Playing With Fire

Georgia congressman and Civil Rights leader John Lewis, reacting to the increasingly incendiary atmosphere at McCain-Palin campaign rallies, condemned the GOP for using tactics that are creating a mood not unlike the one created by George Wallace, the former segregationist governor and presidential candidate. Lewis accused the Republicans of “sowing the seeds of hatred and division,” and warned the McCain campaign that they are “playing with fire:”

Huffington Post | Nicholas Graham | October 11, 2008

He’s right. The Huffington Post has a great collection of stories and videos on the pattern of callousness and hints of violence. I think many of us have had this question in the back of our mind since Obama launched his campaign: when will the more overt racist attacks start, and what form will they take? Now we seem to have our answer. In an early stumble, Obama seemed to see this coming, of course.

In many ways the Midwest, where I live, is ideal; no long commutes or pollution, nice people. The Midwest is also a culture of white racial enclaves, small towns and regions that have maintained monoculturalism against all odds. It can be a very harsh environment for young working class families. Many small towns have long ago emptied out, ghost towns created by corporate, large scale farming and globalization; it’s not just apple pie and ice cream, it’s crank and militias.

This seems to be the natural environment for the anger and resentment that Palin taps into at her rallies, and it’s not surprising that it has taken on this flavor of a strange xenophobic racism. The foreigner, the Arab, and the urban, sophisticated black are all wrapped up into this neat, creepy fear-mongering package. The real American terrorists, of course, were the lynch mobs that Palin toys with so dangerously.

Republican (Empty) Rhetoric

In recent elections, the Republican hate word has been “liberal,” or “Massachusetts,” or “Gore.” In this election, it has increasingly been “words.” Barack Obama has been denounced again and again as a privileged wordsmith, a man of mere words who has “authored” two books (to use Sarah Palin’s verb), and done little else. The leathery extremist Phyllis Schlafly had this to say, at the Republican Convention, about Palin: “I like her because she’s a woman who’s worked with her hands, which Barack Obama never did, he was just an élitist who worked with words.” The fresher-faced extremist Rick Santorum, a former Republican senator, called Obama “just a person of words,” adding, “Words are everything to him.”

by James Wood, New Yorker, October 13, 2008

We all have this tendancy to say, “politicians are politicians,” which means, roughly, that politicians as a class will generally say anything if they think that it will get them elected. We like to think, too, that this is a non-partisan complaint pointed at Democrats as much as at Republicans. To some extent, that is true, but I think this election offers a startling contrast.

It’s true that both sides are getting ugly, but the McCain side has begun to draw on a deep well of the ugliest sorts of political rhetoric, actually stooping to accusing Obama of associating with terrorists, if not being one himself. McCain’s crowds are yelling bloody murder, literally, and the candidate is either unaware, or unwilling to challenge them.

I think Wood might have a good explanation for the deeper sources of the McCain campaign’s slide into emotionally charged, even violent rhetoric and xenophobia. (They’ve starting using Obama’s middle name at rallies again, as if to suggest that he is “foreign,” or alien in some way.) For one thing, as I heard a Pundit say the other night, it’s an old political adage: if you don’t have ideas, pick a fight.

Even more profoundly, though, McCain has had to attack the very idea of logic, of words and reasoning and debate, since the start of his national campaign. If people think their way to the election, rather react, he’s lost. That means his rhetoric has to be as dramatically Orwellian as any I have every seen, and as utterly empty. It’s all fists in the air and meaningless chants: drill baby drill!

Sarah Palin’s (Empty) Rhetorical Style

The heart of Sarah Palin's appeal is —

Wait, did you see that? There! She did it again: wrinkled up her nose in a way that either looks like a sneer or is adorably reminiscent of Samantha from "Bewitched." Depending on whom you talk to.

Style: Examining Sarah Palin’s Rhetorical Style. Libby Copeland, Washington Post

Governor Palin reminds me of a boss I once had. He was good looking, always ready with a smile, and on the surface supportive and helpful. He seemed the ideal academic administrator. Over the course of several years, however, the bright surface seemed more and more like a flashing mirror distracting you from his real goals. He demanded total control over his little kingdom.

Eventually, I came to realize that he was a profoundly immoral human being; a particular type of tyrant that is all too common. I don’t think you can call him manipulative in any substantive sense, because the link between appearance, the public face, and the private power, the authoritarian control, is so close. It’s what success looked and felt like to him: to be powerful is to fool people.

He did some awful things, too, ruining lives in both petty and serious ways and undermining the ability of teachers to do their jobs. He could never be held responsible, though, because on the one hand he had that smiling face, and on the other hand he had a gun under his coat and he was not afraid to use it. We all thought he would certainly become a dean.

My partner is livid that Palin is the “type” that now represents successful women– successful politics– to so many. It particularly galls her that so few seem to even want to try to see behind the flashing mirrors; it’s as if the substance is irrelevant, and nothing matters but the performance. We point out the wink, but then, in effect, we wink in return: isn’t that adorable!

It’s exactly like my old boss. In fact, I think we in academia have had a hand in promoting a way of thinking, so well represented by the Washington Post article, that empties out the content of rhetorical analysis. Maybe it’s because it’s so important to a successful career in the American university. There’s ugliness behind that cute little nose wrinkle, though, and we ignore it at our peril.