A meditation on a quiet ideological drift
Governments rarely wake up one morning and declare their core mission invalid. They do not throw away their founding charters in a single dramatic gesture. They drift. Slowly at first. Then steadily. Then all at once, the mission has inverted — and the institution, once designed to serve the people, becomes an instrument to justify withholding service in the name of “the people.”
Thus we arrive at a provocative hypothesis:
Could the U.S. government — specifically the Department of Health and Human Services — eventually conclude that providing health and human services is un-American?
At first glance, it sounds absurd, even unthinkable. Yet history is crowded with ideas once unthinkable becoming orthodoxy in the glow of nationalism, fear, austerity, or ideology.
There is a playbook for this inversion. And we have seen its opening chapters.
The Ideological Seed: Americanism Defined by Struggle
America’s mythos is rooted in self-reliance. John Wayne didn’t ask for a public option. The frontier settler did not file reimbursement claims. The immigrant who arrived with nothing built a life, or so our national fables say, solely through grit and individual resolve.
That myth — powerful, romantic, and deeply incomplete — feeds a modern politics where help itself becomes suspicious.
If hardship builds character, then preventing hardship… destroys it.
If struggle made us strong, then relieving struggle… makes us weak.
If independence is patriotic, then interdependence… must be treasonous.
It is not hard to imagine a bureaucrat, years from now, standing at a podium and solemnly declaring:
“America must remain strong. We must protect citizens’ independence. Federal assistance has become a threat to the American spirit.”
The applause would be thunderous. This is how a mission inverts: not through malice, but through the mistaken sanctification of suffering.
The Bureaucratic Path to Paradox
No one in a bureaucracy ever says “let’s destroy what we do.” Instead, they say:
We must avoid dependency
We must incentivize responsibility
We must reduce moral hazard
We must protect fiscal sustainability
We must strengthen American values
Each statement sounds prudent. Patriotic. Rational. Responsible.
But the outcome?
Gradually, the purpose shifts from providing help to preventing help.
The role evolves from supporter to gatekeeper to disciplinarian.
Soon, the institution tasked with helping Americans becomes the institution that polices Americans’ worthiness to be helped — and then punishes them for needing help at all.
This is not theoretical. We already see glimpses:
Healthcare tied to employment, as though illness should require economic productivity to justify survival.
Food assistance policed for fraud as if fraud, not hunger, were the crisis.
Disability portrayed as grift rather than misfortune.
Addiction treated as failure instead of disease.
Homelessness met with bans, fencing, hostility, and criminalization rather than shelter or treatment.
We have not crossed the line — but we have mapped the route.
The Patriotism of Withholding
To justify retreat, the rhetoric must invert virtue itself.
Help becomes harm.
Care becomes coercion.
Protection becomes parasitism.
And so the state — in an act cloaked in patriotic earnestness — may come to argue:
“We are defending liberty by refusing to interfere in your life.”
The cruelest policies are always delivered with pure intentions. The most damaging ideologies are most dangerous when carried by true believers. Bureaucratic harm often arrives smiling, speaking of dignity, strength, and the sacred duty to defend the nation’s moral fiber.
The logic goes like this:
- Government help weakens character
- Weak citizens weaken the nation
- Therefore, the patriotic thing — the American thing — is to stop helping
At that moment, HHS stops serving and becomes an ideological custodian, enforcing resilience through deprivation.
Freedom as a Pretext for Abandonment
There is a profound difference between freedom from interference and freedom to live with dignity.
Yet the rhetoric of the former often masquerades as the latter.
We hear it in phrases like:
“Government shouldn’t get between you and your doctor”
“Don’t let Washington dictate local values”
“Americans should stand on their own two feet”
“Taxpayers shouldn’t subsidize the irresponsible”
These lines sound empowering. They poll well. They feel righteous.
But strip away the rhetoric and they amount to:
You are on your own. If you fall, rise unaided or don’t rise at all.
This is not rugged individualism.
It is institutional abandonment repackaged as liberty.
And Americans — conditioned to mistrust institutions and revere individual grit — may cheer the very system that withdraws the supports their grandparents built.
The Historical Warning
Nations have done this before.
Britain dismantled poor relief systems in the name of discipline and morality centuries ago.
Industrial economies have justified brutal labor conditions as character-building.
Modern austerity movements in Europe called social protections “moral hazards.”
Empires have framed suffering as patriotic duty.
The Soviet Union insisted hardship proved loyalty.
China during the Cultural Revolution equated sacrifice with national purity.
Even Rome — at its decline — praised virtue while dismantling civic support structures.
When a society argues that caring for its people is a threat to its greatness, collapse is not far behind. Not because help was given, but because help was withdrawn.
What It Means to Be American
This hypothesis — that the government might one day deem human services un-American — is really a question:
Is American identity defined by helping one another or surviving alone?
Our founding documents reference life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness — not austerity, atomization, and stoicism unto death.
We built:
public schools
public sanitation
public roads
public hospitals
Social Security
Medicare
Medicaid
CHIP
FEMA
NIH
CDC
Not because we are weak — but because strong nations invest in their people.
The Marshall Plan rebuilt Europe not through lectures on bootstraps, but through funding, infrastructure, medicine, and housing.
Greatness was measured in shared strength, not isolated struggle.
The Point of No Return
If the day comes when the Department of Health and Human Services — created to safeguard American well-being — declares its mission un-American, the transformation will not be sudden.
It will be justified.
Principled.
Patriotic.
Wrapped in flags and scripture and data spreadsheets.
But the result will be unmistakable:
A nation that once sought to improve life will instead demand its citizens endure it.
At that point, we will not have lost our programs.
We will have lost our purpose.
Final Thought
The danger is not that the government will fail to help.
Governments fail all the time.
The danger is that one day it will stop trying — and call that decision freedom.
A nation that forgets how to care for its people is not proving its strength.
It is announcing its decline.
And the most tragic part?
It will believe, with absolute conviction, that it is defending American greatness — even as it abandons the very people whose welfare defines that greatness.
The Inner Monologue 
Leave a comment