Living and working in Eastern Europe for six years in the 90s I was surrounded by people emerging from 45 years of totalitarian rule, many of whom were born into it and had known nothing else until a few short years before. While the conventional American critique of communism is arguably a bit simplistic and over-politicized, such is not to discount it in its entirety. One thing that’s certain these countries weren’t by any measure free, and very much related to this is that Communist governments constantly dealt in disinformation such that no one ever knew what was true and what wasn’t, who to trust and who not to trust. The result were societies where people were only able to be close to a small group of people, and, of course, this served the interests of the government in that it made organized opposition impossible, extremely difficult to say the least.
One of the hardest things in me for me to wrap my head around when I was in Eastern Europe was the degree to which in communist times East Europeans had been restricted from leaving their own countries, much less the Eastern bloc. (If they weren’t exactly prisoners as the term is commonly understand, they were something very close.) How is it that they acquiesced to this? I’m not sure there is a definitive answer, but I think part of it lies in the fact that it happened very gradually. This is one of the reasons Donald Trump’s Muslim bans have been and remain so threatening. Yes, it is repugnant because it goes deeply against the grain of what America stands for in terms of discrimination and group punishment for individual crimes. But it is also scary because it can be seen as an opening gambit in restricting freedom of movement for others, potentially anyone and everyone.
One thing I learned from those who had experienced authoritarian rule firsthand is that almost every lie, no matter how preposterous on its face, had a grain of truth to it, and it is that kernel of truth that in many respects is exactly what made the lie so insidious.
And so it follows that the main thing to understand about Trump is that, like all authoritarians, he’s a pathological liar, and that everything else emanates from this. It’s not so much a character flaw as it is the strategy of the authoritarian (consciously or unconsciously), or better put it is the essence of authoritarianism, the notion that if I think it, if I feel it, if I say it, it will prove right and true. It would be a mistake to try to rationalize such behavior of a government official, much less the president. There is none. It’s not a matter of artistic license, thinking outside the box, or relativism. A government official is not a disrupter. Just because there is room for disagreement and interpretation of what constitutes the truth, it is a mistake to confuse questioning authority with uttering nonsense.
While it may be true the American narrative can be a bit simplistic and overbearing, such is not to give carte blanche for giving up on distinguishing between good and evil, fact and fiction, and, of course this is what Trump does when he deliberately obfuscates the debate on fake news. It is also a mistake to monitor the so-called President’s day to day proclamations, via twitter or otherwise, to look for change or nuance. If someone is a liar than telling the truth now and then is not indicative of a change of heart, quite the contrary it is part of the strategy.
Having no regard for the truth is the essence of totalitarianism. This way everyone is always off balance, you never know who to trust, you don’t know what really happened, and nothing is too trivial to lie about.