If You Build It

The Anthony Weiner scandal is splattered all over the media like a double handful of swamp muck. We are also being treated to a rerun of the intimate details of John Edwards, his mistress, and the hush money. These scandals are just the latest in a series involving politicians and sex. Infidelity and hypocrisy seem to be the bipartisan standard. We really should be paying attention to the ongoing rental of our government by corporate interests, but I’ll bite the hook.

It seems that our elected representatives are no better than we are, and probably worse. We shouldn’t be surprised. Think about how these people get where they are. Remember the tag line from the movie Field of Dreams? “If you build it, they will come.” If you build a carnival side show, expect freaks to show up and staff it.

First, we have a system that requires candidates to extract large sums of money from wealthy donors. This requires a level of ass-kissing that encourages the natural con artist while it degrades and discourages the honest person. Then we run the candidates through an extended gauntlet of campaign events, rubber-chicken dinners, coffees, press conferences, intense media scrutiny, character assassination (both received and given), repetitive stump speeches, and more groveling for dollars. The candidate is alternately called a savior and a traitor. Candor and natural behavior are discouraged. A successful campaigner controls every detail of every public moment and never utters an unconsidered word. In politics, hypocrisy isn’t a flaw, it’s a technique. You’d have to be kind of nuts to put up with this. And they are. I look at Congress and all the presidents of my lifetime and I see arrogance, egotism, narcissism, and various shades of neuroticism.

I remember talking with a reporter I knew right after he emerged from the National Governor’s Conference in Burlington VT. I asked him what it was like inside the security perimeter. He said, “I’ll quote from Star Wars. ‘You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy.’ The governors are polished shiny fake assholes, and their wives are polished and fake and their kids are polished and fake.” Sadly, that’s what sells on a 30-second television ad. It’s all image and money and sound bites. And it selects a certain type of people.

A big part of the problem is the money. Quite simply, it forces politicians to lie for their very survival. There is one story for the rich donor and another for the 1,000 ordinary voters.

Another big problem is the fractured and confused electorate bumping up against a two-party system. Two parties aren’t enough to cover all the factions, so each party sets up a fake “big tent” and then triangulates a path that panders to the power base, ignores the truly faithful, and waffles just enough to scoop up people who aren’t paying attention. It’s cynical and dishonest and its goal is the preservation of power.

Twenty-four hour profit driven news coverage doesn’t help. Politicians trade extremism for face time. They have to deliver those pointed sound bites whether they mean anything or not. Editors and reporters follow the political extremes, maudlin human interest stories, and, yes, sex scandals. Anthony Weiner’s tacky emails are the least important thing on the entire national political spectrum, but they are inescapable on the news.

(I have to say this: Weiner should answer the calls for his resignation by saying that he’ll resign over emails after David Vitter resigns over having actual sex with actual prostitutes.)

The general population is a big problem, too. The American public has been lied to long and vigorously, jollied, flattered, and pandered to, enough that a childish delusional state has set in. We’ve reached a state of personality politics where the electorate is forever looking for the perfect Daddy to kiss the booboo on our collective knee and make it all better. Of course, there is no perfect Daddy out there, and there is no magic kiss, so people are forever dissatisfied. Despite the perfect record of failure, most people keep looking instead of focusing on policy. (Borrrring!) Specifically, most people don’t pay attention to our policies on selecting politicians. They just waste time loving them or hating them.

We couldn’t design a better attractant for dysfunctional personalities if we tried. Anthony Weiner, David Vitter, and John Edwards (and the dozen others we know about) are just symptoms of the situation.

Comments

[Susan Clark]

First, I’m relieved to read that your Last Post wasn’t actually your last post, which either means a) the ascension didn’t happen; b) it did happen, and no one we know went; or c) it did happen, and everyone in Vermont went, and this is what heaven is like. Either way, we still get your posts, which is good.
I love your analysis on Why Weiner (and why Vitter and Edwards and ah, yes, Clinton, whose presidency is fondly remembered as The Johnson Years). I couldn’t agree more with your analysis of national politics. It’s as depressing as hell, but makes it all the more compelling to work and find our small successes at the local level. Fits right in with the book I’m writing on local democracy — probably I’ll quote your blog!
Thanks for your wisdom.

[robby]

First, I agree with you on all points.

Now a series of progressively serious follow up questions for you:

1- Bernie Madoff made off with 65 billion dollars. Anthony Weiner sent pictures of his, well, you know, to women he met on line. My question, does this prove the existence of God? And if you do see the hand of an omnipotent power playing chess with our lives, what does this tell you about the Almighty's sense of humor? Otherwise, what are the odds of someone's name being synonymous with their crime?

2- Although I entirely agree with your criticism of the political circus tent we live under, I think you left out biology. As creatures we humans are about 99% like all the other animals and the defining 1% that is clearly human is very powerful but not always in control. At our best we use the 1% to create art, institute just governments and contemplate the nature of the universe, but the animal is under there and since it controls most of the human creature, sooner or later it has its way, so to speak. I don't personally understand the exhibitionist motivation, but when an otherwise intelligent and seemingly rational person gives in to actions with so little to gain and so much to lose, you can't simply attribute it to stupidity alone. And as for the political selection process which clearly cuts in favor of arrogance, hypocrisy and selfishness, this argument still doesn't explain how a person who put so much personal effort into building a career would risk it all for such a minor satisfaction.

I'm not trying to excuse the behavior, just saying ignoring the animal side of human nature is willful and risky ignorance.

3- On our political system, my opinion is that democracy is nice but freedom of speech is the real prize. We can't fix politics until we get the money out, and yet money in politics is protected by the first amendment. So what do you do about that?

[Minor Heretic]

Well, Robby, on the first point, Bush wasn't named Torture War-Crimes and Obama wasn't named Major Major Major Disappointment. No deity involved.

On the second point, I'm with you. We are chimps with wrenches, and that one or two percent of our DNA that makes all the difference doesn't make all that much difference. See some of my posts on human behavior. I don't believe we should ignore our lower brains. On the contrary, I think we should be very careful about using the upper part of our brains to design social structures that minimize the damage done by our monkey parts.

As for Weiner gambling it all on a few twitter photos, you have to remember the level of arrogance necessary to make it in modern politics. No, he didn't think he would get caught.

Money in politics is not protected by the first amendment in my not so humble opinion. A particular set of supreme court justices decided that money was protected political speech. It was just as mistaken an opinion as the one about separate but equal accommodations for people of differing skin color and the one about retrieving escaped slaves. Donating money to political campaigns is like voting, and everybody gets the same number of votes, namely one. Not everyone can donate the same amount of money, so we have to restrict the amount to a sum that all can reasonably afford. One solution someone offered was issuing everyone of voting age a debit card with $50 on it, payable to the campaign or campaigns of your choice. That's the only money that can be spent on political campaigns. Levels the playing field. There are many possible solutions, all imperfect, most better than what we have.