1984: A Guidebook for the Trump Administration
Clyde Dwyer ’21
April 2020
“Whatever the Party holds to be truth is truth.”
George Orwell, in his famous dystopian novel 1984, offered a warning to future governments and societies about the dangers of propaganda and historical denialism. In Orwell’s bleak depiction of post-World War II Britain, individual liberties were non-existent, the government was everywhere --in your home and in your mind-- and propaganda reigned supreme. However, Orwell’s cautionary tale has become true in at least one significant way: the rewriting of truth.
In our current political moment, lies have become more dangerous than ever before. Politicians lie all the time, so much so lying has basically become a job requirement. On the campaign trail, politicians serve prospective voters lofty hopes and dreams that are often more grounded in rhetoric than reality. Once in office, politicians continue to lie to further their political agendas and paint themselves in the most favorable light. An example of a traditional political lie could be in Former President Barack Obama’s Final State of the Union Address, in which he claimed “nearly 900,000 new [manufacturing] jobs” were created during his presidency when in reality, 300,000 people lost their jobs. While Obama made a false claim, it was not particularly heinous, and the ramifications of such a lie are less severe.
However, during President Donald Trump’s time in the political sphere, he has fundamentally altered the definition of a political lie. From July of 2015, when Trump announced his run for president, by blatantly lying about Mexican immigrants. “They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists,” he insisted, with no factual basis for these claims . His fabrications continued into last week when he ominously tweeted (“LIBERATE MICHIGAN,” “LIBERATE VIRGINIA”) as if those states were under the control of a foreign power. Not only are these patently false claims, but the sheer absurdity of them also sows confusion, hatred, anger, and increasingly so, alternate versions of reality.
In a daily coronavirus briefing on April 3, Jared Kushner issued a false claim to reporters and the American people about the role of the federal stockpile. Before April 3, 2020, the Department of Health and Human Services website described the federal stockpile as “the nation’s largest supply of life-saving pharmaceuticals and medical supplies for use in a public health emergency severe enough to cause local supplies to run out.” But Kushner, an inexperienced, corrupt businessman granted significant political power, sheerly by virtue of his familial connections to Trump, changed this definition.
On a day when COVID-19 cases reached 280,000 and deaths reached 8,600 in the U.S., he stated: “the notion of the federal stockpile was it's supposed to be our stockpile; it's not supposed to be state stockpiles that they then use.” It’s unclear whom Kushner refers to when he says “our stockpile,” and it’s unsettling that he’s even making a case against states receiving adequate medical supplies. Trump or one of his minions lying to the American people is no longer surprising. The fact that Kushner lied about crucial medical supplies necessary to save lives made his comments notably bad, though still not surprising. What is most striking about a moment that can be cast off as another Trumpism, is the HHS’ change to the definition of the federal stockpile to match Kushner’s words. The revision bolstered Kushner’s emphasis on the responsibility of states in gathering supplies, while subtly reducing the federal government’s accountability.
It’s not too dramatic to say the HHS changing their website to match Kushner’s controversial claim constitutes a revision of history. This claim is more of a spitball than it is purely factual, but it’s fair to say that governments do not descend into complete dystopia in a matter of days, or even weeks. If the descent into an Orwellian society had a physical metaphor, it would not be jumping into a heavily polluted political ocean, but slowly tip-toeing into the waters, one website revision or one lie at a time, until your body eventually adjusts. Or until you drown.
When the incident occurred more than two weeks ago, there was a flurry of media coverage and social media criticism. Due to the breakneck pace of the news cycle, as well as the current global health crisis, the HHS website’s revision has largely faded from the public’s interest. This certainly is not the first time the Trump administration has ventured into the territory of historical revision through changing words on a website. In 2018, VICE reported that an HHS webpage on LGBT health had been erased, as well as a specific webpage on bisexual and lesbian health. This exclusion of information poses practical risks to members of the LGBT communities who may have used those resources to answer questions such as “What factors put lesbians' and bisexual women's health at risk?” and “What challenges do lesbian and bisexual women face in the healthcare system?,” as reported by VICE. Prior to that, in 2017, the Trump administration removed other mentions of the LGBT community from governmental resources. A question about sexuality was removed from the Census. In the Strategic Fiscal Plan for the HHS (again), there were no mentions of the LGBT community for 2018-2022.
The generational issue of climate change has also been swept under the rug by the Trump administration through notable website alterations. Many of these changes did occur between the administration change in January of 2017 from Obama to Trump, though that does not paint the complete picture. In a report by the Environmental Data and Governance Initiative, it was found that these changes were systemic, occurring across multiple agencies and revising multiple aspects of climate change. For example, the descriptions of certain agencies were changed “to emphasize job creation and downplay renewable fuels,” with the report going on to assert “The Department of State, Department of Energy (DOE), and the EPA removed information about the federal government’s international obligations regarding climate change, downplaying U.S. involvement.” Climate change is one of the more pressing issues of our generation and will most likely continue to be for future generations to come, and the Trump administration’s reconstruction and downplaying of its narrative is harmful.
“We, the Party, control all records, and we control all memories.”
Documentation is a crucial part of remembering and understanding history, as any historian (or Bard history teacher) might say. The past is kept alive through the conservation of primary sources, be it they journals, newspapers, books, or governmental records from a given moment, and is continually analyzed through secondary sources. The fixed nature of primary sources is what allows us to develop new ways of thinking about old issues and reinterpret them based on the current context. In Orwell’s 1984, there is an entire section of the government, ironically titled the Ministry of Truth, devoted to constantly rewriting and reshaping historical events of the past in efforts to control the present. In the novel, the occurrences of historical revision range from the minuscule (the government changing past projections of how much chocolate citizens received) to the large (completely erasing a person’s existence from any newspapers or documents) to the monumental (erasing an entire war from existence and switching an ally to an enemy). All of these serve the purpose of producing a state-sanctioned version of reality. One can never believe one’s memory or recollection of the past if the government is constantly revising or changing that past. This state of existence renders someone with a decent memory practically insane because one’s memory will constantly be at odds with that of the Party.
The Information Age equivalent of dystopian book-burning is the alteration and manipulation of information on government websites. Changing the words on a website may lack the visually powerful symbolism typically associated with historical revision, though it has an equally insidious role in altering American's perceptions of truth. These authoritative sources of information not only inform the public of the government’s stance on topics like LGBT issues and climate change but also reflect the current American reality. If that reality can be changed to match the false claims of pseudo-politicians like Kushner and Trump, 2020 is closer to 1984 than we may think. This year’s election will not be between two candidates, but between two versions of reality, one less obeying to truth and more dangerous than the other.