The lies and propaganda are nothing new. The name of the game has always been to build the constituency for your issue by hook or crook. Absolute truth was never a requirement, only majority opinion. And Joe Schmoe's tweets are absolutely a part of the power structure of the country. They are the drops of water that form the wave. I have worked on policy and advocacy in Washington and seen it all in motion. Individuals, groups, states, companies, professions and each of their dollars in a mad scramble. In all its chaos, I believe our system continues to work as intended.
I would much rather be called a pragmatist than a patriot.
Again, let me preface that I'm playing devil's advocate, but one could argue that constituency is also the name of the game in China: it may sound crazy to us over this side of the pond, but a lot of mainland chinese people actually support the CCP.
Both there and here, there's political work being done, each with their own ideas of what is best for their people. We can argue that their great firewall effort is oppressive for example, but on the other hand, they are probably more than happy the US has outsourced manufacturing to China to such an extensive degree. Both countries ostensibly "work as intended". I guess the end result of all that work still remains to be seen.
Another point that I think is worth pondering about is whether majority opinion is necessarily correct. The US response to covid, for example, has been all over the place, with places like San Francisco, CA being more strict and successful, to places like Minot, ND being hit really hard.
Like you, I'm also all for pragmatism, but I think things like the early perception of the epidemic in the west shows that sometimes the right course of action might sometimes fly in the face of public opinion.
I would much rather be called a pragmatist than a patriot.