Why 'Draining the Swamp' Is a Lie

The political ‘outsider’ narrative is a con.

No one running for office is truly outside the system. Here’s why we need to stop chasing saviors and start focusing on policies and grassroots change.

There's something intoxicating about the notion that an outsider will come in and fix everything the establishment has royally screwed up.

But it's all bullshit.

The "political outsider" is a carefully crafted illusion, a sleight of hand designed to manipulate our emotions and short-circuit our critical thinking. It's a sales pitch, not a genuine political stance.

And we fall for it over and over again.

To mount a serious campaign for high office, you need vast sums of money.

You need connections to wealthy donors and influential power brokers. You need a sophisticated political machine to craft your message and get out the vote. Does any of that sound like the domain of a true outsider?

Of course not. But we convince ourselves otherwise because it's a comforting narrative. It's much easier to believe in a heroic outsider who will save us than to grapple with the complex, systemic issues that actually shape our political landscape.

Let's take a look at some so-called outsiders who've captured the public imagination. There's Donald Trump, the 6 time bankrupt businessman turned politician, promising to run government like a corporation. In 2015, he declared, "I'm really rich," as if that was all the qualification needed to lead a country. But Trump had been rubbing elbows with political elites for decades, donating to both sides of the aisle and floating presidential runs as far back as 1988.

Then we've got J.D. Vance, the self-styled champion of Appalachia. He sold himself as the voice of the working class, explaining Trump's appeal to rural white voters. But scratch the surface, and what do you find? A Yale Law grad who cut his teeth in Silicon Valley before deciding to play the outsider card.

These guys may not have traditional political resumes, but they're deeply embedded in systems of power and privilege. Trump's got his Wharton degree, Vance his Yale law diploma. They've spent years hobnobbing with the very elites they now claim to oppose.

The "outsider" narrative plays into our desire for simple solutions to fucked up problems. It strokes our ego by suggesting that we, the ordinary voters, are smarter than all those corrupt insiders. And perhaps most importantly, it absolves us of the responsibility to engage deeply with difficult political realities.

Even if these "outsiders" genuinely want to change things (and that's a big if), they quickly discover that governing is nothing like campaigning. The very system they railed against becomes their new reality. They find themselves constrained by institutional norms, beholden to party leadership, and subject to the same pressures and influences as any other politician.

So what happens to all those bold promises of transformation? They get watered down, compromised, or entirely abandoned, if there was ever any intention of addressing them in the first place. The "outsider" learns to play the insider game, because that's the only way to get anything done in our political system. And their supporters are left wondering what happened to their champion of change.

This cycle of hope and disappointment is corrosive to democracy. It breeds cynicism and apathy. It makes people lose faith in the very idea of political change. And ironically, it ends up strengthening the very establishment forces these outsiders claim to oppose.

The political establishment loves the outsider narrative. It gives voters a pressure release valve, a way to feel like they're rebelling against the system without actually threatening its fundamental structure.

The political system is designed to resist radical change. It's built on a foundation of checks and balances, compromise, and incremental progress. That can be frustrating as fuck when you want big, sweeping changes. But it's also what prevents wild swings in policy and protects minority rights.

An outsider who truly wants to change that system would need to dismantle the very institutions that give them power in the first place. Few have the genuine desire to do it, and even fewer have the ability.

Are we doomed to be perpetually suckered by the myth of the political outsider? Not necessarily. But we need to radically adjust our expectations and our approach to political engagement.

1. We need to stop looking for saviors. No single politician, no matter how charismatic or well-intentioned, can fundamentally transform our political system overnight.

2. We need to focus more on policies and less on personalities. Instead of getting swept up in the emotional appeal of an outsider candidate, we should be rigorously examining their actual proposals.

3. We need to engage more deeply with the political process at all levels. Change doesn't just happen in Washington, in Whitehall or in Canberra. It starts in city councils, school boards, and state legislatures.

4. We need to be honest with ourselves about the nature of political power. The idea that someone can be both a political outsider and a major party nominee for high office is inherently contradictory.

Realpolitik isn’t finding the perfect outsider to save us. It's millions of ordinary people getting involved, staying informed, and pushing for change in a thousand small ways. It's in building coalitions, finding common ground, and doing the shitty work of governance.

In politics, there are no true outsiders—only insiders of various stripes, some more established than others. Accepting this reality is the first step towards making real progress.

The myth of the political outsider is a comforting story, but that's all it is—a story. It's time we stopped letting this distract us. We have to stop falling for the outsider con and start taking our political power seriously. In a democracy, we're all insiders.

That’s the whole fucking point.

It's time we started owning it.