After its first 100 days were replete with orders to expunge DEI from the federal government, the Trump administration is now experiencing an internal rift over what its next priority ought to be. While there is a consensus on dismantling social security programs, there is a divide over whether it is more important to the target the “social” or the “security.”
Most observers see this as a small matter of semantics. Trump strategists, however, think it matters a great deal. “We get so caught up in the fun and games of overturning the government that we forget some of these things mean what they literally say,” said an adviser speaking on the condition of anonymity. “A lot of Americans feel a desire for both more social connection and more security. What do we say when we target social security? That we stand for anti-social insecurity? I mean, we do. We just can’t tip our hand that bluntly.”
The Trump administration has generally tried to match anti-government sentiment with rhetoric that draws on negative connotations about race, gender and queer issues. Most Americans, however, associate social security with old and disabled people, neither of whom are fully demonized as threats to a Trumpist social order. “The same playbook doesn’t work,” says the adviser. “We have to find a new angle and ram it through. So far, all we’ve got is this idea that dead people get rich on social security. But we can’t make up a story that dead people are going to move to your community and bring crime with them … or could we?”
Trump officials have brainstormed some tricks, such as pointing out that SSA is “ASS” spelled backward, or referring to SSDI as SS-DEI. “Eventually we are going to have to get around the fact that people need social security and like having it. So when we take it away, we have to make it sound like you’re keeping the core benefits even though you’re not. Either you keep your security but have no obligation to be social, or you can be social but insecure.”