter):

  • Actively seek out and consume diverse news sources beyond your usual echo chambers to counter the fractured media landscape. This requires conscious effort to understand differing perspectives, even those you disagree with.
  • Engage in local political processes. Support candidates and initiatives that champion deliberative governance and democratic norms, even in seemingly small races. This builds the foundational infrastructure for broader democratic resilience.
  • Support independent journalism and fact-checking organizations. Their work is crucial in counteracting the spread of disinformation and holding power accountable. This is an investment in the public's ability to discern reality.
  • Practice and advocate for respectful dialogue. Resist the urge to fall into the administration's framing of political opponents as enemies. This requires significant personal discipline.

• Longer-Term Investments (6-18 months and beyond):

  • Develop a deeper understanding of international law and institutions. Recognize their limitations but also their vital role in preventing global conflict and upholding human rights. This knowledge is a bulwark against unilateralism.
  • Invest time in understanding the historical parallels of autocracy. Gessen's work and the books recommended offer crucial context for recognizing and resisting authoritarian tactics. This pays off by providing a framework for analysis and action.
  • Build and strengthen community networks. As the space for individual action shrinks, collective action becomes paramount. Organizing and mutual support are essential for sustained resistance. This creates a buffer against state repression.
  • Prioritize civic education. Advocate for robust civic education in schools and communities to equip future generations with the understanding and skills necessary to defend democratic principles. This is a generational investment in democratic continuity.