The Political Garden: Weeding Out Distrust, Cultivating Trust

Trump routinely sows chaos and will reap it, but we can choose to sow careful cultivation and reap sustainable democracy.

Soil science teaches us that good soil takes generations to build but can be destroyed in a season. We can connect that to the fragility of democratic institutions. As political bulldozers tear through democratic institutions, leaving scorched earth behind, how do we stop bulldozers and instead plant seeds of trust in the wreckage?

In an age dominated by figures like Donald Trump, it feels like our political landscape is being churned by a blunt plow, tearing up trust and sowing chaos. Democrats are sitting on the sidelines; they need to get their hands dirty and approach governance not as a battlefield, but as a garden or their field. Just like any good gardener, we need to focus on weeding out distrust and cultivating trust. This means using plain words for everyday Americans in need and the difference between a precise, targeted approach and a brute-force method that leaves nothing but barren soil.

Using an agricultural metaphor might produce sustainable results if implemented by opposition to DOGE/Trump, including but not limited to the Democratic Party.

Imagine your field (or garden) is infested with chronic destructive weeds (assuming the presence of some level of waste, fraud, and abuse).

First, you have targeted treatment. This approach involves carefully identifying the weeds, understanding their biology, and then applying a highly-specific solution–certain crop rotations, early monitoring, and scouting, cover crops– to the affected plants or even directly to the weeds themselves. It's about minimal intervention, maximum impact on the problem, and preserving the overall health of your ecosystem. You're not harming beneficial insects or the soil; you're just getting rid of the bad actors.

Then there's indiscriminate plowing. When used for weed control, this is like tilling your entire garden. It might disturb some weeds, but it also rips up your healthy plants, destroys beneficial microorganisms in the soil, and generally wreaks havoc on the delicate balance of your field or garden. It's a brute-force method that creates more problems than it solves, leaving a barren, vulnerable landscape in its wake.

DOGE and Government: Scalpel vs. Blunt Hammer

Now, let's apply this to the criticism of DOGE and its"blunt hammer attacks" on the government, compared to using a "scalpel."

While DOGE, is engaging in "blunt hammer attacks" on government, it's akin to using a moldboard plow on your garden. This perspective suggests:

• Indiscriminate disruption: Its influence isn't directed at specific, identified issues within government or traditional finance. Instead, it creates chaos, distrust in government, and a general sense of unpredictability that can be seen as destabilizing to established systems without offering clear, constructive alternatives. (Chaos is a goal of Bannon and MAGA)

• Collateral damage: The "hammer attack" may disrupt some established norms or even expose weaknesses, but it will lead to significant financial losses for individuals, create regulatory chaos, and potentially undermine the stability of broader economic systems. There's no precision in its impact. (Proponents welcome collateral damage is welcomed by proponents; it only creates greater chaos)

• Lack of clear objective (beyond disruption): The goal is disruption for disruption's sake. (Steve Bannon has talked for several years about using chaos and destruction of current institutions as a strategy to reshape entire government and society)

---

The Challenge to Opponents: Responding with the Scalpel

Given the nature of these "blunt hammer attacks," Democrats and other opponents are challenged to move beyond mere reaction and instead offer a three-pronged, "scalpel-like" response to the public's frustrations and the perceived governmental shortcomings:

1. "Identify Benefits and Show the Harvest" - demonstrate and remind people of examples of good government: Instead of solely defending against attacks, proactively articulate and demonstrate the essential services and positive impacts the government provides. This means highlighting specific programs that improve lives, foster economic stability, ensure public safety, and protect rights, effectively showcasing the "healthy parts of the garden" that the "blunt hammer" risks destroying.

2. "Detail Solutions and Precision Weeding" - specific fixes, not wholesale destruction Detailed Solutions While Keeping Core Values: Acknowledge legitimate concerns about governmental inefficiency or corruption. However, instead of a blanket condemnation, offer concrete, actionable solutions to address waste, fraud, and abuse. This demonstrates a commitment to accountability and improvement without abandoning the core values and essential functions that the government upholds, akin to precisely removing diseased tissue while preserving vital organs.

3. "Early Warning Systems and Preventative Device”- - monitoring before a crisis hits. People walk their gardens and pull weeds. Preventative or Early Detection Devices in Place: Advocate for and implement robust internal mechanisms designed to identify and address problems before they escalate. This includes strengthening institutions like the Inspector General's office, promoting independent performance audits, and fostering a culture of continuous improvement and transparency. These "early detection devices" are the governmental equivalent of regularly inspecting your garden for early signs of pests, allowing for targeted interventions before a full-blown infestation requires a "plow."

By adopting these "scalpel" approaches, opponents of the "blunt hammer" narrative can demonstrate a nuanced understanding of public concerns while offering constructive, sustainable pathways to a more effective and trusted government. For decades candidates and public officials have largely avoided broad and principled justification of government.

I was unaware of Project 2025 when I wrote on the need to defend the government in my first substack from Feb. 2024. I wish I used a larger, more effective megaphone. Today, we're hourly planting seeds of chaos, distrust, and institutional destruction and those seeds are already sprouting.

The Trump administration explicitly says they want to "bring everything crashing down," they're sowing destruction. When DOGE takes a "blunt hammer" approach, they're sowing instability. In Iowa, we have witnessed blunt hammer approaches to many issues.

A call to action for Democrats: if we want to reap trust, stability, and effective governance, we need to start sowing those seeds now through precise, constructive policies rather than only reactive politics.