As the campaign draws to a close, two classic Doonesbury cartoons have been regularly recurring to me, a visual analogue to the aural experience of a song I can't get out of my head. One of them was the pithiest summary of the differences between conservatives and liberals I've ever read; the other was a parody of college students acting as sheeple, uncritically accepting anything and everything their professor says, despite his assignment of writing an essay on independent thought.
This campaign has been emotionally charged for me (and others). I generally try to be positive on this blog, and yet have been finding myself increasingly indignant from the [literally] incredible smears and fears shamelessly promulgated by the campaigns and their supporters. I've started using my Twitter account to vent some of this irritation by simply and briefly noting some of the acts I find most egregious – occasionally sprinkled with sparks of hope.
The recent news that Gary Trudeau has created an "Obama Wins!" strip for Wednesday, based on his reading that "Nate Silver at Fivethirtyeight.com is now giving McCain a 3.7% chance of winning" (though my reading of Today's Polls, 10/31, says "McCain’s win percentage is down to 2.8 percent") leads me to delve into these strips and describe how I see them as framing the current political climate in America.
In the first strip [first published on July 13, 2003], two Doonesbury characters who play the role of commentators on the public radio show All Things Reconsidered, liberal Mark Slackmeyer and conservative Chase Talbot III (who also happen to be homosexual lovers, and eventually became a married couple), discuss the differences between liberals and conservatives. The strip starts out with Mark watching Fox News, where an announcer trumpets "Fox News: we report, you decide!", to which Mark muses "That has to be the most cynical slogan in the history of journalism" [personally, I find their other slogan, "Fair and Balanced" to be far more cynical].
In the main portion of the strip, Chase sums up the differences between liberals and conservatives: "[Y]ou liberals are hung up on fairness! You actually try to respect all points of view! But conservatives feel no need whatsoever to consider other views. We know we're right, so why bother? Because we have no tradition of tolerance, we're unencumbered by doubt! So we roll you guys every time!" When Mark replies "Actually, you make a good point…", Chase responds, "See! Only a loser would admit that!"
As I noted in my last blog post – and as is reflected in many of my recent "tweets" – what irks me the most this campaign season is the ignorant and incendiary statements made and actions taken by some of my fellow Americans. Revisiting Doonesbury's characterization of conservatives, I can see that many of these statements and actions reflect the core conservative values of righteousness, intolerance and certainty.
The willingness to consider alternative perspectives, think critically, and arrive at independent conclusions – hallmarks of liberalism, from Doonesbury's perspective – is the subject of the other Doonesbury strip that has been on / in my mind a lot lately. In this strip [first published on January 27, 1985], a professor is lecturing to students, who eagerly write down everything he says, without thinking about or challenging any of the increasingly provocative statements he makes:
- "… and in my view, Jefferson's defense of these basic rights lacked conviction. Okay, any discussion of what I've covered so far?" [no response]
- "Of course not, you're too busy getting it all down. Let me just add that personally, I believe the Bill of Rights to be a silly, inconsequential, recapitulation of truths already found in the Constitution. Any comment?" [no response]
- "No, scratch that! The Constitution itself should never have been written! It's a dangerous document! All power should rest with the executive! What do you think of that?!" [no response]
- "Jefferson was the antichrist! Democracy is fascism! Black is white! Night is day!" no response].
After the professor slumps over the podium, decrying "Teaching is dead", two students turn to each other; one says "Boy, this course is really getting interesting", to which the other replies "You said it, I didn't know half this stuff."
Now, this strip was originally printed on January 27, 1985, shortly after Rush Limbaugh started his conservative radio show in Sacramento, but a few years before it made its debut on WABC-AM radio in New York during the 1988 campaign. I don't know if Doonesbury knew about the show at that point, but his strip perfectly illustrates the legions of Limbaugh fans – sometimes referred to as dittoheads – who unquestioningly accept and repeat the hateful, righteous, intolerant views he regularly espouses on his show. The strip also has current relevance, given the confusion about the First Amendment recently exhibited by Sarah Palin (the conservative Republican vice presidential candidate), the evangelical furor over [allegations about] Obama being the antichrist that I mentioned in my last post, and the growing acknowledgment (by conservatives) that conservativism is increasingly anti-intellectual and some going so far as to claim that conservatives are addicted to misinformation.
Although I do not listen to Rush Limbaugh nor watch Fox News regularly, I have heard and seen many clips from a variety of their shows, especially this election season, and all of them have exhibited some combination of righteousness, intolerance and certainty … and none of them has exhibited anything that I would consider to be fair or balanced (though I want to note that I've never heard Rush refer to himself – or his show – as "fair and balanced" … and in fact, he has strenuously argued against the Fairness Doctrine).
Now to be fair, Fox News is counterbalanced, to some extent, by MSNBC, a network which seems to be increasingly liberal – the "antithesis of Fox News". As I've noted before, MSNBC's Keith Olbermann is my hero … or, at least, he was. I have to admit that as the campaign has worn on, it seems to be wearing down Olbermann, whose candid, direct and provocative style has become increasingly affected by righteous indignation … and contemptuousness. In his recent Special Comment on "It's Palin doin' the pallin'" (embedded in my last post), which is both a fabulous refutation of Palin's charges against Barack Obama "palling around with terrorists" and a strong indictment on her – and John McCain's – associations with people who might be considered terrorists, he condescendingly refers to "poor Sarah Palin", and uses a mocking tone in many of his other references to her … a tone I typically associate with Rush Limbaugh and the conservative pundits on Fox News.
In another dimension of "balance" between conservatives and liberals, I was very disturbed to see an article about a mannequin dressed up as Sarah Palin with a noose around its neck hung outside a house in West Hollywood this week, and then to read about an effigy of Barack Obama with a knife through its neck that was hung outside a house in Redondo Beach in response … all in the spirit of Halloween "fun". Both of these effigies have now been removed after protests, and I was heartened to see that one of the protesters against the Barama effigy was a local McCain campaign official, Pete Kesterson [I do not know whether any Obama campain officials officially protested against the Palin effigy]. I was also heartened to see a video of Daniel Zubairi, a Muslim McCain campaign official, and other supporters, confront other supporters who were promulgating misinformation about Obama being a socialist with an Islamic background (though, disheartened to later read that Zubairi was then asked not to talk about the incident by the McCain campaign).
Finally, I want to also note that I was heartened – and humored – to see John (and Cindy) McCain's appearances on Saturday Night Live last night. Although there was some booing of John McCain from the audience, I have to say that the skits he appeared in seemed to strike a fair balance between the serious issues McCain wants to emphasize in the campaign and a rather self-effacing, humorous look at some of the issues I would have expected that McCain would not have wanted to emphasize. I have to say that the effect – for me – was to re-humanize McCain a bit, after a long, downward spiral of increasing negativity coming from McCain, Palin and their supporters (including Fox News and Rush Limbaugh).
Although SNL is often criticized by conservatives for having a liberal bias, the show has recently been willing to poke fun at liberals (e.g., House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee Barney Frank in an interpretation of the recent bailout of the banking industry) as well as conservatives (e.g., their interpretation of Katie Couric's interview of Sarah Palin).
To end off on a light note, I'll embed a couple of these videos below.
Oops! I just discovered that last night's show included an SNL parody of Countdown with Keith Olbermann, played by Ben Affleck:
Comments
5 responses to “Conservativism, Liberalism and Independence”
Kia ora Joe,
It is interesting here in New Zealand, with our own elections taking place this Saturday, that there seems to be more interest in what is happening with the election in the states. I have found myself more than ever before explaining how the electoral system works, the different branches of the government, and the traditional relationships between areas of the states to particular political parties. For once my political science degree has been handy! Personally I think the way America is putting forth this campaign, both democrat and republican, and how elections will work in the future, is for the first time we are witnessing the true harnessing of the internet potential, blogs, sound bytes, You Tube, emails,instant communication, combined with the biased views of whatever news media we choose to watch, or newspapers we read. There is so much stuff to trawl through for those who wish to be really informed. Or those who wish to stick to one cult of personality source tune into Rush Limbaugh, or one might also write John Stewart for that matter. There has been a bit of vindictiveness on both sides from my far away vantage point – this is what we have made it become, maybe simply what it always has been.
In any case I have already voted and I hope to sit back and witness an historical moment in US and world history, and hopefully a saner path for our lives, and a brighter outlook for our children. Kia ora Joe.
Rangimarie,
Robb
Robb: thanks, as always, for sharing your perspective. especially given your political science background and current international / ex-pat context!
I recently discovered a joint Foreign Policy / Gallup international polling site If The World Could Vote, which shows results from 73 countries, representing 75% of the world’s population, to the question “Who would you personally like to see elected president of the United States?”. 24% said Barack Obama, 7% said John McCain. Surprisingly to me, 69% did not have an opinion, though the percentage of non-opinionated respondents appears highly correlated to the percentage of those who answered “no” to a second question: “Do you think who is elected makes a difference to this country or not?”. Unfortunately, New Zealand does not appear to be included in this poll, but results in nearby Australia are 64% for Obama and 14% for McCain (with 76% saying that the election does make a difference).
There are some interesting analyses about the big changes in U.S. politics and elections wrought by the Internet already appearing, e.g., Arianna Huffington’s post today declaring “the Internet” the winner in the 2008 election and her earlier post on the death of Rovian politics. An article in today’s NY Times about the ’08 Campaign: Sea Change for Politics as We Know It makes the optimistic observation that:
However, given the liberal-leaning source of that observation, and Doonesbury’s observations about the differences between liberals and conservatives, I am not so optimistic about whether or how much this skepticism, questioning and fact checking applies across the entire political spectrum.
I don’t envy your position in having to explain our political process – especially the electoral college – but I hope, at least, this year that we don’t have another example of discrepancies between the popular vote [count] and the electoral vote.
I’m glad that you’ve voted – I have, too – and hope that we both have cause for celebration regarding a saner path and brighter outlook in our, and our children’s, future!
Kia ora Joe,
I am so proud of my country right now I have tears in my eyes as I write this, and celebrate with a wee dram of fine scotch. We have lived through an historical day and time. To Obama I can only raise my glass and write, Kia Kaha – Be Strong, and to America, thank you for still being today a land of possibility for all. Cheers Joe, wish I was there to raise a toast with you my friend!
Aroha,
Robb
Robb: I share your joy, and have found myself nearly overcome with emotions at times since the historic event on Tuesday night. I’ve finally channeled some of this emotional energy into a new blog post – on hope and dreams trump fears and smears – and my hope, now, is that I can focus more on some of the other important work I want to do.
I, too, wish we could have shared a toast in the same time and space to celebrate this amazing event, but am glad we’ve been able to share some of our thoughts and feelings through the blogosphere. Cheers to you, too, my friend!
The Coffee Party: Political Conversation vs. Confrontation
I attended a Coffee Party kickoff meeting at SoulFood Books, Music and Organic Coffee House on Saturday. Approximately 40 people subdivided into smaller groups to discuss their hopes and fears about the state of the union. Amid the largely liberal…