Glass Maze Every jumbled pile of person

Monsters, Unleashed

The good news is that, if you’re in the market for an ignorant xenophobic bigoted loudmouth, you can just stop by the nearest convenient McCain/Palin rally and pick one up. They won’t be hard to find.

The footage from inside these things is pretty entertaining — Palin giving the crowd that adorable smile of hers and telling us how goshdarn disappointed she is with Obama, what with all his doggone consorting with terrorists and whatnot; McCain wondering out loud just who this guy is (I mean, he’s probably not a terrorist nazi Arab baby-eater, but do we really know?). It’s pretty much like watching a schematic of the standard Rovian campaign strategy: direct lizard-brain appeals cloaked in anthemic perorations and cynical paeans to fear and prejudice. Except the McCain folks forgot about the cloaking part — they’ve more or less jettisoned the trappings of a political campaign in favor of a straight-up program of slander and character assassination.

But the footage from outside the rallies is even worse. Take a look at this:

Or this:

When a very large group of people is willing to say, on camera, that a man is a terrorist, a Muslim, and an Arab when it’s transparently obvious that he’s none of these things, then we have a serious problem. Because how can you reason with people who hold apparently incontrovertible beliefs that go against every known fact? And, more importantly, when did it become ok to talk about your bigotry and religious intolerance on camera?

But it’s important to understand that McCain isn’t creating this hatred. He’s unlocking it. There are monsters lurking in the baser natures of each of us, and there always will be. One of the purpose of a civilization is to suppress those monsters: because all you can do is shackle them, and hope they don’t find a way out.

It seems to me that the McCains are doing just the opposite: not removing the padlocks, exactly — because they don’t quite have the courage to be that bald-faced about it — but giving the monster the key and looking the other way.

This isn’t necessarily a Republican thing, of course — George Wallace was a Democrat — but it’s been more or less exclusively a Republican thing for the past twenty years. Bill Moyers did a show about rightwing talk radio that sampled some actual quotes from actual radio personalities. Like this one, from Glenn Beck:

I’m thinking about killing Michael Moore and I’m wondering if I could kill him myself, or if I would need to hire somebody to do it. No, I think I could. I think he could be looking me in the eye, you know, and I could just be choking the life out of him. Is this wrong?

Or this from Neal Boortz:

It’s Ramadan and Muslims in your workplace might be offended if they see you eating at your desk. Why? I guess it’s because Muslims don’t eat during the day during Ramadan. They fast during the day and eat at night. Sorta like cockroaches.

This is hate speech, pure and simple. It’s covered under the first amendment, but there’s no point in calling it anything but what it is: an attempt to stoke prejudice, hatred, and violence. This has been going on ever since the Bill Clinton had the temerity to become president; the McCain campaign’s innovation was to bring it up to the national level. The presidential level. And, in the process, unlock the worst of so many of their supporters. You don’t hear anything like this coming from the Democrats right now. It’s just sickening.

To his credit, McCain seems to be trying to walk this back. But I suspect it’s too late. It might help him politically, a little, but you can’t rebottle hatred. It’s going to trouble us for a while.

Bill Moyers tells this fable:

I was reminded of a story from folk lore about the tribal elder telling his grandson about the battle the old man was waging within himself. He said, “My son it is between two wolves. One is an evil wolf: anger, envy, sorrow, greed, self-pity, guilt, resentment, lies, false pride, superiority and ego. The other is the good wolf: joy, peace, love, hope, serenity, humility, generosity, truth, compassion and faith.” The boy took this in for a few minutes and then asked, “Which wolf won?” His grandfather answered, “The one I feed.”

McCain decided, at some point, which wolf he needed to feed to win this election. And I’m afraid that his decision, no matter what effect it has on the actual race, is going to have some seriously unpleasant effects on our culture, for many years to come.

First, the political disclaimer: I am a small-l libertarian (as in, not a member of the Libertarian party, but definitely a believer in smaller government), and do not support either of the two major party candidates for president.

That said, I must both agree and disagree with the commentary offered: I agree that (at least as written), the comment by Glenn Beck is quite hateful and mean-spirited. I add the “as written” qualification because it is possible that hearing it spoken might make it plain to the listener that he was kidding (I doubt it, but I just don’t have the facts to judge). I can’t quite agree that what Neal Boortz said qualifies as hate speech. Insulting, yes, and deeply so, but hate speech? I’m not quite as sure.

The problem here is one of “confirmation bias”, where we as humans tend to notice facts and stories that confirm our own biases, and to discount or ignore those that contradict them. As an example, I invite folks to listen with a critical ear to Air America (assuming you can find it on the airwaves in your locale). I have heard statements there (though I can’t currently cite any, as I listened on the way to or from work, where note-taking was not an option) by hosts like Al Franken or Thom Hartman talking about the Bush Crime Syndicate, or suggesting killing members of the current administration. I have heard Hollywood entertainers also make such remarks, so I just don’t think I can accept this as being solely, or even largely, a failing of the American political right wing.

I think the real problem is that somewhere in the last thirty years (or so), we lost the notion that a political opponent could just be wrong, plain and simple. Somewhere, all members of the political class adopted the idea that their opponents were not merely wrong, but in fact, totally evil. It is much easier to attack ones opponents when they are evil. There is no need to negotiate, to compromise, or to make deals with evil. Evil must be destroyed utterly. Much easier to take that attitude than the more complicated one that says, “You’re plans and proposals appear misguided to me, my dear opponent. Perhaps we can discuss them, and make some changes that will fix most of the flaws that I see, whilst keeping most of the benefits that you see.”

Listening to the morons on both ends of the soi-disant political spectrum is enough to get me disgusted with the whole process. Pfui!

Timothy — good points, all. I especially like what you’re saying about confirmation bias. It’s a tendency I see in myself, certainly. And no question that this kind of thing exists on both sides of the political spectrum. I think my point, such as it is, is that this is a matter of degree: right wing radio takes this natural tendency to new extremes. And the fact that it’s appearing (admittedly, in a much watered-down form) at presidential campaign events has to be an indication of extreme sickness in the right wing of the party.

But I’m probably using too broad a brush here. I don’t mean to discredit the ideology of the right wing of this country, or even most of its members. There are a bunch of conservative thinkers out there who I both disagree with and respect. The problem is that the movement’s standard-bearers seem to be leading it off a cliff. The lunatic fringe of conservatism has become the face it shows the world. That can’t be good.

I am not an american but i love this article.

You are so right. kinda sick eh?! you are a really good writer.

P