“Radical leftists, grifters, and lunatics” are the labels that Elon Musk uses to describe people who worked for the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) or anyone who dares to speak up in favor of an agency that for over sixty years has embodied the democratic values this country aspires to live by. Most Americans, indeed, have no clue what foreign aid is, which makes it easy for this Administration to weaponize it and demonize USAID’s work.
For the record, I worked at USAID for three years as a senior communications advisor in the Bureau for Global Health. I was hired as a contractor under the Obama Administration and stayed for about 18 months into the first Trump Administration. Before joining USAID, I worked with organizations that implemented USAID’s programs and delivered humanitarian assistance in far-flung places. For seven years, I lived in Nairobi, Kenya, where I saw first-hand the impact of U.S. foreign assistance programs.
USAID rally in Washington DC, one with Senator Cory Booker. Kelley Lynch
So yes, I suppose Musk could label me—and thousands of aid workers like me—as leftists, grifters, or lunatics. But here’s the difference between us and Musk: we choose to work in foreign aid because we believe that every person, regardless of wealth or geography, has the right to live in peace, with dignity, and the opportunities to reach their full human potential. That means access to education, healthcare, and protection from intimidation and harm.
Is this really a “radical” idea?
The executive order to reevaluate and realign foreign assistance was among the first ones signed by President Trump on his inauguration day. On January 24, a Stop-Work Order targeting USAID was issued by Secretary of State Rubio. What started as a 90-day freeze on U.S. foreign aid programs, pending a review process has turned into a permanent shutdown of an Agency and an entire sector where the U.S. was a leader for six decades. This move leaves a ready-made power vacuum for China to step in.
The latest figures, as reported by Devex, suggest that USAID’s workforce was cut from 10,000 to 294 in just a week. USAID staff stationed in U.S. embassies were told to return home immediately, having to quickly pack up homes and pull kids abruptly out of school. USAID’s website, which contained a ton of useful data, went offline almost immediately, and its X account was removed. This was a deliberate purge meant to eradicate what Musk and President Trump perceive to be a “Marxist ideology.”
The disinformation Musk has spread since vowing to annihilate USAID is astonishing. On X, he called the agency “ criminal ” and said it was “time for it to die,” boasting that he spent the weekend “ feeding USAID into the woodchipper.” What I find most alarming is that he and other tech plutocrats now control our digital information landscape, using “freedom of expression” as a pretext to eliminate fact-checkers, amplify falsehoods, and discredit many dedicated government workers.
Shutting down USAID does not just impact the federal workforce, but it is definitely taking a major hit. It is also affecting thousands of people working for USAID’s implementing partners. They are the backbone of USAID, the “boots-on-the-ground,” those who work with local governments and civil society to strengthen health systems, boost agricultural productivity, harness innovation for research, or train media professionals to discern facts from fiction – just to name some USAID-funded activities.
Most importantly, the looming USAID shutdown is wreaking havoc in communities worldwide. People who depend on life-saving medicines for HIV, TB, and malaria are being turned away from health clinics. Clinical trials are abruptly stopping in South Africa, leaving people with no access to monitoring or care. Afghan girls will lose access to secret schools, their only hope to get an education under Taliban rule. An aid worker friend warned me that without USAID support, Burmese journalists in Thailand would be forced back to Burma, risking their lives.
To make matters worse, efforts to contain disease outbreaks—like Ebola, Mpox, or Bird flu—are suddenly defunded, putting American lives at risk. Let me break this down for you. During the Zika outbreak, I traveled to Honduras and Jamaica to document U.S. taxpayer-funded programs. These initiatives supported mothers of babies born with congenital Zika syndrome, trained community leaders on basic sanitation measures, strengthened lab capacity for disease surveillance, and partnered with U.S. companies to harness innovation. Infectious diseases don’t respect borders. The only way to contain them is by collaborating with other countries and investing in preparedness.
Watch Samantha Power’s video interview with Stephen Colbert on why we need USAID:
- YouTubewww.youtube.com
Let’s be clear: poverty and despair fuel radicalization, posing a threat to U.S. national security. USAID’s work, and that of its implementing partners, are the “soft power” of American diplomacy. By helping others, we help ourselves. When I lived in East Africa and visited refugee camps in Kenya and Sudan, I often saw large bags of food aid bearing the USAID logo with the tagline “from the American people.” In rural pharmacies, I encountered stacked boxes of medicines with USAID branding. I used to cringe when I saw that logo. Other donors are not as eager to publicize their gifts. But American generosity has brought us goodwill on the ground despite our sometimes-harmful foreign policy.
Experts question the legality of shutting down USAID, an agency created by Congress in 1961 under President John F. Kennedy. Lawsuits are being filed, but President Trump, eager to appease his base, is pushing ahead. After all, this is an easy target that feeds the MAGA narrative on “massive” spending of American taxpayer’s money abroad. The fact is that Congress sets USAID budget priorities, and the U.S. only spends about 0.7% of its federal budget on foreign assistance, far less than other G7 countries.
At the end of the day, foreign aid and humanitarian assistance are about understanding that uplifting others is not a zero-sum game. This is the “radical” concept that seems to be so threatening to one of the wealthiest men in the world and to this administration.
Beatrice Spadacini is a freelance journalist for the Fulcrum. Spadacini writes about social justice and public health.
Children watch a July Fourth Parade along the Walkway of Heroes and Independence Avenue on July 04, 2026 in Tappan, New York.
The Great American Grumpfest
Our nation’s 250th birthday party didn’t feel especially patriotic and wasn’t as much fun as the 200th anniversary was.
President Trump, who did his best to co-opt our holiday for his personal aggrandizement, was a major reason. The party he threw in Washington, D.C., was crankier than uplifting, and less about celebrating our shared past and a promising future than about reminding us how far we have strayed from our founders’ plan to create a republic that future Americans would keep in good working order.
Credit Trump this much. He has a singular gift for picking at scabs that other politicians would rather ignore and pushing us into reckonings we don’t need.
The thing is, Americans have seen all this before. Sometimes the makeover we were encouraged to undertake was more conservative, sometimes more liberal. Whatever direction we were pushing, however, the reckoning we had in mind this time had to be more forthright and the conclusion more definitive than it was the last time.
Our current discontents, the ones behind the reckoning President Trump has been trying to inspire, are not trivial. Included among them are immigration, birthright citizenship, exploding healthcare costs, election rigging, a gag-inducing national debt, how we educate our children, too many genders, racial differences we can’t move past, a lopsided economy that favors more well-off Americans, and historic levels of political corruption and graft. Add to these the several foreign adventures he has pushed us into or is anxious to undertake, and you have the makings of a national headache the likes of which we haven’t had in half a century.
All the elbow-throwing and overheated rhetoric we’re using today have begun to look almost normal in all the ways that bickering neighbors and feuding family members appear normal. But they have also made us look mean-spirited and have portrayed our differences as irreconcilable. To ourselves, of course, but also to many people outside the United States who might be forgiven for turning their heads and not looking at the national car wreck we Americans show no interest in avoiding.
The good news, as I suggested above, is that Americans have had a great deal of practice dealing with challenges and national car wrecks like these.
This essay begins to lay out the reasons why.
By way of illustration, we have our seemingly insatiable demand for more bad news about race in America.
Sixty years after being released from the legal constrictions that bedeviled both white and black Americans, many white people have come to believe the color that used to make them unassailable is now a sign of a moral inferiority born of a racial animus they can never wash off. Many black people, on the other hand, are insisting that America is as hopelessly stacked against them as the formerly unassailable white people’s ancestors used to tell their black ones.
The result is that many people today are buying into racist nightmares and mumbo jumbo that their black and white ancestors worked hard and effectively to put in each other’s heads.
This might be dismissed as crazy behavior if it weren’t so important to rituals Americans have long used to express their deepest fears about each other while figuring out what move they can make that won’t end with their world crashing down on everybody’s head.
Unfortunately, the kind of cultural sleight of hand we have used to ramp up our racial differences has been appropriated by people who have many other cultural fears and unresolved differences with each other. Their clumsy but culturally prescribed missteps are making all these other issues look as irremediable as our racial problems.
A good place to start an answer to how we back away from ledges is Alexis de Tocqueville’s writing on early-19th-century American democracy. He had an optimistic take on Americans’ unscripted displays of public bravado, recrimination, and payback.
For him, these were occasions when people tried to mitigate the effects of the unfair hand they were dealing someone else or had themselves been dealt by behaving in ways quite at odds with how they would otherwise be expected to act. These inversions of what Tocqueville called “the natural order of conscience” presented themselves as a loud but culturally muted challenge to the hypocrisies that people had built into the world they’d made together.
One of his favorite illustrations of early-American hypocrisy involved slave masters sleeping with their less-than-worthy slaves. To the best of my knowledge, he didn’t pick up on all the ways that slaves messed with their owners. Their well-chronicled and quiet resistance showed that even severely ill-treated people can exercise more control over their lives than outsiders appreciate.
Be that as it may, such inversions of a people’s “natural order of conscience” make a good public show of them wrestling with demons they can’t or may not want to shake off, but in any case, are nowhere close to figuring out how to cast out.
Implicit in these disruptions was the discomforting idea that people might flip the entire script and turn the world on its head in more permanent ways. That kind of flipping worked out better for us in our revolution against England than in our Civil War. These events taught us the value of stepping back from historically unprecedented ledges.
Americans of late have been giving loud expression to a long list of things they don’t like about each other and the last makeover they started but didn’t finish a half-century ago. The outcome of our fights today will be as revealing as they are embarrassing to everyone who imagined they could recast our country in a way that privileged their favorite kind of Americans.
Their disappointment with the accommodations they strike will be palpable, but the middling results they achieve with all their pushing and shoving won’t be anything they can’t live with.
Anthropologists who have written about such moments in other cultures less “advanced” than our own show that people find ways to work around their seemingly irreconcilable differences without ever fully resolving them. Indeed, the patches and repairs people make have the unheralded effect of reinforcing rather than undermining the legitimacy of the practices and values they thought were fundamentally flawed.
For example…
White guilt and black pessimism do more good than putting cash into the pockets of professional shamers and handwringers. They give the rest of us who don’t feel guilty or powerless more time to make the world less racially unequal. Good news.
Regarding illegal immigration, the entrance requirements for future immigrants will remain stringent. Americans will applaud the continued detention and deportation of the few illegal immigrants who commit serious crimes. Good news.
All the people who came to the United States without being legally vetted and were locked up for a time will be released in numbers small enough to avoid serious media attention. Along with the several million other good people who snuck in but avoided capture, the former detainees will go to school, find gainful employment, pay their taxes, and stay out of trouble. Many will eventually become citizens. Good news.
Investigations into election tampering and Donald Trump’s 2020 presidential loss will come to an unceremonious conclusion the day after his second term ends. Many Americans will grumble about this, but there will also be some quiet partying, too. Good and bad news.
Congressional hearings into all the grifting accomplished by people tied to the Trump administration will end without anyone having to pay a dime back to the American taxpayers. Bad news, we’ll learn to live with.
New laws and regulations will be created in the hope that the kind of corruption practiced by President Trump will not be repeated for another 250 years. Good news, I hope we’ll live long enough to enjoy.
Show trials for people who allegedly vandalized the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool, if they happen, will get big television viewer ratings. Good news.
Trials for pardoned Capitol insurrectionists who committed serious crimes after their release should get more attention, but won’t. Bad news.
We will continue to hear nothing from most of the people who were pardoned for crimes they committed in the insurrection at the Capitol on January 6, 2021. They will keep their mouths shut and their heads down for the rest of their life. Good news.
The gold-gilded ornaments that Donald Trump had plastered all over the White House will be shipped to Mar-a-Lago, where the former president will sell them on eBay. Fun news.
American taxpayers end up paying for most of the new East Wing, the removal of the miniature gladiatorial arena that was built behind the White House, and the restoration of the White House rose garden. Bad news.
The Triumphal Arch was never built. Good news.
Trad wives and gay couples raise perfectly lovely children. Good but unsurprising news.
Trans men and women learn that most Americans can’t figure out who they used to be. No one gives a second thought to their use of “family bathrooms” or “unisex bathrooms” in public settings, businesses, and schools. Communities will sponsor athletic teams that have trans boys and girls just to show they can. Good news.
Budget deficits will be kicked down the road for someone else’s children to pay down. Bad news.
Federal agencies that had their budgets and employee ranks slashed during President Trump’s second term are getting some of the money and lost positions back. Good news.
Elite universities will buy their way out of DEI purgatory by competing for conservative scholars whose inflated salaries dwarf those of their liberal colleagues, who will think about suing their institutions for reverse discrimination but won’t be able to figure out who would pay for it or care. More fun news.
Okay. I’ve probably missed some ways that Americans will step back from the ledges they have been making noises about leaping off. But to the extent that my predictions pan out, the best and most important moral of the stories about us stepping away is this: everything we lost and took back, or had returned to us, will have happened without our government collapsing, civic traditions crumbling, or our people beating each other up.
The reason why is that the differences Americans have with each other really weren’t as irreconcilable as we made them out to be. The empty-sounding bromide that Americans have more that unites us than divides us turns out to be true, not just metaphorically but in fact.
Now that is really something to celebrate.
Daniel J. Monti (danieljmonti.com) is Professor of Sociology at Saint Louis University and the author of American Democracy and Disconsent: Liberalism and Illiberalism in Ferguson, Charlottesville, Black Lives Matter, and the Capitol Insurrection.