Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

The “Deep State” Myth

By

There is no “deep state”.

There is the United States civil service, a system of hard-won, good-government, anti-corruption protections for federal workers, and by extension for all of us. Period. That is all.

Anyone using the term “deep state” is nescient of this fact, willfully ignorant of it, or a right wing nut. ENOUGH ALREADY.

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0

Comments

  1. There’s a book out now by Trump cronies Corey Lewandowski and David Bossie called Trump’s Enemies: How the Deep State is Undermining the Presidency to which my response is. “You say it like it’s a bad thing!”

  2. Is there such a thing as “the military industrial complex”? Or “the intelligence community “? Your post seems to rule that out.

    • Sigh.

      There is clearly a military-industrial complex and an intelligence community.

      Are you arguing that there is, therefore, a “deep state”?

      • Not at all. I’m relieved. Terry seemed so categorical that nothing exists except the civil service.
        It didn’t seem to leave room for anything else.

          • I don’t see the touché. I think my critic could just be nescient of the possibility that the tremendous blood, sweat, and tears that constituted the activism that preceded the institution of the great American civil service have remained largely undefended by typically ahistoric progressives. And the transparency and value of this civil service have remained undefended, and shamefully uncontextualized, during this unprecedented onslaught of far right (actually genuinely fascist) attacks on the civil service, generally masquerading as an attack on the so-called “deep state”.

            And this has zero to do with the other governmental cliches mentioned on here by my critic in response to my post, such as a military industrial complex. The reference is a cheap shot and (obviously) not useful. We should be ashamed of ourselves for not putting these references to a “deep state” into historic context. And pointing out that they are actually attacking the civil service is only the beginning of such a historic contextualization.

            As a Bernie supporter in 2016, there is nothing worse to me than erstwhile progressives who implicitly belittle the work of our American predecessors who suffered so much in order to make a cheap point.

            • I found Bob’s comment to be marvelously light-hearted yet on-point.

              I enjoyed the gentle poke.

              • I found it to be an irrelevant detour from the topic of the deep state. And as badly written as my above comment now appears to me, these days, anything that strays from the fight to counter the very dark things being done in our name, I do not find amusing. Nor do I feel obligated to have a sense of humor about any of this.

                For the very same reason, I actually appreciate Somerville Tom (your) comment about Trump’s erroneous blanket reference to civil servants as “Democrats”. It is on topic, accurate, and not an attempt to inexplicably take a canardic offramp.

                • Indeed, the transparently partisan attack on suffering federal workers is truly offensive. Today, he threatens to close the entire southern border.

                  This tyrant MUST be stopped.

            • I don’t see Bob’s commentary in the same harsh light as you. I think he’s encouraging us to lighten up.

              I find Mr. Trump’s outrageous assertion that “most furloughed workers are Democrats” far more offensive than anything in this thread — if you’re looking for explicit attacks on civil service and federal workers, there it is in black and white. That’s an example of something that ought to cause him to be IMMEDIATELY removed from office.

  3. The problem with your post, Terry, is that it is a proclamation. It doesn’t convince anyone who doesn’t already agree with you already.
    You don’t give any reason why there is no deep state. Your statement could be made about either of the two examples I gave. And would be just as unconvincing.
    If you have some argument why the deep state doesn’t exist, I’m all ears.
    But “we are not amused” means nothing.

    • Sometimes there is value in preaching to the choir when the message is so obvious. I would say the burden of proof is on those claiming a deep state.

Archives