By David French
Tuesday, May 29, 2018
Even by the standards of Twitter mistakes, this weekend’s
frenzied sharing of a photograph of immigrant children sleeping in a cage
stands out. The picture is pretty
sobering. It shows two young kids sleeping behind a chain-link gate. Their
surroundings look worse than in prison: At least inmates get a bed and a
toilet.
Why were we treating children worse than hardened
criminals? Former Obama speechwriter (and current star of the Pod Save America
franchise) Jon Favreau spoke for the outraged masses when he tweeted this:
And he wasn’t the only one. My own timeline filled with
tweets and retweets. Prominent activists like Linda Sarsour shared the image,
as did journalists like CNN’s Hadas Gold and Jake Silverstein of the New York Times.
Unfortunately for Favreau and his ilk, this isn’t
“happening now.” It turns out that the picture is from 2014, when the Obama
administration still ran U.S. immigration policy. In the lingo of Twitter,
that’s what you call a “self-own.” And this weekend was full of them.
It turns out that both administrations have had trouble
accounting for unaccompanied, illegal-immigrant minors after they’ve been placed
with adult sponsors. For example, a 2016 inspector general’s report “showed
that the federal government was able to reach only 84 percent of children it
had placed, leaving 4,159 unaccounted for.” That’s on Obama’s watch.
Did you see a picture of a “prison bus for babies”? Well,
that’s from the Obama era as well, and it was designed to assist in
ICE-organized field trips from the Karnes County Residential Center in Karnes
City, Texas.
Yes, I know that much of the nation is in the grips of
Trump Derangement Syndrome, but does that fully explain the gullibility on
display here? After all, while some of the images and stories were shared by
activist hacks, some of those who jumped on the outrage train were smart and
careful people who ordinarily know better.
This is what happens when narrative trumps truth: Even
responsible people are primed to believe lies. We see this all the time in the
wars over our current president. We’re forgetting, however, the extent to which
narrative still trumps the truth about the Obama administration. This is
particularly true when the dominant narrative serves both sides of our ideological divide.
Let’s take immigration, for example. Much of the Left and
the Right are invested in the notion that American policy and practice took a
sharp and dramatic turn (from good to evil in the progressive mind, from
feckless to responsible in the GOP mind) when Trump beat Hillary Clinton in
2016. And, yes, there have been changes, but those changes are exaggerated by
both sides.
Take, for example, the shock and outrage at Trump’s first
so-called travel ban. When he “slammed the door” on Syrian refugees, liberals
said the Statue of Liberty wept. They said it was a betrayal of American
values, and a dramatic reversal of the Obama administration’s longstanding
openness and compassion.
They were wrong. The vast majority of Americans has
absolutely no idea that the “compassionate” Obama administration admitted less
than 2,000 Syrian refugees in the first
five years of the Syrian Civil War. Millions of men, women, and children
were fleeing their homes, and the U.S. opened its doors to almost none of them.
It was only in the last year of Obama’s two-term presidency that the number
substantially increased, and even then the 13,000 refugees admitted represented
an insignificant contribution to efforts to ease the crisis.
Time and again, the black/white, good/evil categorization
of Obama’s and Trump’s policies fades away into matters of degree. For example,
is Trump a monster for capping refugee admissions at a number higher than the average number admitted
during the Bush administration and only slightly lower than the average
admitted during the vast majority of the Obama years? When it comes to
deportations, have we moved from light to darkness when ICE border removals are
slightly down from the Obama era, but ICE interior removals are substantially
up?
No. We’re dealing with relatively normal policy
fluctuations in the context of changing administrations. This is not the
transition from the Archangel Michael to Baphomet.
Similarly, in foreign policy, the move isn’t from Obama,
man of peace, to Trump, man of war. There was a time, to be sure, when that
caricature might have had more credence. That time was before the rise of ISIS.
But even when Obama was withdrawing from Iraq, he was conducting a
comprehensive, aggressive drone campaign against al-Qaeda and had reinforced
Afghanistan. By the time he left office, his Nobel Peace Prize seemed even more
like a sad, hopeful joke. There were American boots on the ground in Iraq
(again), Syria, Afghanistan, and North Africa. American planes were refueling
Saudi jets to enable their brutal, indiscriminate bombing campaign in Yemen.
And now, thanks to an extraordinary
New York Times investigation, we
know that civilian casualties in Obama’s air war against ISIS were likely far,
far higher than his administration reported.
It’s easy to look at the nuanced picture above and point
fingers straight at the mainstream media. “Look how they made Obama look more
compassionate than he was! Look how they ignored Obama’s possible war crimes!”
But that’s only half the story, because much of the conservative world fed off
the notion that Obama was an abject weakling.
Indeed, the notions that America had effectively opened
its borders and was “in retreat” against ISIS fed into the absurd Flight 93
election narrative that dominated discourse on the right. In fact, I constantly
heard conservatives tell me that “Obama hates Republicans more than he hates
ISIS.” This, when Obama was conducting B-52 strikes against the caliphate.
In reality, the immense ship of state is hard to sharply
turn, and while policy differences are real and meaningful, they’re often far
less consequential than the attendant rhetoric would imply. But when trying to
motivate a sometimes-listless electorate, “better” is a less-powerful word than
“great,” and “worse” is less-alarming than “authoritarian” or “fascist.”
Partisan media primes us to believe the best of our
friends and the worst of our ideological foes. So of course the picture of kids
in cages had to come from Trump. Of course he’s the one who lost immigrant
kids. It’s time for everyone to grapple with reality. Obama wasn’t as wonderful
(or terrible) as you remember, the Trump administration isn’t as terrible (or
wonderful) as you think, and the true story is far, far more complicated than
the facile narratives partisans would have us believe.
No comments:
Post a Comment