Genuflecting Towards Complicity

 

It is disturbing to see so many folks paying obeisance to Donald Trump as he prepares to re-ascend to the presidency. To some extent, it’s understandable: Trump’s relationships are transactional, and his stance on an issue at a given moment appears to be dictated largely by his then-views of the agents (people, companies) involved. Given this, it seems only common sense to get on his good side by appeals to his vanity, so as to avoid incurring his wrath and becoming a target of his policies. This might arguably be considered ethical, even, if the agents truly believe what’s being protected will deliver a greater benefit to the world.

But this genuflection carries a price: it legitimizes the whole of Trump’s agenda as favorable or at least acceptable, and creates more pressure for similar agents to fall in line or risk being left behind as targets of Trump’s disfavor. It normalizes compliance and weakens resistance at the very least—and, depending on the tributes being paid, could actively enable the rest of his agenda by amplifying the propaganda machine, singling out critics, or participating in policy execution.

For those agents who believe in the totality of Trump’s agenda, this poses no quandary. But those folks who find parts of his agenda deeply, morally objectionable have hard choices to make: where should they draw the line to make the most good in the world? How can they ensure their current transactional homages aren’t the start of a slippery slope of ever-deeper complicity in inhumane acts and the destruction of institutions that have been aiming, however imperfectly, for fairness, order, and opportunity for all?

I don’t have an answer to that, but would suggest that at least a first step is this: draw a line in the sand now (yesterday would have been better) that you commit to not crossing. Be explicit and detailed. And then check it frequently and hold yourself to it. As we’ve learned from history, complicity is sometimes a very gradual process where each small increment feels acceptable, but which, when seen in totality, reveals a gross violation of the values and morals we once held dear and still consider part of our self-identity.