There’s a lot of empty activism in the news these days. Empty activists espouse a cause simply because it is cool or “en vogue” – or even just out of ideological reflex – with no real intention of following through to see actual change and no desire to risk their personal comfort or reputation for the cause.
Unfortunately, if empty activists espouse the “right” causes, equally empty media outlets are happy to give them notice and plaudits for their (lack of) trouble. Take the November 15 New York Times story with the headline, “More Than 500 U.S. Officials Sign Letter Protesting Biden’s Israel Policy.” The problem is that not one of these “signers” working in the Biden administration and Biden's re-election campaign will step forward to identify themselves. They lent their support to the letter anonymously, claiming “concern for our personal safety and risk of potentially losing our jobs.”
These empty activists can support a position, tell their friends how progressive and understanding they are, and enjoy their virtue without lifting a finger or suffering any of the consequences that typically accompany siding with those who exterminate innocent civilians.
Many of these non-signers allegedly have attended meetings in their respective agencies where they have discussed their suffering. In an October 23 meeting at the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, according to the Times, “some attendees cried” as they “demanded that the administration call for a cease-fire.”
Then there was a group of White House Interns – Interns! – who were “demanding that the president call for a permanent ceasefire in the Israel-Hamas conflict.” These are college students and young adults who are privileged to be working in the most prestigious government internship in the country. They are learning, through the example being set for them by the permanent administration appointees they work for, that their opinion and feelings seem to matter more than U.S. policy. In any other administration, these interns would be immediately fired.
Imagine this same scenario on the political right: a small, extreme subset of a conservative administration anonymously demands the president abandon our greatest ally in the Middle East as it fights a barbaric enemy that has slaughtered innocent Jews. There would justly be pandemonium in newsrooms. Congressional and media investigations would be aggressive and exacting, and those siding with groups calling for the extinction of the Jewish people would be identified overnight.
Transparency is paramount to a trustworthy, accountable government. In a healthy republic, the media and the government would work to expose empty activists who espouse extreme stances. They would not be protected and revered as they are now by both the administration and the media.
The pendulum swings throughout the years. If today we tolerate one party’s extreme minority working against policy, in a few years we will be doing the same for the other. Government employees have First Amendment rights. But citizens also have a right to know what their employees publicly state and believe. Discriminatory or extreme views, particularly those contrary to long settled U.S. policy, must be beyond the pale.
Furthermore, serious national security interests are at stake. Employees throughout the administration are involved with foreign policy decisions and advise the White House on those decisions every day. The people must know their employees, whether they agree with policy or not, are doing their level best to protect the U.S. and its allies.
Finally, there was one former employee who had the guts to identify his opposition to the administration – Josh Paul. Mr. Paul is the former director of congressional and public affairs at the State Department’s Bureau of Political-Military Affairs, which handles arms transfers. He resigned in October, calling the administration’s response to the conflict “an impulsive reaction” based on “intellectual bankruptcy.” Mr. Paul has since become a go-to source for news outlets seeking an anti-Israel voice proximate to our government, and his opinion is objectionable. But he handled his dissent in an honorable way, unlike his former counterparts throughout the administration.
The media may protect and celebrate those who align against our allies, but the U.S. government cannot. My organization, Center to Advance Security in America, has filed a series of FOIA requests to investigate these anonymous letters, their non-signers, the agencies they work for, and the ideology they espouse while collecting taxpayer salaries to execute the policies of the United States. For good or ill, Americans should know the identities of government employees so they can judge for themselves whether they and their nation are being well served.
James Fitzpatrick is an Army Veteran and the Director of the Center to Advance Security in America (CASA), an organization dedicated to improving the safety and security of the American people.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member