Thank you for such a thoughtful response—it captures the heart of the problem so perfectly. The assumption that public servants would uphold basic decency, even under pressure, was so foundational that its fragility went unnoticed for generations. Nixon, flawed as he was, still adhered to the norms when faced with overwhelming accountabi…
Thank you for such a thoughtful response—it captures the heart of the problem so perfectly. The assumption that public servants would uphold basic decency, even under pressure, was so foundational that its fragility went unnoticed for generations. Nixon, flawed as he was, still adhered to the norms when faced with overwhelming accountability.
But now, as you point out, we are dealing with a figure who not only rejects these principles but weaponizes their absence, wielding chaos as both shield and sword. What’s even more alarming is the infrastructure of enablers—the courtiers, voters, and indifferent bystanders—who amplify this destruction.
Thank you for such a thoughtful response—it captures the heart of the problem so perfectly. The assumption that public servants would uphold basic decency, even under pressure, was so foundational that its fragility went unnoticed for generations. Nixon, flawed as he was, still adhered to the norms when faced with overwhelming accountability.
But now, as you point out, we are dealing with a figure who not only rejects these principles but weaponizes their absence, wielding chaos as both shield and sword. What’s even more alarming is the infrastructure of enablers—the courtiers, voters, and indifferent bystanders—who amplify this destruction.