What Does Not Knowing Look Like II

The question posed last week:

what drives the aesthetic of a culture that says one thing and does another? That consistently shouts the word "fairness" even as corporations increasingly depend on taking advantage of ignorance?

Answers to this question abound at the RNC. Sarah Palin delivered a speech last night that was as emotionally powerful as it was chockablock with lies. And I am not just garden-variety, Lied-To-Get-To-An-Emotional-Truth lies that have been a staple of politics forever. I am talking specific lies that matter in individual bottom lines all over this country. One example about taxes lifted from the AP:

PALIN: "The Democratic nominee for president supports plans to raise income taxes, raise payroll taxes, raise investment income taxes, raise the death tax, raise business taxes, and increase the tax burden on the American people by hundreds of billions of dollars."

THE FACTS: The Tax Policy Center, a think tank run jointly by the Brookings Institution and the Urban Institute, concluded that Obama's plan would increase after-tax income for middle-income taxpayers by about 5 percent by 2012, or nearly $2,200 annually. McCain's plan, which cuts taxes across all income levels, would raise after tax-income for middle-income taxpayers by 3 percent, the center concluded.

Obama would provide $80 billion in tax breaks, mainly for poor workers and the elderly, including tripling the Earned Income Tax Credit for minimum-wage workers and higher credits for larger families.

He also would raise income taxes, capital gains and dividend taxes on the wealthiest. He would raise payroll taxes on taxpayers with incomes above $250,000, and he would raise corporate taxes. Small businesses that make more than $250,000 a year would see taxes rise.

Palin just straight-up lied to the American people about their taxes. And her speechwriter felt confident because in this case the lying is being done by someone who mispronounces the word "nuclear" and is otherwise able to flash "not elitist" cred.

First of all, this is a somewhat Baudrillardian confection. It's the substitution for the appearance of something for the thing itself. Instead of an actual, qualified politician, you have a person in glasses and a suit standing in front of a podium and giving a speech.

But it's more pernicious than a straightforward simulacra, because the whole point is that she's "not a politician," and "not elitist."

Palin is like Washington Mutual.

Washington Mutual is an aggressively non-banky bank. It sells itself with the tagline "Woo Hoo!" while dressing its tellers in regular-looking polo shirts instead of making them buy business clothes, and blaring soft hits in their branches that are colorful and more like a cell-phone store than a bank. And we all know that Washington Mutual does all this so that it can sell you a credit card you shouldn't have with a low introductory interest rate. So that it can raise your interest rate to over 30% the second your electricity bill is overdue.

It's a simulation over a real structure. Banks and politics still work to extract your money and determine your future. So the structures depend on our yearning for authenticity, and make a cynical bet that enough people will be dumb enough or busy enough to fall for a patently unfair or untrue proposal, based on visuals that are too easy, too happy, too safe, too familiar.

In other words, this is all about the baby, and all the other adorable children who take turns holding him. And it's about Levi and Bristol, and it's even about the plotline looking as titillating, familiar and predictable as an episode of Jerry Springer.

Comments

[Lee Gainer]

Palin's speech was made to a bunch of true believers, some call them kool-aid drinkers. These are the folks who would believe her if she, or any GOP politician, said that the sky was made of yogurt. Easy targets. When she gets to the tv shows and, more importantly, the debates, she won't be able to get away with that tripe.

Perception is everything. The truth is only important to the people who value it.

[deborahfisher]

Hey Lee,

Yeah, I agree with you. The math is just bad: in a year when general democrat numbers are like 10 points higher than general republican numbers, a polarizing figure like Palin seems like the wrong choice.

What I find interesting is that it works for anyone--it's so cynical. It's so wrong to exploit fear and ignorance. The RNC was ugly. John Stewart is right--there is a Lord of the Flies quality.

I hate to sound like a conservative, but when I look at "conservatives," I can't stop thinking about how we have no moral compass.

[Lee Gainer]

I hear ya. The outright lies, the "swift boating", the spin. Fear has worked so well for so long, I see why they (politicians) use it every election cycle even though some claim to despise it. Sigh. Please continue with the great posts!

[MBT Online]

It's so nice to have you do all of the research for us. It makes our decision making so much easier!! Thanks.