The Ethicist - If Donald Trump Does Something I Agree With, Do I Need to Change My Stance on that Issue?
Ask the Ethicist
Dear Ethicist,
My father worked for a small, unprestigious government agency, and often talked of the absenteeism, favoritism, and corruption that was rife amongst the middle management there.
At the same time, I also think Trump is generally a disgusting man, with many horrid qualities.
If Trump implements cost-cutting within the Federal Government, should I change my stance and support wasteful spending and increased lack of oversight?
PS: Since Trump favors Putin so much, I'm hoping German tanks cross the Volga and roll on Moscow, to finish the job they failed to do last time, and defeat the barbarians of the East.
- Conflicted in Cincinnati
From the Ethicist:
You describe your father's tenure in a “small, un-prestigious” government agency, where absenteeism and kickbacks were as common as water cooler gossip. This, you imply, is the natural state of bureaucracy: a sprawling ecosystem of inefficiency, where middle managers bloom like mushrooms in the damp, unlit corners of oversight. Yet, you also express disdain for Donald Trump, a man whose qualities you find “disgusting” and “horrible.” (A sentiment shared by many, though perhaps not articulated with such restraint.)
It is important, that as an individual, you are consistent in your beliefs and opposition systems.
Jesus promoted forgiveness, therefore, I, as an atheist naturally favor eternal vengeance against people who have committed moral transgressions. This is the correct position for anyone who favors moral consistency. And, why settle for turning the other cheek when you can hold a grudge for all eternity?
Therefore, I urge you to be consistent in your opposition to every decision made by Trump, a man you are opposed to. In the particular issue you brought up, one could argue that wastefulness in government is a form of economic stimulus, a hidden Keynesian gem in the rough.
George Orwell, the famous writer said, “Political language is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind,”
Throughout history, though its name has changed, the effectiveness of moral grandstanding, the use of pious platitudes, and appeals to moralistic hyperbole has not. You should convey your arguments for increased government waste in the language of philosophy, and your calls for increased government corruption in the language of high ideals.
On your calls for military action, I urge caution. The famous philosopher Karl Marx said, “History repeats itself, first as tragedy, second as farce.”
While viewing the people of the East as being inferior has been common since the days of Attila the Hun and Genghis Khan, it is also true that the more ethical people of the West, after leading scorched earth campaigns to reach the gates of Moscow, didn't know what to do once they got there. In the absolute worst case (an unconditional surrender), we would lose an adversary to feel superior to. It is absolutely essential for a person of high moral standing to have both someone to pity, and someone to despise.
In a final note, Bertrand Russell, absolutely the worst philosopher of the 20th century, said, “The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.”
***
This is Satire, Not a Policy Brief – The views expressed in this article are intended to be humorous, thought-provoking, and occasionally absurd. If you’re looking for serious political analysis, you’ve come to the wrong place. If you’re looking for a laugh and some philosophical musings, you’re in luck.
No Government Agencies Were Harmed – While the article references absenteeism, favoritism, and corruption in a “small, un-prestigious” government agency, no actual agencies were named, shamed, or subpoenaed. Any resemblance to real bureaucracies, living or dead, is purely coincidental.
Donald Trump is a Real Person, But This is Fiction – The article mentions Donald Trump, his qualities, and his policies. This is not an endorsement, critique, or subpoena of the man himself. It’s satire. If you’re a fan of Trump, please don’t @ me. If you’re not a fan of Trump, please don’t @ me either. Let’s all just agree to @ no one.
No German Tanks Were Mobilized – The reference to German tanks crossing the Volga and rolling on Moscow is a historical callback used for comedic effect. It is not a call to arms, a geopolitical prediction, or a suggestion that we revisit World War II. If you’re a history buff and this offends you, I suggest you write your own article. I’ll even read it. Maybe.
Eternal Vengeance is Not a Recommended Lifestyle Choice – The article humorously suggests eternal vengeance as a morally consistent position. This is satire. If you’re considering holding a grudge for all eternity, please consult a therapist, a priest, or your local neighborhood cat. Cats are excellent judges of character and grudges.
Wasteful Spending is Not Endorsed – The article playfully suggests that wastefulness in government could be a form of economic stimulus. This is not an endorsement of fiscal irresponsibility. If you’re a policymaker, please don’t use this article as justification for your next budget proposal.
No Barbarians Were Offended – The reference to “barbarians of the East” is a historical and satirical trope, not a commentary on any group of people. If you’re a descendant of Attila the Hun or Genghis Khan and feel misrepresented, I apologize. Please direct your complaints to the nearest steppe, where they will be duly ignored.
Bertrand Russell is Not the Worst Philosopher of the 20th Century – The article humorously dismisses Bertrand Russell as “the worst philosopher of the 20th century.” This is satire. Bertrand Russell was, in fact, a brilliant thinker. If you’re a fan of Russell and feel offended, I suggest you read Principia Mathematica to calm down.
This Disclaimer is Legally Binding (Probably) – By continuing to read this article, you agree to waive all rights to sue, complain, or send me strongly worded emails. You also agree to laugh at least once, even if it’s out of pity.
About the Creator
Scott Christenson🌴
Born and raised in Milwaukee WI, living in Hong Kong. Hoping to share some of my experiences w short story & non-fiction writing. Have a few shortlisted on Reedsy:
https://blog.reedsy.com/creative-writing-prompts/author/scott-christenson/
Reader insights
Nice work
Very well written. Keep up the good work!
Top insights
Easy to read and follow
Well-structured & engaging content
On-point and relevant
Writing reflected the title & theme


Comments (3)
When I started reading this piece I thought I was finding out we had a mutual friend. One of my friends recently wrote that after college he worked in politics for a bit, working for one of the agencies you describe. There, his department only had $500K of expenses each year, but he was always told to request $2million in funding. When he was asked why, he was told because if they asked for the $500K, that's all they'd get. The money was never used to provide additional benefits to anyone, it just went away somewhere, year after year. Disgusted, he quit and worked for members of Congress instead, where he learned things were worse. He said the same thing I've heard from others I know in those positions - members of Congress spend most of their time fundraising, and maybe 10 hours a week doing work. Their positions in key committees and the party are based on how much money they bring in, and seniority, that's it. Thoroughly discouraged and disgusted, my friend then went to the private sector, where he's remained ever since.
This was a very interesting read and thought provoking. This leads me to think seriously if Donald Trump does something that I agree with. OK, so wasteful government spending is something that I agree does need to be addressed. Believe it or not it was addressed during the Biden administration. He just wasn’t loud about it. He just began taking care of the issue. But that is a longer story I’m not gonna get into right now. But yes, government waste is definitely an important issue to look at. I agree with that. But, the issue with Donald Trump is the way he’s going about it. That’s where I have the problem. First of all he has appointed the richest man in the world to be the head of this government waste issue, a man that nobody elected, a man who is unable to get a security clearance and is working without a security clearance, a man who has many conflicts of interest, a man who is now getting or possibly getting governmental contracts due to what he is doing. I can go into detail but I’m not going to, but there’s a lot of issues here with having Elon Musk appointed. It’s very partisan. This should be done by a bipartisan congressional committee with a built in system of checks and balances. Right now there are no checks and balances on Elon Musk so this is not good. It’s really turned out to be more of a partisan witch hunt. Will Elon Musk investigate why Donald Trump took billions of dollars from military funds in order to build a wall which was never completed and was contracted to one of trump’s friends/supporters who used cheap materials. What was built was not sturdy and began to erode - if this is not government waste and fraud, then I don’t know what is. Another thing that I don’t agree with is the motive or why this is being done. Ultimately, it is not about actually creating a more fiscally efficient government. It is about clearing as much funding as possible in order to give the biggest tax break ever. This tax break will largely benefit the richest people in the country and hardly do anything for a person like you and me. Oh, we might get an additional $400 for the entire year. Elon Musk is calling that $400 a big huge benefit to the American people. I had to laugh when he said that. So my thought is if we cannot afford to give this $4.5 trillion tax break without firing tens of thousands of people, or without cutting programs such as Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid then we shouldn’t be giving this tax break. I agree with cutting governmental waste for spending. I do not agree with the way Donald Trump is doing it. It just doesn’t seem honest on so many levels.
This is Satire, Not a Policy Brief, very interesting article,good luck