The TikTok Doctrine
How Pete Hegseth Turned State Violence Into Social Media Entertainment
You know this is a spectacle, right? A show. That’s what it is. A performance for social media. With blood.
Pete Hegseth just ordered the twenty-first strike on a suspected drug boat. Three more bodies. Another video posted to X showing a vessel bursting into flames. “Three male narco-terrorists” dead, the military announces. No trial. No evidence presented. No due process. Just boats exploding on camera and bodies labeled terrorists because the Department of Defense says so.
This is governance as content creation. TikTok foreign policy. Snackable clips of military strikes designed for engagement metrics while everything that actually matters falls apart around us.
Blowing up drug-running boats in the Caribbean isn’t going to stop the flow of drugs into America. Everyone knows this. The drugs will keep coming—they always do, they always have. Different boats, different routes, same product reaching the same streets. This isn’t policy designed to solve problems. This is spectacle designed to produce feelings. The feeling that someone strong is doing strong things. The feeling that enemies are being punished. The feeling that something is being done even as nothing actually changes.
But it is illegal. Under United States law and international law. The rule of law is being killed alongside these men in these boats. Admiral Alvin Holsey—the four-star admiral overseeing these operations—resigned because the boats weren’t showing immediate hostile intent. Colombia says we’re killing their fishermen. Ecuador released survivors for lack of evidence. Congress hasn’t authorized any of this. The Constitution hasn’t been consulted. Just Hegseth ordering strikes and posting videos while the legal framework that makes civilization possible burns alongside the boats.
So they can post it on X. So they can show you what an amazing job they’re doing. While your prices rise. While the Epstein files document twenty thousand pages of connections that cannot be explained away. While the artificial intelligence market bubble exhausts its last breaths of irrational exuberance. While American citizens are illegally detained by masked federal agents and some have been shot. This is a show for social media.
Twenty-one strikes now. How many bodies for the algorithm? How many “narco-terrorists” killed without trial before someone asks to see evidence? How many boats exploding on camera before Congress remembers it’s supposed to authorize military action? The carrier arrives tomorrow. Fifteen thousand troops ready. And still no authorization. Still no debate. Just Trump saying he’s “sort of made up my mind” while Hegseth produces content.
This is what authoritarian governance looks like in the age of engagement metrics. The policy is the spectacle. The spectacle is the policy. You’re not supposed to ask whether it works. You’re supposed to watch the boats explode and feel like winning is happening. You’re supposed to see bodies labeled terrorists and feel safer. You’re supposed to consume the content and move on to the next post before you have time to ask: Where’s the evidence? Where’s the legal authority? Where’s Congress? What is this actually accomplishing besides producing clips for social media?
The boats keep exploding. The videos keep posting. The body count keeps rising. And while you watch the performance, Trump’s Epstein connections sit in those twenty thousand pages. While you debate whether the targets were really terrorists, American citizens are detained without warrants. While you argue about drugs, the Constitution collects dust and admirals resign in protest and the rule of law dies with every strike that produces another video for posting.
This is governance for the algorithm. Bodies for engagement. Military action as content strategy. Twenty-one strikes. The carrier arrives tomorrow. Eighty people dead in undeclared war. Congress silent. The Constitution ignored. Admirals resigning. The rule of law burning.
For fucking TikTok.
Go Deeper into the Circus
A Short, Victorious War
The USS Gerald R. Ford—the world’s largest aircraft carrier—arrived in the Caribbean this weekend. Eighty people are dead from undeclared strikes. Fifteen thousand service members stand ready for war. A four-star admiral has resigned in apparent protest. And the President of the United States, speaking casually aboard Air Force One like a man deciding w…
The Modern American Conservative Movement is Bankrupt and Anti-American
The modern American conservative movement claims the mantle of the Founders while systematically rejecting everything the Founders built. This is not philosophical tension or good-faith disagreement about constitutional interpretation. This is straightforward fraud—claiming reverence for principles you abandon t…
The GOP exists solely to manufacture lie-filled fascist propaganda at this point. That’s literally the only thing it does.
Somewhat "questionable" at best. Though I just asked Google's AI, Gemini, about Britain's policy on pirates in the 19th & 20th centuries. Part of its answer:
Gemini: "Early 19th Century: Aggressive Naval Campaigns: The Royal Navy, the world's most powerful fleet, was primarily responsible for actively hunting and engaging pirate vessels, notably in the Caribbean and later in Southeast Asia."
https://www.google.com/search?q=what+was+britain%27s+policy+on+pirates%2C+particularly+in+the+1800s+%26+1900s%3F&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&udm=50&aep=48&cud=0&qsubts=1763344968142&mstk=AUtExfCPRwAAbtoM2a3ynL-To2S9LYc9ecG-rlOmmGR61yTxy28ZqhlwB06YMLLjKoRX8iAhFdgll713uqpvVlrwEIBhQ3UBQgSo0DucnhXjhSl7-9-F1KMSL2u1-t1hZHjb1GhhquNjbrFUOFHgY1wrZCNre-N6ayZApJCZ0AU7n2IxzSbWkt9Z0bN8ky6V4MCTyaacq7novOjgzsRl--7P03oEbg5MFGOKhjwMSecPgueHmqyOd8tUxvS6Y-VkdaWP7jU7OlZ59xx-bYfQ0xtUstHup19PjAhjReQ&csuir=1&mtid=b4IaacKtL4z40PEP_tKYkA0
Do note the "actively hunting & engaging". Part of the ongoing drug wars -- largely fueled by demand from the American public.
I also remember bits about the "Opium Wars" -- Britain and, to a lesser extent, the US forcing China to allow the importation of opium:
Wikipedia: The First Opium War was fought from 1839 to 1842 between China and the British Empire. It was triggered by the Qing government's campaign to enforce its prohibition of opium, which included destroying opium stocks owned by British merchants and the British East India Company. The British government responded by sending a naval expedition to force the Chinese government to pay reparations and allow the opium trade.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opium_Wars
Some reason to argue that the shoe is on the other foot, not that either state was admirable.