On the Hill: A White House at war (with everyone)
Cianan Sheekey • US • 2 minute read
Image: Images George Rex / Flickr
Embedded Files
The war in Iran (or the not-war in Iran, claims the administration) was just the beginning for a White House elected on “no new wars”. Just like the first time out, I’m starting ‘On the Hill’ with failed Trump promises. It’s amusing, really, but when Trump repeatedly assured voters he wouldn’t drag the US into conflict, we all thought he was talking about wars with foreign powers. But now we also have a press war beyond the likes of which we’ve never seen, a Defence Secretary assaulting the separation of church and state, as well as a President insistent on ramping up an AI arms race that is evidently already spiralling out of control. In terms of the latter, are we allowed to say that, in doing so, Trump’s declared war on humanity? Seems apt to me.
Firstly, the press war. I don’t mean to sound partisan, but when Fox News is at odds with a Republican administration, you know something rather remarkable must have occurred. When the President banned POLITICO and CNN from the White House, he claimed they spread constant disinformation, though he cited no examples. In response, major outlets have collectively suspended executive coverage. Clearly, Trump is a man of unity, bringing ideological foes together to sing kumbaya. Humour aside, while distrust in the media has long been ‘an article of faith on the [American] political right’, it’s hard to see, even from an optics perspective, how the base will react to this new domestic conflict well.
What the world needs is more angry, God-fearing G.I.s
It’s one of the most striking elements of the administration in recent weeks: considering its actions from its shoes. Usually, even if you’re not a fan of Trump, you can understand why he does certain things, whether it’s to fit his often disjointed worldview or to accumulate power (ends that can be attributed to many a politician). But now the President’s actions are increasingly unexplainable; assuming Trump’s political end goal wasn’t solely press-bashing, there appears to be no light at the end of the tunnel. It’s as if all that is left is Trump’s strong political instincts, clinging on for dear life.
Image: Markus Spiske / Unsplash
Secondly, Hesgeth and his hyper-masculine religious salvos. The Evangelical Defence Secretary doesn’t want “beirdos, weirdos, and wimps” in the military, but was anyone insulting the US armed forces on those fronts? There are plenty of frequently-cited criticisms of the American military, but I can’t remember ever being told it just wasn’t manly enough. Hesgeth is turning US Army discussions into testosterone-measuring contests, while simultaneously seizing power through his new faith-based Pentagon Office, which reports directly to him. Because what the world needs is more angry, God-fearing G.I.s.
Thirdly, the war on all of us (potentially, nay, probably). A recent AI test by OpenAI highlighted the imminent perils of the technology after it broke out of the test environment and infiltrated a real company. While most of us couldn’t even pretend to understand the full ramifications of AI on every factor of our lives, it thankfully isn’t our job. It’s up to legislatures, Congress chief among them, given the White House’s insistence on embracing the technology. But it’s clear that ‘[US] lawmakers are at a loss for how to regulate AI’, and so we face a new technological epoch without adequate safeguards. Given the currently incalculable risks to humans in so many ways, whether it’s employment opportunities or newfound security threats, I think we can safely double down on the ‘war on humanity’ claim.
Edit log
•Published: 04/10/26
Google Sites
Report abuse