Chainsaw Killers Don’t Care About Statistics

Suppose that you are in a locked room as a chainsaw-wielding maniac. You don’t have many options, unless of course you come up with the sort of Kobiyashi Maru-like outside-the-box thinking that the imminent threat of being carved into bloody chunks sometimes inspires. Suddenly, you have an inspiration: Distract the maniac by critiquing his choice of weapons!

“Hey, buddy! I can see that you’re big into your vivisection hobby. Maybe you should consider another tool from the shed that takes less effort, and certainly less gasoline? Or maybe – stay with me here – maybe something completely different, like a scalpel? Way less mess to clean up. If you care about cleaning up. That’s your call, you do your thing.”

This is an option, of course – an astoundingly stupid one. You’ve clearly misread the agenda of the psycho killer, when he’s salivating behind the hockey mask with thoughts of your imminent dismemberment. He’s calculating how many seconds will it take to end your life, and how can he make it as gruesome as possible. You’re waving a finger in his face. We know how this will end.

Unfortunately, we live in a time when too many people in public life are still misreading the situation. They’re like a teenager at Camp Carnage who, after seeing several of his friends murdered, thinks that the killer might be suffering a cramp by now, from all the labor-intensive murdering. Or maybe if someone were to just understand the deep sources of resentment behind all the chainsawing, the death-obsessed lunatic might have an epiphany, break down in tears, and find a different avocation.

Here’s the functional equivalent of finger-waving: Charles Fain Lehman’s article this week in The Atlantic, which points out that, yes, the District of Columbia has a genuine crime problem, but Trump and company are just addressing it the wrong way. Which is true, but also, to some degree, besides the point. Here’s a core section of Lehman’s article:

D.C.’s homicide rate in 2024—roughly 26.4 homicides for every 100,000 residents—is lower than in both 2023 and its peak in the 1990s. But, according to data compiled by the Council on Criminal Justice, it’s still nearly seven times higher than New York City’s rate (3.8 per 100,000). D.C.’s rate is also worse than that of Philadelphia, Atlanta, and even Chicago. In fact, it’s closer to that of infamously crime-ridden cities like Memphis and Detroit than it is to some other important metropoles’.

Again, there’s no argument to be had with Lehman’s facts. Even though the trend line has been pointing downward, there’s still a significant amount of violent crime in our nation’s capital. But the real question is, who is the audience for Lehman’s article? It’s not the thoughtful, principled people who agree that putting the National Guard on the streets and re-directing federal law enforcement agents from the critical work they were doing to playing beat cops is a terrible idea. It’s not the people who live in DC and already know the crime statistics, but still feel that crime is too high. And it’s definitely not the Trump Administration and its supporters, who have a very different agenda than reducing the violent crime rate by some percentage.

So what are the goals of the current regime? The ingredients of their toxic stew include some combination of (1) subverting both the military and law enforcement; (2) honing the subjugation of a city, using an easier target than Baltimore, Chicago, Los Angeles, Oakland, or New York; (3) demonizing Democratic politicians; (4) demonizing minorities; (5) claiming TV-friendly victories that don’t really amount to anything substantive; and (6) furthering the consolidation of power by demonstrating how feckless the laws and norms that used to govern this country have been at preventing authoritarianism.

The goals of some MAGA supporters and “influencers” are much the same, just stated more plainly. Here’s how one of those cheerleaders, Benny Johnson, described the need for drastic action:

And if you are a proud patriot and you love this country and you wish for it to be reflected honorably to the peoples of Earth, then Washington, DC must be swept clean.

I believe entire neighborhoods, probably, need to be emptied, need to be bulldozed. I believe that there are places that are so crime-ridden and so infested that you just need to — like you’re just gonna have to crack down. You’re going to have to do the job, and you’re going to have to get the crime out of Washington. That’s my personal experience.

If that’s not obviously racist enough for you, see the other sections of Johnson’s rhetorical projectile vomiting that blames DC problems on the civil rights era (“What happened to DC, especially during the civil rights period, was that protesters that were bussed up here stayed here.”), or points out his anxiety at being a white person living in a city with a poor black population that resents being an underclass (“It is one of the worst, most racist, narco states and welfare states imaginable. In that neighborhood that I would walk every single day, racial epithets were screamed at us. Rocks were thrown at us because we were white people.”).

Nobody should have rocks thrown at them, or fear for the lives of their children, whether they’re white, black, or any demographic. The solution, however, is not the ethnic cleansing of the nation’s capital. So what’s the ultimate goal here? Reducing crime by evicting the black population? Or evicting black people, based on exaggerated claims about violent crime, pinned to the citizens living in Anacostia and other poor black neighborhoods? Johnson’s statements make his intent as subtle as an avalanche.

Which again leads us back to Lehman’s article. Benny Johnson isn’t going to read it. Donald Trump, Stephen Miller, Pam Bondi, and Tom Homan aren’t going to read it. Even if they were forced to consume it, strapped to a chair with their eyes wired open, A Clockwork Orange-style, they wouldn’t care. Their primary goal isn’t to reduce the crime rate. Nor is the chainsaw killer’s goal to have a kumbaya moment with you.

The one possible use for Lehman’s article is to add to the slow drip, drip, drip of uncomfortable knowledge that someday might sway your MAGA-friendly or MAGA-curious friend or relative. That’s a slow process, much like the creation of stalagmites, but there’s still value to it. Meanwhile, however, we should be very clear about the agendas of those in power, their indifference to facts, and risks of assuming that they’re anything but who they are.