Looking at, listening to the GOP presidential hopefuls on the campaign trail is not encouraging. Lately they've become so over the top crazy, even the national media is starting to notice. More to the point, they've started to wonder why Carson and Trump are still at the top of the polls, while 'normal' front runners like Jeb! are sinking - and they're still hoping Rubio will suddenly emerge from the pack as a 'safe' establishment candidate. (Ed Kilgore says good luck with that idea.)
What's going on that so puzzles the media is a steadfast refusal to look at some really alarming trends among a significant fraction of Americans, who've been fed a steady diet of toxic memes by conservative media and right wing con men for decades. The pot has been bubbling away, and it just might be getting ready to boil over. An NPR look at some NH voters Monday 10-26-15 should be sounding alarms.
More below the Orange Omnilepticon.
All Things Considered talked to some New Hampshire voters on the right side of the political spectrum to try to find out why Carson and Trump seem to have so much appeal. The transcript gives some idea of their thinking, but you really need to hear them speak in the audio stream to grasp just how their minds work.
We call ourselves the reality-based community, but it's necessary to remember everyone thinks their view of the world is based on reality. What these people are saying - and what they are asking for - makes every kind of sense to them, and if they don't get it, they're going to continue to be angry. We ignore them and dismiss them at our peril. One of the biggest traps progressives fall into is wondering why people continually vote against their own interests. The answer is, they don't. They vote for reasons that make sense in their world view, not ours - and they think we're even more deluded.
Here's a few snips from the NPR piece to give a sampling of the world view we're dealing with here.
...I asked Jerry DeLemus what he thinks when he watches C-SPAN and two members of Congress of opposite parties address each other politely, ceremoniously. To Jerry, it is not civility. It's a fake. It's lying.
J. DELEMUS: They go, oh, my good friend, my colleague, whatever. Well, half of us would like to punch the guy in the mouth ourselves. You know, we're going, you're not doing what you're supposed to do. The other guy's lying, and you know it. Call him on it.
SIEGEL: As Jerry sees it, politicians go to Washington and become cozily corrupted. So it's time for an anti-politician.
SNIP
...CHEVALIER: I'm very attracted to the outsiders, obviously mostly to Ben Carson.
SIEGEL: Why?
CHEVALIER: Well, he just strikes me as being the Pied Piper. I was attracted to him immediately when I saw the prayer breakfast.
SIEGEL: That was Carson's speech to a national prayer breakfast in 2013. With President Obama nearby on the dais, Carson decried political correctness, moral decay and the national debt, and he proposed a system of health savings accounts presumably to replace the Affordable Care Act.
CHEVALIER: He's a brilliant man. I think he is self-educated, and I think he's smart enough to surround himself with the people he needs. It's not a one-man show or a one-woman show. It is - you need a team.
SNIP
...SIEGEL: Jim Boyle thinks the Republican field is deep in talent. One candidate he's especially impressed with is Carly Fiorina.
BOYLE: Very impressed.
SIEGEL: Why?
BOYLE: She's really smart. She's got a lot of drive. She knows what she wants, and she knows why she wants it. I think she's got leadership capabilities. She has a gift, obviously, to talk about things that a lot of people don't like to talk about.
SIEGEL: Like defunding Planned Parenthood. Boyle hasn't completely settled on a favoritem but he did host an event at the dealership for Fiorina.
BOYLE: I support her very much, obviously. I think she's got some really strong capability there. She's really smart.
SIEGEL: One question about Carly Fiorina that's been raised, along with Donald Trump and Ben Carson, is, they've never been in government. They've never been elected to anything. Do they have any idea of how one legislates or how one implements policy beyond business? How do you sort that one out? Is that a plus that she's never been involved in any kind of elective office?
BOYLE: Well, I think, if anything, it's certainly not a minus. It could be a plus because she knows what it's like to deal with these bureaucrats, as does Donald Trump. He goes to planning board meetings. Talk to Carson - same deal.
emphasis added
What you hear is the sound of people looking for a strong leader to organize their world for them, give them a center to focus on, and protect them from their enemies, and ultimately destroy those enemies. They're not looking for compromise - they want confrontation. They see what they want to see and they hear what they want to hear, as the rock man said. These are not people who believe in the democratic process or the ambiguities of a tolerant society. At heart, they're absolutists, the followers authoritarian movements are built on.
Sara Robinson's excellent series on Authoritarians is critical to understanding what's going on here. Drawing from the work of Bob Altemeyer and John Dean, here's what she has to say about Authoritarian Followers. I'm quoting a large chunk of it because it explains so much that seems to be a mystery to the mainstream media and pundits.
While the [authoritarian] high-SDO leaders are defined by Dean as dominating, opposed to equality, desirous of personal power, and amoral, right-wing authoritarian followers have a different but very complementary set of motivations. The three core traits that define them are:
1. Submission to authority. "These people accept almost without question the statements and actions of established authorities, and comply with such instructions without further ado" writes Dean. "[They] are intolerant of criticism of their authorities, because they believe the authority is unassailably correct. Rather than feeling vulnerable in the presence of powerful authorities, they feel safer. For example, they are not troubled by government surveillance of citizens because they think only wrongdoers need to be concerned by such intrusions. Still, their submission to authority is not blind or automatic; [they] believe there are proper and improper authorities…and their decision to submit is shaped by whether a particular authority is compatible with their views."
2. Aggressive support of authority. Right-wing followers do not hesitate to inflict physical, psychological, financial, social, or other forms of harm on those they see as threatening the legitimacy of their belief system and their chosen authority figure. This includes anyone they see as being too different from their norm (like gays or racial minorities). It's also what drives their extremely punitive attitude toward discipline and justice. Notes Dean: "Authoritarian aggression is fueled by fear and encouraged by a remarkable self-righteousness, which frees aggressive impulses."
3. Conventionality. Right-wing authoritarian followers prefer to see the world in stark black-and-white. They conform closely with the rules defined for them by their authorities, and do not stray far from their own communities. This extreme, unquestioning conformity makes them insular, fearful, hostile to new information, uncritical of received wisdom, and able to accept vast contradictions without perceiving the inherent hypocrisy.
Conformity also feeds their sense of themselves as more moral and righteous than others -- a perception that's usually buttressed by the use of magical absolution techniques that they use to "evaporate guilt," in Dean's words. Because they confessed, or are saved, or were just following orders, they can commit heinous crimes and still retain a serene conscience and sense that they are "righteous people." On the other hand, when it comes to outsiders, there is no absolution. Their memory for even minor transgressions is nothing short of elephantine (as Bill Clinton knows all too well).
Dean lists other traits of right-wing authoritarian followers, most of which flow directly from the three core traits above:
Both men and women
Highly religious
Moderate to little education
Trust untrustworthy authorities
Prejudiced (particularly against homosexuals, women, and followers of religions other than their own)
Mean-spirited
Narrow-minded
Intolerant
Bullying
Zealous
Dogmatic
Uncritical toward chosen authority
Hypocritical
Inconsistent and contradictory
Prone to panic easily
Highly self-righteous
Moralistic
Strict disciplinarian
Severely punitive
Demands loyalty and returns it
Little self-awareness
Usually politically conservative/Republican
emphasis added
These people believe in magic. They believe a 'strong leader' can make things happen , "because they know how to get things done" etc. etc. They have no patience for democracy when it doesn't give them what they want, and little empathy for anyone they regard as not one of them. They've been told for years that America is going to Hell - 911 and the election of a black president were huge shocks to them. They want to believe America is still exceptional - in a white, Christian way of course. They see multiculturalism as an abomination. They go with the gut, not the brain - which is why so many of their views and wishes simply don't add up.
There are always people like that in any population, but what makes this situation unprecedented is the large number of authoritarian leader wanna-be's and the messaging machine they've crafted to A) encourage these tendencies and B) exploit them. Check out the description of High SDO leaders at Robinson's article - it sounds like a checklist for the GOP front runners.
High-SDO people are characterized by four core traits: they are dominating, opposed to equality, committed to expanding their own personal power, and amoral. These are usually accompanied by other unsavory traits, many of which render them patently unsuitable for leadership roles in a democracy:
Rick Perlstein's The Long Con lays out in detail how so many of the 'thought leaders' the right wingers follow are basically running a scam on them. It's hugely profitable. Snake oil salesmen used to do flourishing business in the days before effective medicines and antibiotics existed, promising miracle cures overnight. The rubes flocked to them, because what else did they have?
Modern snake oil salesmen now concentrate on politics - and they thrive there because the miracle cures proposed by the right (They keep us safe! Tax cuts pay for themselves! The rich are job creators! The only racism is talking about racism! Morning in America! etc. etc.) are really nothing more than snake oil when all is said and done - so they can keep fleecing the marks who are desperately hoping that maybe, this time the promises will come true.
And when they don't, their leaders provide them with a handy list of targets to blame for their woes: Democrats, Liberals, Feminazies, Illegals, Blah People, etc. etc. The modern GOP doesn't give a damn about solving problems via government or anything else. It's all about keeping the con game going for as long as possible. The GOP has abandoned any pretense at governing on the basis of facts and competence; it's pretty much all con game all the time now.
The problem is, the marks are getting restless. They keep getting disappointed and at some point their frustration is going to boil over. Donald Trump has already promised them he'll take the gloves off against protesters. Racial violence is up; gun sales too. There's talk of violent resistance against the government... Imagine what these people will do if a woman or a Democratic Socialist ends up in the White House. They already think America is going to Hell - they'll be convinced it'll be a sign of the end times and just might really cut loose.
These people are ready to vote for any smooth-talking sociopath who hits that sweet spot in their mental picture of the world with the right message. Cognitive dissonance goes with the territory; it's what feels right to them that matters, and they can rationalize away anything that they don't want to acknowledge to themselves. As per the NPR interview:
SIEGEL: As for people who express surprise at Trump's popularity among evangelical Christians...
S. DELEMUS: They're like, oh, well, he's been divorced and this and that. Well, guess what? My mom's been divorced three times. I've been divorced three times. Jerry's been divorced. You know, everybody's got those kind of skeletons, if you even want to call them, in the closet. It's not a big deal. He seems like a good, solid family man. He cares about his wife. He cares about his children. He's built an excellent empire. What a business guy.
To repeat
a selection from Robinson again,
...Conformity also feeds their sense of themselves as more moral and righteous than others -- a perception that's usually buttressed by the use of magical absolution techniques that they use to "evaporate guilt," in Dean's words. Because they confessed, or are saved, or were just following orders, they can commit heinous crimes and still retain a serene conscience and sense that they are "righteous people." On the other hand, when it comes to outsiders, there is no absolution. Their memory for even minor transgressions is nothing short of elephantine (as Bill Clinton knows all too well).
emphasis added
Having determined to cultivate these people, and having built a huge media machine to play on their fears and anger, the GOP is discovering they've succeeded a bit too well. A problem with trying to use demagoguery as a means to power is what do you when an even bigger demagogue comes along? What do you do when the monster you've created refuses to take your orders? (Charles Koch, for one, is finding out.) Having successfully made government the enemy, the Republicans are now in the contradictory position that if they take control of government, that makes them collaborators at best, traitors at worst in the eyes of their base. My heart bleeds for them.
We didn't create the monster, but we have to deal with it. But how?
The Republican Party has spent years deliberately doing everything it can to de-legitimize Democrats in the eyes of the public and the press. (That's what the Benghazi hearings are all about, as the latest example.) The delusion of the centrists is that bipartisanship is still possible. It presupposes both parties are still rational, and willing to compromise. The only compromise the GOP and their followers will accept these days is "Heads I win, Tails you lose." Not the least good to come out of Joe Biden's decline of another presidential run is that he still believes he can work with Republicans - along with too many other triangulators in the party. The idea that going "Republican Lite" will somehow attract undecided voters has failed time and time again - but still the Democratic Party Leadership has too many still playing that game. At least Biden won't be running on that idea, though he may still be pushing it...
A first step is for Democrats to stop apologizing for being Democrats, and stop trying to compromise on liberal principles. The followers of Trump and Carson respect what they see as strength and confidence even if they don't agree with what liberals are saying. And given the repeated failures of their own leaders, the constant betrayals of their dreams, that's one route to opening their minds. (That's the main focus of Robinson's series - read the whole thing.)
More to the point, the Democratic Party has got to stop conceding state and local elections to the GOP. We have a dysfunctional Congress because the GOP has been doing state by state what they haven't yet been able to do at the national level - and a lot of that is based on controlling election outcomes by any means, foul or fair. The other reason we have a dysfunctional Congress is because too many Democratic voters stayed home in the last election cycle; the current majorities in both houses represent a small fraction of the potential voting pool. (The craziest part, as it turns out.) We don't have to convert them if we just show up and out vote them. There are signs that the Democratic front runners are aware of this, as Undercover Blue notes at Digby's place.
...Democrats got hammered in 2010 and 2014 off-year elections. Sanders cited the contributors and volunteers who have turned out in large numbers to help his campaign. "The reason that I think I can help the entire Democratic Party at the head of the ticket is we have got to increase voter turnout. We've got to get low-income workers. We've got to get young people to stand up and fight back and get involved in the political process. And I think I can do that." Campaign 101.
...The upside to the Clinton campaign is Clinton's staff will have both down cold. She has been promising DNC members that she wants to revive the party infrastructure that withered under President Barack Obama. Organizing for America point-whatever has been a bust. Super-delegates welcome the return of something resembling Dean's 50 state plan in hopes that party infrastructure will accomplish more than presidential candidates' personalities. By mid-September, Clinton had signed joint fundraising agreements with two-thirds of the states. Pledging to rebuild the party "from the ground up" sounds pretty good to Democrats in states controlled by T-party legislatures.
There's no need to go
Godwin here by comparing any of the GOP front runners to Hitler (or Stalin) - although
the right's fascination with those they perceive as strong leaders is rather telling. Authoritarians and their followers can be found anywhere there is power to be had, whether on the left or the right. The problem before us is that the Republican Party is where they are overwhelmingly to be found these days in America.
Acknowledging it, getting the message out AND offering alternatives that make sense is one way to deal with them. The same old, same old is not going to be enough. Clinton's moves away from past positions implicitly acknowledges this. Whether it's from conviction or in response to polling, it's still building momentum in the right direction. When Sanders talks about the need for a revolution, it's in the sense of mobilizing the millions currently standing by or looking the other way while the inmates take over the asylum.
To paraphrase Yeats,
"The best lacked all conviction, while the worst
Were full of passionate intensity."
That would truly be a horrifying epitaph on the "American Experiment" if we allow the authoritarians to prevail. The appeal of the GOP front runners is all too comprehensible. The answer is to respond with a better alternative (not all that hard to do!) and engage the rest of the country in making it so. It will not be a cake walk - but it's eminently doable.