Federal Workers in a Climate of Fear and Paranoia
Federal workers across various government agencies are gripped by an unprecedented sense of fear and paranoia. In recent weeks, President Donald Trump and Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) have been systematically reshaping the federal bureaucracy, leaving employees uncertain about their roles and their future. Over a dozen federal workers, representing six different agencies including the State Department, Commerce Department, Defense Department, and USAID, have shared their experiences of working in an environment where trust has eroded and self-censorship is rampant. Many of these workers requested anonymity, fearing retaliation or further targeting by the administration. One federal employee succinctly captured the mood: “People are terrified, not for losing their jobs but for losing democracy.”
The profound transformation in the character of the federal government has left many workers feeling isolated and unable to speak freely. Colleagues who once collaborated openly now view each other with suspicion, unsure of who might report them for perceived infractions. This breakdown of trust has led to a pervasive culture of self-censorship, where even matters of national security are discussed with hesitation. One team working on climate change issues has taken extreme measures to protect their discussions, holding meetings in a "tech-sanitized" room where no phones, watches, or connected devices are allowed. This level of paranoia underscores the deep-seated fear that permeates the federal workforce under the Trump administration.
The Root of the Paralysis: Executive Orders and Internal Communications
The widespread fear and mistrust among federal workers stem not only from the abrupt terminations and dismantling of entire agencies but also from a series of executive orders and internal communications that have created a climate of uncertainty. One of the most striking examples is a diplomatic cable sent by Secretary of State Marco Rubio on January 21, the day after the inauguration. The cable, which was distributed to all State Department employees, outlined the administration’s priorities in an Orwellian tone, as one employee described it. Rubio accused the agency of promoting "censorship, suppression, and misinformation" targeting Americans, suggesting that such actions might have been motivated by "an excess of zeal or misguided attempts to control discourse." The cable went on to assert that the State Department would now prioritize the "truth" and defend Americans’ First Amendment rights, while terminating any programs that could be seen as censoring the American people.
This rhetoric has left federal workers deeply unsettled, as it implies that the administration is dictating what constitutes "truth" and is accusing employees of engaging in censorship. The ambiguity of Rubio’s accusations has only added to the confusion and fear. For instance, it remains unclear what specific "censorship" Rubio is referring to, and the State Department has declined to provide further clarification. Meanwhile, workers have observed a pattern of information suppression and censorship under the Trump administration, including the deletion of scientific data related to climate change and the removal of terms related to gender, sexuality, and diversity from official documents. One federal employee noted that colleagues have even considered replacing the word "including" with "such as" in reports, fearing that the former term might be too closely associated with "inclusion," a concept now viewed with suspicion by the administration.
Ideological Obedience and the Silencing of Workers
The changes underway in the federal government go beyond the typical shifts in priorities that accompany a transition of power. Instead, workers describe a concerted effort by the Trump administration to engineer ideological obedience. This has manifest in various ways, from the suppression of diversity and equity initiatives to the outright dismantling of programs focused on disinformation and propaganda. For example, the State Department’s Global Engagement Center, which was established under President Barack Obama to counter foreign disinformation, was shut down after the Republican-controlled House declined to renew its funding. Federal workers now feel reluctant to associate themselves with any work related to disinformation research, even as they acknowledge the growing threat posed by state-backed disinformation campaigns, particularly in the age of AI.
The climate of fear has also led to widespread self-censorship, particularly on issues related to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). On the third day of the Trump administration, the Office of Personnel Management instructed agency heads to email their employees a notice asking them to report one another for violations of President Trump’s executive order. This directive created a pervasive atmosphere of mistrust, as employees became reluctant to speak openly in meetings or even in casual conversations with colleagues. Pronouns were dropped from emails, pride flags were removed from desks, and references to Black History Month or promoting women in STEM were excised from office discussions. Several workers believe that this was the administration’s intention all along: to create a culture of chaos, fear, and confusion, where employees are forced to question what is safe to say, to whom, and how.
The Taboo Topics: Climate Change and Medical Data
The self-censorship has extended to other sensitive topics, particularly climate change and medical data. At the Department of Defense, staffers received an email in late January explicitly stating that all activities related to diversity, equity, and inclusion, as well as climate change and transgender policies, were to be suspended. This directive has led some workers to reframe climate-related policy documents and research in more administration-friendly terms, such as focusing on energy and environmental issues that align with Trump’s priorities, like oil, natural gas, and coal. Others have resorted to communicating via encrypted messaging apps like Signal, rather than email, to discuss climate-related issues. One federal worker lamented, “All I have ever wanted to do was help the American people become more resilient to climate change. Now I am being treated like a criminal.”
Similarly, federal workers responsible for collecting health and medical data are grappling with whether to continue recording information about transgender patients or pregnancies and abortions, given the administration’s hostile stance on these issues. The potential consequences of this self-censorship are far-reaching, as the absence of such data could limit critical research on drug effects during pregnancy, gender-based health disparities, and other public health issues. One employee noted that while federal workers have long asked patients about illegal activities, such as illicit drug use, this feels different: “It’s not just because it’s illegal in some places,” the employee said, referring to abortions. “It’s because it’s political.”
Orwellian Echoes: The Erosion of Trust and Institutions
The experiences of federal workers under the Trump administration have drawn comparisons to George Orwell’s 1984, with its portrayal of a totalitarian regime where truth is manipulated and dissent is suppressed. Workers have referenced concepts like doublethink, Newspeak, and the Ministry of Truth to describe the ideological conformity being enforced within the government. Nowhere is this more evident than in the rapid dismantlement of USAID, which has been publicly vilified by Musk as a “criminal organization.” The agency’s staff were caught off guard by the speed and scope of the changes, and many now regret not sounding the alarm sooner. Under the new regime, employees have become increasingly afraid to communicate with one another, even going so far as to avoid connecting their personal devices to government Wi-Fi for fear of surveillance. As one terminated USAID worker put it, “USAID is a canary in a coal mine. It felt like being hunted by your own government.”
The broader implications of this erosion of trust and institutional integrity are dire. Federal workers are not merely casualties of a political transition; they are the backbone of a functional democracy, and their paralysis undermines the government’s ability to serve the public interest. As Russell Vought, the director of the Office of Management and Budget and architect of Project 2025, has openly stated, the administration’s goal is to "traumatically affect" federal employees, making them feel like villains so that they no longer want to come to work. If this strategy succeeds, it will not only hobble the government’s ability to function but also erode the foundations of democracy itself.
