The Government of Ghosts: How Incoherence and Secrecy Forged a New Kind of Power

There is a moment in every political drama when the mask slips, when the carefully constructed facade of competence falls away to reveal the chaotic reality beneath. For the second Trump administration, that moment arrived during a baffling, rambling monologue on trade policy. “We just signed with China,” the President declared vaguely. “We’re going to open up India in the China deal. We’re starting to open up China.” In the television studio, a panel of seasoned political observers was left stunned into a state of collective confusion. “Make it make sense,” MSNBC host Jonathan Capehart pleaded. “What’s he talking about?”

It is the single most important question one can ask of this administration. But what if the answer is that it isn’t supposed to make sense? What if the incoherence is not a bug, but a feature? The President’s baffling pronouncements are not isolated gaffes; they are the most visible symptom of a much deeper and more dangerous governing philosophy. It is a philosophy built on a foundation of profound policy ignorance, a cynical and amoral worldview, and, most critically, a systemic and intentional culture of secrecy designed to make accountability impossible. The defining characteristic of this administration is not simply chaos; it is the deliberate construction of an unaccountable shadow government, a government of ghosts.

The Incoherent Mind: A Leader Who Doesn’t Understand His Own Policies

To understand the dysfunction, one must begin with the policy itself—or the lack thereof. The President’s statements on trade reveal a mind that seems fundamentally incapable of grasping the basic mechanics of international economics. As former congressional staffer Brendan Buck explained, real trade deals are painstakingly complex, requiring years of line-by-line negotiations over tariffs, quotas, and regulations.

President Trump, by contrast, speaks of them with the simplistic, transactional bluster of a real estate developer haggling over a zoning variance. His entire philosophy appears to be built on a single, glaring falsehood: his belief that tariffs are a “win” for the country that imposes them. He celebrates the idea of slapping a 45% tariff on a nation’s goods as if it were a blow struck against a rival, seemingly oblivious to the elementary economic fact that it is his own country’s consumers and businesses who ultimately bear that cost. This is not a nuanced disagreement over economic theory; it is a fundamental failure to comprehend the basic facts of the policy he claims to be an expert in. This intellectual vacuum creates the space for a policy apparatus that is not just inconsistent but often nonsensical.

The “Nasty World” Doctrine: The Amorality Behind the Chaos

If policy incoherence is the “what,” then a deep, pervasive amorality is the “why.” In a stunning interview with a friendly Fox News host, the President revealed the cynical doctrine that underpins his entire approach to governance. After Maria Bartiromo listed a series of China’s malign activities—stealing intellectual property, spreading pathogens, fueling the fentanyl crisis—a typical leader would have seized the opportunity to condemn the adversary. President Trump’s response was a shocking, off-the-cuff admission of moral equivalency.

“You don’t think we do that to them?” he retorted. “So we do a lot of things… That’s the way the world works. It’s a nasty world.”

This is the “Nasty World” Doctrine, and it is the key to understanding the administration’s chaotic behavior. It is a worldview devoid of principles, alliances, or a belief in a rules-based international order. In this world, there are no partners, only temporary transactional counterparties. There are no shared values, only competing interests. Everyone is corrupt, everyone cheats, and the only objective is to win the immediate street fight. This amoral perspective is what makes the policy incoherence possible. If you don’t believe in long-term alliances or the value of trust, you don’t need coherent, long-term policies. Every interaction is a one-off shakedown. It is a philosophy that justifies any action by assuming the worst of all actors.

The Architecture of Unaccountability: “If It’s Not in Writing, It Didn’t Happen”

This brings us to the heart of the matter, the operational manual that allows this entire dysfunctional enterprise to function: a deliberate, creeping culture of secrecy designed to erase history in real-time. As a deep-dive investigation by the Washington Post revealed, a new doctrine has taken hold across the federal government, a philosophy best summarized by one horrified career staffer: “If it’s not in writing, it didn’t happen.”

This is the architecture of an unaccountable state. The reporting details a litany of tactics designed to create a government that leaves no fingerprints. Employees at the Department of Veterans Affairs are forced to sign nondisclosure agreements before even reviewing plans for personnel changes. Staff at the Administration for Children and Families were explicitly told not to respond in writing to panicked grant recipients to avoid creating a “paper trail.” And across dozens of agencies, communication has been systematically shifted to encrypted, auto-deleting messaging apps like Signal.

This systemic secrecy is the perfect incubator for the administration’s other dysfunctions. Incoherent policies can persist because they never have to be written down, debated, or defended in a formal memo that could be subject to oversight. Amoral backroom deals can be made without fear of public scrutiny or congressional investigation. And aggressive, incompetent officials like Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth are protected because their emotional meltdowns and personal attacks on respected journalists leave no official record.

The human cost of this doctrine of erasure is devastating. A lawyer at the Department of Homeland Security, unable to get the basic written details required to provide legal guidance on the administration’s plans, was forced to quit. His job had become impossible because he could no longer “ensure that we were in compliance with the law.” Staffers at NASA have resorted to holding sensitive conversations on the lawn, outside the building entirely. Government work is being slowed, honest discussion is being impeded, and the morale of the dedicated civil service is being systematically crushed under a cloud of paranoia and fear.

The Government of Ghosts

The second Trump administration is not merely chaotic; it is a government of ghosts. The incoherence, the amorality, and the incompetence are not bugs in the system; they are features, all made possible by a deliberately engineered architecture of unaccountability.

The ultimate goal of this system is to render democratic oversight impossible. A government that leaves no records cannot be investigated by Congress. It cannot be audited by the inspectors general. It cannot be held to account by future administrations or by the historians who will one day try to make sense of this moment. It is a government designed to be utterly and completely impervious to consequence.

We must return to the central, chilling quote. A government that operates on the principle that “if it’s not in writing, it didn’t happen” is not just secretive; it is a fundamental threat to the very idea of a constitutional republic. It is an attempt to create a form of power that is absolute precisely because it is ephemeral, a shadow that can act with impunity because it is determined to leave no history, no evidence, and no trace of its passing.