If a striking thing about the period just before Donald Trump’s second inauguration was the feeling that America was genuinely shifting to the right — wokeness crumbling, more minority voters and elite factions joining the GOP, every branch of government in conservative hands — a striking thing about the Trump administration is that it has governed as though none of this were the case.

Instead, its approach belongs to a world where both the conservative position and the wider American situation are simply desperate and there’s only the narrowest of windows to wrench the country away from some apocalyptic fate.

The best term for this mentality is “black-pilled,” an online reference, based on a famous scene in “The Matrix,” to different pills that awaken people to hidden realities. A red pill lets you in on secret right-wing truths. A white pill persuades you that the world situation is better than you thought. And a black pill lets you know just how doomed we really are.

A merely red-pilled Trump administration would still be doing much of what the actual one is doing — pushing the envelope on executive power, making a bid to revive American manufacturing, trying to find ways to increase deportations, picking fights with Ivy League universities.

But the black pill helps explain the hyperactivity with which Elon Musk’s DOGE project set about cutting jobs and programs — no pause for assessment, just the chainsaw.

Or the chaotic haste that yielded a list of sweeping demands being sent to Harvard apparently by mistake.

Or the no-pain-no-gain maximalism of Trump’s trade war.

Or the impulse to engage in brinkmanship with a conservative Supreme Court.

Or the seeming lack of concern for whether newly Republican constituencies might be alienated or freaked out.

The administration’s mentality exists in symbiosis with its most fervent online supporters, who have responded to each new foray with all-or-nothing takes. “If we can’t bring all the jobs back/deport all the illegal immigrants/smash the Ivy League, we don’t have a country.”

Let me take one illustration of this mentality, from a commentator who goes by the nom de guerre FischerKing and has more than 200,000 followers on X. Calling the American situation an “emergency,” with an added expletive, he writes: “The USA has elected a series of administrations from both parties who have given us a $37 trillion national debt, probably 30-50 million illegal aliens, woke ideology, and a series of pointless wars. But we’re supposed to care about ‘norms.’”

I like this post because it lets me make two points about the problem with the black pill.

First, it overstates the direness of the situation. The United States almost certainly does not have 30 million to 50 million illegal immigrants. A high-end estimate from an anti-immigration advocacy group puts the figure at 18 million to 19 million. That’s a big number; it makes a case for deportations. But it’s far less transformative than 50 million would be.

The 21st-century United States has indeed been embroiled in “a series of pointless wars.” But the debacles of Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya are in the past, and U.S. foreign policy has turned in a more realist direction under Democrats as well as Trump. Even if you take a maximally skeptical view of our support for the Ukrainians, the war in Ukraine is a classic proxy conflict, not another Iraq or Vietnam.

Meanwhile, the peak of woke ideology is, for now, in the past: Today, Ibram X. Kendi is increasingly a punchline, the British Supreme Court is vindicating JK Rowling, and affirmative action, as well as DEI, is on the ropes.

So at the very least, some “emergency” aspects of our situation are less grim than the black-pilled view would suggest. But just as crucially, many norm-busting responses of the Trump administration are either nonresponsive to the alleged emergencies or arguably counterproductive.

The national debt is a real problem. But the Musk attack on federal spending has savaged important programs for the sake of trivial savings, and the profligate budgets being pushed through the House and Senate will very likely swamp any savings.

On immigration, the bitter fights over sending alleged gang members to a Salvadoran prison are not necessarily relevant to the White House’s ability to carry out deportations on a larger scale, since the administration desperately needs more resources for that project, not just more authority.

In the culture war, conservative success in the struggle against wokeness depends on continuing to convert centrists and even liberals to the cause, and the administration’s all-or-nothing strategy risks making liberal academia sympathetic — a truly counterproductive feat.

Finally, the trade war looks like a debacle. Full stop.

Related Articles

Bruce Yandle: Trump, like Twain’s cat, jumps from a hot stove

Noah Feldman: Here’s why the president keeps ignoring the law

Letters: St. Paul Council should delay vote on rent-control amendments

Francois Nguyen: 50 years since the fall of Saigon: a reflection

Other voices: Muck up the tax code to control tariff damage? Bad idea

One reason to stress these aspects of the Trump agenda (and the falling poll numbers that indicate their costs) is that black-pilled conservatives are understandably allergic to being lectured (especially from elite pulpits) that the situation isn’t as bleak as they believe.

Better for the critics to meet the black-pilled halfway — with the suggestion that even in a dire situation, you still need a response calibrated to reality, rather than a furious flailing that most likely guarantees defeat.

Ross Douthat writes a column for the New York Times.

By KIMBERLEE KRUESI

The Trump administration on Monday announced federal officials are launching investigations into Harvard University and the Harvard Law Review, saying authorities have received reports of race-based discrimination “permeating the operations” of the journal.

Related Articles

Mexico and US reach deal on Rio Grande water sharing

FDA scrutiny of Novavax COVID-19 vaccine sparks uncertainty about other shots

Things to know about the US coal industry and proposed changes under the Trump administration

White House focuses on border crackdown as it marks 100 days for Trump’s second term

Rep. Gerry Connolly steps down as top Oversight Democrat and won’t seek reelection as cancer returns

The investigations come as Harvard fights a freeze on $2.2 billion in federal grants the Trump administration imposed after the university refused to comply with demands to limit activism on campus. A letter sent to the university earlier this month called for the institution to clarify its campus speech policies that limit the time, place and manner of protests and other activities. It also demanded academic departments at Harvard that “fuel antisemitic harassment” be reviewed and changed to address bias and improve viewpoint diversity.

Monday marked the first time that both sides met in court over the funding fight. The investigations by the U.S. Department of Education and the Department of Health and Human Services were announced separately on Monday, with authorities saying they were investigating policies and practices involving the journal’s membership and article selection that they argue may violate Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

According to the federal government, the editor of the Harvard Law Review reportedly wrote that it was “concerning” that the majority of the people who had wanted to reply to an article about police reform “are white men.” A separate editor allegedly suggested “that a piece should be subject to expedited review because the author was a minority.”

“Harvard Law Review’s article selection process appears to pick winners and losers on the basis of race, employing a spoils system in which the race of the legal scholar is as, if not more, important than the merit of the submission,” said Acting Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights Craig Trainor in a statement. “Title VI’s demands are clear: recipients of federal financial assistance may not discriminate on the basis of race, color, or national origin. No institution — no matter its pedigree, prestige, or wealth — is above the law.”

An email seeking comment was sent Monday to a spokesperson for Harvard.

Harvard is among multiple universities across the country where pro-Palestinian protests erupted on campus amid the war in Gaza last year. Republican officials have since heavily scrutinized those universities, and several Ivy League presidents testified before Congress to discuss antisemitism allegations. The Cambridge, Massachusetts, institution was the fifth Ivy League school targeted in a pressure campaign by the administration, which also has paused federal funding for the University of Pennsylvania, Brown, and Princeton universities to force compliance with its agenda.

By ADRIAN SAINZ and TRAVIS LOLLER

MEMPHIS, Tenn. (AP) — A historic Black church in downtown Memphis that was the organizing point for Martin Luther King Jr.’s final campaign in 1968 caught fire early Monday morning and suffered significant damage.

“The inside is a total loss, but we’re still somewhat hopeful that some of the façade will be able to be left standing,” Memphis Fire Chief Gina Sweat said at a Monday morning news conference. She said the fire was reported at 1:39 a.m. through a commercial alarm service. Local fire and police officers are investigating the cause, along with the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. It is “way too early” to know anything more, Sweat said.

King was drawn to Memphis in 1968 to support some 1,300 predominantly Black sanitation workers who went on strike to protest inhumane treatment. Two workers had been crushed in a garbage compactor in 1964, but the faulty equipment had not been replaced. On Feb. 1, 1968, two more men, Echol Cole, 36, and Robert Walker, 30, were crushed in the compactor. The two men were contract workers, so they did not qualify for workmen’s compensation, and had no life insurance.

Workers wanted to unionize, and fought for higher pay and safer working conditions. City officials declared the strike illegal and arrested scores of strikers and protesters.

Before the fire, the Clayborn Temple was undergoing a $25 million restoration that was slated for completion in 2026. The initiative aims to preserve the architectural and historical integrity of the Romanesque revival church and includes the restoration of a 3,000-pipe grand organ. At the same time, the project seeks to help revitalize the local neighborhood with a museum, cultural programing and community outreach, according to a news release on the renovation.

“This morning we woke up to heartbreaking news: a devastating fire has ravaged one of our city’s greatest treasures, Clayborn Temple,” Memphis Mayor Paul Young wrote in a statement posted to social media. “Clayborn is more than a historic building. It is sacred ground. It is the beating heart of the civil rights movement, a symbol of struggle, hope, and triumph that belongs not just to Memphis but to the world.”

Just south of Beale Street, Clayborn Temple was built in 1892 as the Second Presbyterian Church and originally served an all-white congregation. In 1949, the building was sold to an African Methodist Episcopal congregation and renamed Clayborn Temple, according to the release.

Memphis sanitation workers started striking in February 1968 after Cole and Walker were killed on the job.

The Clayborn Temple hosted nightly meetings and the campaign’s iconic “I AM A MAN” posters were made in its basement. The temple was also a staging point for marches to City Hall. They included a March 28, 1968, march led by King, a rally that turned violent when police and protesters clashed on the iconic Beale Street, and a 16-year-old was killed.

When marchers retreated to the temple, police fired tear gas inside. People broke some of the stained-glass windows to escape. King promised to lead a second, peaceful march in Memphis, but he was killed by a sniper while standing on the balcony of the Lorraine Motel on April 4.

After King was assassinated and the strike ended with the workers securing a pay raise, the church’s influence waned. It fell into disrepair and was vacant for years before the renovation effort that took off in 2017 thanks to a $400,000 grant from the National Park Service.

Clayborn Temple was placed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1979.

Anasa Troutman has been leading the restoration effort as executive director of Historic Clayborn Temple.

“To everyone who has loved, supported, and prayed for Historic Clayborn Temple, we are still committed to her restoration,” she wrote in a Monday statement urging supporters to donate money if they are able.

Jimmie Tucker, one of the architects who has worked on the restoration for years, spent Monday morning working on a plan to try to shore up the exterior walls.

“As a native Memphian, this project is personal,” he said. “It has so much meaning.”

Tucker said he had been speaking to some of the people who helped after a similar Memphis fire at First United Methodist Church in 2006. He said that project gives him hope because they were able to rebuild. He was also encouraged that the mayor pledged to support the project.

Young said in a social media statement that the city will “help ensure this sacred place rises again.”

Loller reported from Nashville, Tennessee.

Delay the rent vote

The St. Paul City Council is considering a permanent exemption to the rent stabilization law voters approved just five years ago. On April 8, the City took public comment on this motion. Billion-dollar developers like Ryan Construction support this permanent exemption. We oppose it, and further request that action on this be postponed at least until the fall, both to gather accurate data and evidence and to democratically elect a new city councilor from Ward 4.

Supporters argue that this permanent exemption is needed because housing development in St. Paul has fallen over the last five years. However, speakers on April 8 pointed out that Minneapolis, with no rent stabilization, has experienced exactly the same reduction in development as St. Paul. On April 8, Sczepanski and Hoang published a letter to the editor with solid research showing rent stabilization has not affected housing development in other cities; Sczepanski testified at the hearing, presenting some of that same research evidence. But the Council appears to be ignoring the data in a rush to vote on May 7. This rush to offer developers permanent exemptions for new builds must not amplify a pattern already occurring here — naturally occurring affordable housing (NOAH) is being torn down in order to build new housing that is not affordable to working people. Surely any permanent exemption to rent stabilization should exclude new higher-priced construction that destroys affordable housing.

Of course St. Paul needs more housing for a range of incomes, but the Ccty needs to be more thoughtful and creative in producing housing specifically for low-income residents. Please delay the vote on exemption, and use the time to consider alternatives.

John Slade and Elaine Tarone, St Paul
The writers are members of the St. Paul Chapter of MICAH (Metropolitan Interfaith Council on Affordable Housing)

Don’t sacrifice worker safety

We will remember all workers in the U.S. on April 28, who were killed, disabled, injured, or made unwell by their work. The day marks the legislative anniversary of OSHA (occupational safety and health act) of 1970.  On average, 344 workers a day die on the job or from occupational diseases. Let that sink in and let us remember all the families that are affected.

In this time of chaos in Washington, D.C, let us not sacrifice worker safety in the name of streamlining or cost-cutting.

Bernie Hesse, St. Paul

A great disconnect

In his opinion piece, “It’s Time for a Civic Uprising,” David Brooks sets the terms for a non-violent civil war, though he may not call it that. He insists that President Donald Trump cares nothing about the strictures of our Constitution and rule of law; that his goal is power.

Remarkably, millions of those who elected President Trump argued the same about Presidents Obama and Biden. In many ways, it’s what motivated them to vote for Donald Trump.

We have a great disconnect here. Brooks urges that residents unite against the president in a series of peaceful moves, a powerful alliance of those who fear him. He especially urges us to use lawsuits to stifle the president’s actions; lawfare, that is a term we’ve heard repeatedly in the last few years.

Thankfully, he does not urge violence, but it is sure to come. A massive civil movement rising up against the wishes of the 77 million who voted for Trump will not end well, that is, unless our civil and legal institutions right themselves and reduce the tension.

Dave Racer, Woodbury

Correct, violence has no place

The letter writer from Owatonna is correct in saying that violence has no place in our disagreements and political differences.

When he asked, “What could be more anti-democratic than that?” — I immediately wondered what he thought of the riot at the capitol on Jan 6, 2021, influenced by Donald J Trump. I still cannot understand anyone who could vote for him after he sat, watching the violence unfold and escalate. It was an attempt to disrupt one of the most important processes in our democracy. Trump had every means to stop the attack, but obviously preferred to watch from the sidelines for several hours. And then, after becoming elected, President Trump let these people off the hook, maybe giving the country and the world the impression that there is an acceptable place for violence, which is a terrible thing.

Colleen Flaherty Hocking, Hugo

Where is the evidence?

The column by David Brooks (“It’s time for a civic uprising”, April 19) didn’t disappoint. And I’m sorry my newspaper wasted a half-page of ink on this screed. Everything isn’t about President Trump. He dared to address the financial and philosophical excesses of our society. He dared to represent half of the population of our country — as attested to by the last national election.

Mr. Brooks labels what he calls “Trumpism” as evil.  And he accuses President Trump of being “… primarily about the acquisition of power — power for its own sake.” Where is the evidence?

The present administration is facing a bureaucracy that was and is out of control. There has apparently been nobody leading the country for four years, and Mr. Brooks, by his silence, was part of that coverup. Laws were not being enforced even when the police did their job. Limits were set on when they were allowed to pursue investigations or even provide safety. Hundreds of thousands of children are unaccounted for. Immigration was not just allowed but encouraged — with accommodations not heretofore offered.  Election security laws and rules were relaxed. Those last two were for the acquisition of ongoing power — there could be no other reason.

And that is only the beginning. This country cannot afford to continue on the path on which we live. We have exceeded most, if not all economists’ published estimates of how much debt the United States can safely carry. With our debt load accompanied by increasing ongoing spending and increasing borrowing rates, we are one hiccup from financial disaster. All we need is one major power to boycott our bonds.

Mr. Brooks and those in his camp apparently have no counterarguments to the efforts to reduce the bloat caused by our out-of-control grant system, so this is the language they employ. Attack and vilify and dehumanize the person. And this isn’t about President Trump. It wouldn’t make any difference what his name is. The actions of the present administration threaten the entrenched system of spending and anarchy. This with the most open administration of my nearly 80 years of following the news (my opinion).

Art Thell, West St. Paul

Where we would be? Well …

“Just imagine where this country would be had Trump not won last November,” says an April 20 letter writer. Oh my.

Well, I know that we wouldn’t have to get up every morning with a sense of dread, wondering what he’d destroyed THIS time. I know that we wouldn’t have thrown our foreign allies to the wolves. I know that Canada, Denmark, and Panama would still be our friends. I know that those in charge of our military, our law enforcement and cybersecurity would still be competent people with the knowledge and experience to keep us safe. I know that any other president would not have fired anyone with brains and replaced them with his boot-licking cronies. I know we wouldn’t have a president who turned his best bud Musk loose to run amok in our federal agencies. I know that we would not have a president obsessed with illegally throwing immigrants out of the country to be incarcerated in some hellhole in a foreign land (even those here legally, who have committed no crimes). I know that our president would not be talking about doing the same to U.S. citizens. I know our president would not be hellbent on taking down our major universities and law firms. I know that we would not have a president who hates our judicial system — and flaunted his disobedience of a Supreme Court ruling. I know that our president’s only goals would not be retribution, chaos and destruction. I know we wouldn’t have a toddler in the White House.

Carol Turnbull, Woodbury

If he’d been at the office …

I’ve been seeing some stories about the man in Minneapolis who “allegedly” was caught on camera vandalizing six privately owned Teslas. A guy who the DA over there refuses to charge. I’m surprised she didn’t charge the cops for arresting him. Turns out the vandal is a state employee. That in itself is ironic. My thought is: If he had been working at the office instead of out walking his dog, he might not have found the time to be such a mindless, heartless and cowardly piece of humanity.

Mark Ruecker, Roseville

Privilege

A white, middle-class professional, who is an employee of the State of Minnesota, gets off with a wrist slap after vandalizing several Tesla vehicles around downtown Minneapolis. This sounds like the very definition of white privilege. Does anyone else see the hypocrisy in this? I guess that if you are the correct color, and you work for the State, and you have the correct politics, you can get away with writing a check and avoiding jail time.

Gregory A. Beckstrom, Minneapolis

A slap on the wrist

Mighty Mary Moriarty strikes again. Yep, just when you think the Hennepin County attorney’s office can’t be laxer about crime, Moriarty sides with Tesla felony vandal and Minnesota state employee Dylan Brian Adams with the “diversion” program. We know Adams vandalized at least six Teslas and got a slap on the wrist. What incentives does this signal to Minneapolis Police investigators to do their job so diligently when you pull these political stunts?  I can only imagine if this suspect were not a state employee, but a conservative who vandalized a vehicle, the book would be thrown at them with jail time.

Bobby Reardon, Pelican Lake Township

Where is the sense of humility and integrity?

I don’t say this lightly, but I’m writing in response to all the tired lecturing and petty grievances that I hear on a daily basis from individuals who have too much time on their hands, defending scam artists who don’t care about them one bit, as well as lectures from individuals who have their own indiscretions, Bill Cosby style. Where is the general public’s own sense of humility and integrity? And why use wokeism as an excuse to compensate for your own fragility and lack of self-esteem?

Dana W. Carlson, Woodbury

People, not pawns

Prophetic words of Pope Francis:

Refugees are not pawns on the chessboard of life.

Gerry Del Fiacco, Eagan

It all goes into the river

In the spirit of Earth Day let’s go to the store. Walk the aisles of bodywash, shampoo and conditioner, laundry soap, dish soap, all the superdooper cleansers, then tell yourself, “Everything in these containers is going into the Twin Cities sewer systems and will eventually end up in the Gulf of Mexico.” And the shelves will be restocked again and again. Folks, at the very least, use less of these. Please. Experiment to learn what is the smallest amount you actually need to use.

Linda Bryan, Maplewood

Sainted

A big thank you to all the individuals who recently picked up trash along West Seventh Street, St. Paul Avenue and Davern Street.  Your many hours of hard work have not gone unnoticed and are much appreciated. You are truly Saints!

Kay Reich, St. Paul

Demonization and dehumanization, evil twins

“What we should demonize is people like Elon Musk,” declared former vice-presidential candidate and Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz at a recent Ohio town hall. Just days later, Cody Balmer allegedly set fire to the Pennsylvania governor’s home — a chilling reminder of where escalating political hostility can lead.

Increasing political violence germinates in a climate where demonizing opponents has been normalized. Walz’s rhetoric reflects a perilous and disturbing trend: the weaponization of the Us-vs-Them divide that sets us on a diabolical collision course because demonization and dehumanization are evil twins.

The Us-vs-Them divide dictates our perceptions, trust and even moral judgments. We extend generosity, the benefit of the doubt, and leniency to Us while scrutinizing, distrusting, and shaming Them. Us-vs-Them divisions and conflicts seep into every aspect of our lives but now are on full display in politics and acts of violence.

Gov. Walz could hardly contain his glee on stage over the decline of Tesla’s stock price. Tesla cars were set on fire, and its dealerships were vandalized. Meanwhile, over 48% of people on the left believe that murdering Elon Musk is justifiable, according to a new report from Rutgers University. It makes you wonder: Which direction are we steering into?

The roots of this Us-vs-Them divide run deep. Our brains are wired to categorize people into Us and Them primarily based on similarity. Such judgments come at lightning speed. Studies show that 6-month-old babies already prefer those who share something in common. Ask a 4-year-old boy to choose a playmate. His preferences center on the similarities in age, gender, language and accent.

The consequences of this unconscious divide are profound. Brain-imaging studies reveal that when we see images of Us, areas for social bonding activate, but when we see Them, our brain’s fear centers switch on. Worse, extreme Them groups — such as marginalized communities — trigger strong emotions such as disgust, as if you just swallowed a nasty bug. The brain has a built-in mechanism to dehumanize Them.

Once we stop acknowledging that our opponents are humans, there is only one rule left for the game: those identified as Them are fair game.

Aggression toward Them is part of unflattering human nature. Studies show that toddlers want to bond with those who are similar to them but punish those who are different. This tendency gets worse with age. In Jane Elliott’s classic 1960s experiment, third-grade children separated by eye color quickly began bullying those deemed inferior, showing how readily arbitrary distinctions foster division.

History offers chilling reminders of how demonization and dehumanization have been exploited to fuel atrocities. Nazi propaganda labeled Jews as “rats” during the Holocaust. During the Rwanda civil war, Hutus called Tutsis “cockroaches” before slaughtering 800,000 of them.

But do we even know who is Us and who is Them? Not long ago, Elon Musk was one of Us who would save our planet. Now, to many, he is one of Them. Not long ago, Gov. Walz promoted the adoption of electric vehicles. Now, he gets a boost when Tesla’s stock price plunges. Not long ago, more than 1 million Minnesotans owned Tesla stock through the state retirement plan. Today, they still do.

The fast-changing line between Us and Them can easily turn today’s hero into tomorrow’s villain. Then, who is safe and who won’t get demonized and dehumanized next?

Related Articles

Francois Nguyen: 50 years since the fall of Saigon: a reflection

Other voices: Muck up the tax code to control tariff damage? Bad idea

James Stavridis: My old warship is caught up in the battle over DEI

Joe Soucheray: Was politics a factor in Mary Moriarty’s charity to Tesla vandal?

F.D. Flam: Geoengineering’s risks need to be studied more

Criticizing Musk is healthy in a democracy. Publicly calling for demonizing people like him by a former vice-presidential candidate is against what our democracy stands for. The exploitation of Us vs. Them always starts at the top and will never get old.

When we recognize that today’s Them might fight tomorrow’s disease alongside Us or help after a natural disaster, we can see our shared humanity.

As Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. said, “We must learn to live together as brothers or perish together like fools.”

Terry Wu, Plymouth