Perhaps the most jarring image from last night was the juxtaposition of Piper Palin licking her palm and smoothing down her baby brother’s hair at the same time that her mother stood before a roaring crowd issuing hate filled invective. How, I wonder, do we get from childhood innocence to a grown woman who proudly refers to herself as a pit bull with lipstick?
Sarah Palin gave us an insider’s view of how it is done. Psychologists have recently published findings on the five steps in the development of collective hate (Making a Virtue of Evil: A Five-Step Social Identity Model of the Development of Collective Hate, Soc Per Psych Compass 2/3 (2008): 1313–1344) and Palin seems to have embraced the model enthusiastically. According to the researchers:
“The five steps are: (i) Identification, the construction of an ingroup; (ii) Exclusion, the definition of targets as external to the ingroup; (iii) Threat, the representation of these targets as endangering ingroup identity; (iv) Virtue, the championing of the ingroup as (uniquely) good; and (v) Celebration, embracing the eradication of the outgroup as necessary to the defence of virtue.”
Let’s look at how Palin accomplished her aims.
Identification, or I’m just like you: Palin led with a description of her family, proudly proclaiming, “Our family has the same ups and downs as any other ... the same challenges and the same joys.” She emphasized her large family size, her family members in the military, her special needs child, her husband’s blue collar job and her parents’ background as farmer and small business person.
Exclusion, defining the other: Palin was quick to claim that her opponent talks one way in Scranton to working people (us) and another way in San Francisco (them, and they’re gay, too) supposedly deriding religion and gun ownership. Palin invokes the Washington elites (them) as if the Republicans didn’t hold the presidency, vice presidency, Supreme Court, and other major positions of power.
The threat: Her opponent supposedly wants to turn his back on victory in Iraq; her opponent wants us to be threatened by oil producing nations; and, worst of all, terrorists are trying to attack us and her opponent still cares about the Constitution.
Virtue: Her group is uniquely good. She implies that they, and they alone, are the people who care about family, about religion, about patriotism, about sacrifice, and she is sure that God cares uniquely about her group.
Celebration: Finally, the call to action, the insistence that the defeat of the other is required to defend the values of family, religion, patriotism and sacrifice.
Not only was the structure of the speech designed to evoke hate, the very words and the delivery were chosen to ridicule, demean and denigrate. She made is quite clear that her opponents are not merely political opponents, they are people unworthy of the basic respect that should be due to any individual, let alone two Senators who have served their country well.
Sarah Palin was perhaps more honest than she intended to be when she described herself as a pit bull with lipstick. She implied that she is vicious, immoral, bred to attack, and fed on misery and hate. The crowd lapped it up. She carefully followed the script for inciting hatred and the audience responded with thunderous applause. How does an innocent child turn from sweet and loving to a person standing before millions joyously delivering a speech dividing America into “us” and “them”? Sarah Palin showed us how.
TIP:
Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
MissingK8
aliquot
Roger Fallihee
madcelt
Norwonk
John Moore
Salon.com
Comments
"What happened last night made me simultaneously very sad and very angry. "
It also makes me frightened for our country, too.
"Those cheap shots she took at Obama. They make her a very small person. Mocking and demeaning his "community organizing". He's helping under-priviledged kids, minorities, in forgotten parts of a large city. To mock that is just plain mean. And dangerously close to expressing contempt for inner-city working people of color."
Absolutely!
I just hope Obama hits back hard.
A skillful manipulation which resulted in a mindless, bloodthirsty mob mentality.
All that was missing were the torches and pitchforks.
“The hottest places in hell are reserved for those who in times of great moral crises maintain their neutrality” - Dante
Time to step up to the plate and fight this...
"But last night when I saw the hate I realized there's nothing to discuss when people hate you."
There's nothing to say to them. However, we do have to figure out how to convince other people not to be duped. Hate is extremely seductive, especially when it is presented in the way that Palin presented it.
What frightens me most is the crowd's visceral response. They know she's not remotely qualified, but they don't care. They know her family is not representative of "family values" but they don't care. They know that she is already being investigated for ethics violations and they don't care. She knows it, too, and that's why she didn't even deign to address any issues. It's all about the hate.
The image of that child patting down the baby's head was for some reason, disturbing to me.
Senator Obama responded I believe brilliantly. He pointed out all the things she didn't bring up like health care, education, college education, etc.
Now the question is, do her speech writers actually work up from a formula, or do they spread hate instinctively?
I wonder if that is enough.
I think he should directly address her attempts to sow hate. She is telling people that Obama doesn't respect "us"; he doesn't respect religious devotion; he doesn't respect patriotism.
One of the things that makes Bill Clinton a political genius is that he manages to convey respect for people who are very different from him, the same people who are obsessed with being disrespected. The guy is a Rhodes scholar, but he managed to convince people that he respected the average folks in Arkansas. He is hardly a religious conservative, but he managed to convey respect for religious belief. He never was a blue collar worker, but it sure seemed like he cared about blue collar workers.
Obama has got to do the same thing. He has to make the case that he respects people without fancy education, that he respects people with deep religious faith, that he respects people who hold blue collar jobs. It shouldn't be too hard; I think he does respect these people.
Palin, and politicians like her, encourage the "us vs. them" mentality so they can convince people that "they don't respect us". She didn't even deign to mention the issues, because she can't win on the issues. She can only win by stirring up hate. Obama should confront those tactics directly by showing that she is meanspirited, unscrupulous and wrong!
"Now the question is, do her speech writers actually work up from a formula, or do they spread hate instinctively?"
I think they work from a formula. They have been perfecting it for the last 20 years. It started with Lee Atwater, and reached its apogee with Karl Rove.
For conservative Christians there is always an enemy -- not merely an opponent, but an enemy that is contrary to all that is right and good, literally the embodiment of evil. The enemy must be identified and labeled as such so that all the good people can understand that they are under attack -- and they always are under attack. The enemy is clever, concealing himself in high-sounding phrases that must be torn away so that his true evil becomes apparent to all. So it's not that Obama is merely wrong on the issues; he's wrong metaphysically, spiritually, ontologically.
The opposite of the enemy is the hero -- the one whose personal virtues (not just ideas or policies) will restore The Good and vanquish the enemy. True, the hero is human and has minor flaws, but these are easily overlooked for the sake of the larger cause and only make the hero seem endearing. Often the hero is seen as being chosen by God, a modern day David standing against the Philistines.
Thus the battle is not a battle of issues or ideas, but ultimately a battle of good vs. evil, played out in the personal narratives of the combatants. It's ultimately not about judgment, experience, temperament, or anything else. The narrative, the story, is everything.
This is why we hear continually about McCain's POW experience -- over and over and over and over again. This is why the McCain campaign is so upset about the press and Sarah Palin. They are fucking with her narrative, the most important thing, and that simply cannot be! This is the reason for the exaggerated, childish enthusiasm over Sarah Palin -- she is being elevated to the status of hero. The enemy is on the loose, and the hero must be called forth.
In this context policies and ideas are not ends in themselves but rather that which helps to illuminate the character of the hero. Whether drilling for oil actually does anything positive really doesn't matter. The important thing is that in calling for oil drilling McCain is "sticking it" to the liberals, to the wacky environmentalists, to the sentimental tree-huggers, the "big government" supporters, thus displaying his manly willingness to fight. For every "policy" McCain or Palin articulate, look for the subtext -- what virtue of character does advocating this policy illuminate in the candidate? Because *that's* what it is all about for these people.
"The enemy is clever, concealing himself in high-sounding phrases that must be torn away so that his true evil becomes apparent to all. So it's not that Obama is merely wrong on the issues; he's wrong metaphysically, spiritually, ontologically."
Yes, and that's what makes it okay to denigrate, demean and hate him.
Succinct, to-the-point, and accurate. Nicely done.
"I sincerely hope that the American public saw it for what it was, nothing but smoke and mirrors."
I hope so, too, but I think that Obama should carefully explain to the public what Palin is trying to do, and why they shouldn't go along with it.
mishima666, I totally agree with you about the coopting of the narrative, as you so aptly describe. that is why the right is freaking out.
Mishima666 wrote "For every "policy" McCain or Palin articulate, look for the subtext -- what virtue of character does advocating this policy illuminate in the candidate? Because *that's* what it is all about for these people." The character virtues they are think they are illuminating are: strength, power, street smart, and reward earned through hard work. It doens't matter that their points doing' really support these virtues in the true sense of the words; people were hungry for it to be so (that their proffered leaders are strong, powerful, smart but no intimidatingly so, and hard working and meretricious) and so therefore it was found to be so.
Bill - the people she was talking to did not 'see through' her speech so much as swallow it whole.
I trust Obama to come back with a measured and hard hitting response that does not stoop to Republican tactics of hatred but is nevertheless as, or more, effective.
10 out of 10
I am having difficulty sorting this stuff out; it appears that some intelligent, but crazy or just plain greedy dishonest people have joined together to organize the slower amongst us to become completely at their mercy.
The craftsmanship displayed in the speech Sarah gave is scary; hopefully Obama will win this time; if not most likely a democratic congress will provide some protection.
I wonder at the motivation of these people.
Identification: "How, I wonder, do *we*..." (my emphasis added)
Exclusion: "Perhaps the most jarring image from last night was the *juxtaposition* of Piper Palin licking her palm and smoothing down her baby brother’s hair at the same time that her mother stood before a roaring crowd issuing hate filled invective. " "How does an innocent child *turn from* sweet and loving to a person standing before millions joyously delivering a speech dividing America into us and them? "
Threat: "She implied that she is vicious, immoral, bred to attack, and fed on misery and hate. The crowd lapped it up." Boy, that does sound threatening!
Virtue: "...basic respect that should be due to any individual, let alone two Senators who have served their country well"
Celebration: As I write this, you have 11 rating points which put on the right column of the cover as a highest rated. Some people are liking your comments.
I also found this funny: "One of the things that makes Bill Clinton a political genius is that he manages to convey respect for people who are very different from him."
I agree that he did *convey* respect. But, I find it hard to believe that he really respected all the women he seduced in all his years. Maybe it's just me...
Seriously, there is a regular amount of hate spewing from Open Salon. I see the words evil bandied about pretty loosely here. I don't think your article helps to raise the debate.
I have to say that it's a big turn off to an independent voter. And Obama needs independents because this is going to be a close race.
Well, as a registered Democrat but an independent voter, can I say that I wouldn't have voted for John McCain even if Al Gore had been running against him? Frankly, I've had enough of the Republican leadership. Hell, if Obama can't convince me he's the right man for the job I'll vote for Ralph Nader.
It really has come down to "anyone but the Republicans" for me. They are slowly strangling my family with their policies and their unwillingness to act on those matters that they SHOULD act on yet go barreling into a war we have no business fighting at this time. The middle class is dying, thanks to Bush and Dick. We need to perform CPR before it goes flatline.
I hope so, too, but I think that Obama should carefully explain to the public what Palin is trying to do, and why they shouldn't go along with it.
I don't disagree - I just think he needs to be very careful how he couches his words. He doesn't want to come across as petty and vindictive, not now.
Sandra Miller said...
the people she was talking to did not 'see through' her speech so much as swallow it whole.
True, Sandra, but she was speaking to REPUBLICANS that were already committed to McCain (at the convention). I'd like to see a poll of the fence sitters who aren't really sure about where they'll cast their votes - if she convinced them, we're in deep shit.
Thanks for the kind words.
John Leonard:
"pit bulls are "amoral", not "immoral". You are right though - Ms Palin is indeed immoral."
Thanks for pointing that out.
Tom Phillips:
"I wonder at the motivation of these people."
One thing is for sure. They are not motivated by the best interests of America or Americans, no matter how much they insist they are.
"Bill - the people she was talking to did not 'see through' her speech so much as swallow it whole."
The wildly enthusiastic response of the crowd indicates that, sadly, you are right.
"I trust Obama to come back with a measured and hard hitting response that does not stoop to Republican tactics of hatred but is nevertheless as, or more, effective."
I hope so, but I'm worried. This is why I favored Hillary over Obama. If anyone knows how to survive the politics of hate it is Hillary. Time and again the haters have hit her with everything they've got, and she's still standing.
Obama has never received this kind of treatment. So far, I don't think he is responding either aggressively enough, or by directly condemning and counteracting the message of hate. I hope he's just waiting until the convention is over.
In his one deft game-changing move, he managed to insult women, drive any last hope of a move to the middle ground on either side of the aisle, and most importantly, threaten the very fragile trust any citizen has left that any politician knows a damn thing about putting country first.
So, if we liberals who value civil liberties, the constitution, fiscal sanity, etc. sound angry, sad, and threatened - we are. We've been spun for 8 years, held a small shred of hope that McCain with all his talk of honor might walk the high road, but instead, he caved to the base. And now, they're trying to spin it.
I will be throwing tea into the seas of Alaska before I back down.
"It's a regular Democratic bloodfest here and I have to say that it's a big turn off to an independent voter."
From you perspective, how do you think that Obama should address Palin's divisive message.
Guess what, Sarah Palin has also re-energized the progressive/liberal/left-leaning base and probably a fair amount of moderate women as well.
"Guess what, Sarah Palin has also re-energized the progressive/liberal/left-leaning base and probably a fair amount of moderate women as well."
The Obama campaign reported that donations soared in the aftermath of her speech.
I've been an athlete all my life, and I've played a lot of sports where you have to completely disregard the health and well being of your opponent. You run him over, slam him into the boards, etc.
In the locker room, before the game, I would take to a very, very, very dark place. I would demonize the opponent and turn him from a human being into just an obstacle to overcome.
That is what we need to do with these people. They are obstacles to progress which we need to overcome.
The thing is, you don't want to spend too much time in that dark place. I did it for a couple of hours and then I would go and shake the opponent's hand. Kind of strange how I could turn it on and off, huh?
But you've got to take some things from there and use that as motivation to take down the Sarah Palins of the world and expose them for what they are.
last night listening to NPR after McCain's speech, to a call-in show, I was heartened to hear several Independents say that they may have liked McCain's speech, but either didn't like Palin's or were unimpressed by it. They made some thoughtful points.
Great post, Amy!
"She had to answer back and did it well. I think the hate came in the form of the media craze to convict her before she could let us get to know her."
Convict her? She is convicting herself. Virtually every thing she has said is a lie or extraordinarily nasty.
"The sad part is I see no hitting back from Obama! Are the democrats so spineless? I can't figure out whats stopping them."
I agree. What appears to be stopping them, is the same combination that is always stopping them --- utter shock and an insistence of playing by the rules of civility even when it becomes clear that the Republicans have absolutely no respect for the rules.
Think about it:
Who would have expected the Willie Horton campaign? It broke all bounds of decency and it caught the Democrats flatfooted.
Who would have predicted Ken Starr and his "report", which were nothing more than political hatchet jobs? Fortunately, both Clintons are made of iron and they didn't back away.
Who could possibly have predicted the Swiftboat campaign? It was an entirely fabricated, despicable and deliberate effort to smear the reputation of a genuine war hero. Kerry never saw it coming and couldn't figure out how to respond to something so outside the bounds of human decency.
Sarah Palin is the 2008 version of Atwater-Rove politics: win by lying your; win by smearing; win by inspiring hate.
If Obama thinks he is going to fight back by "explaining" that the Republicans are making things up, that they are avoiding the issues, that they are the party of government incompetence, he can forget it. Let him ask Dukakis and Kerry how well that works.
Sadly, Obama and Biden need to send the "chicks" out to critique Ms. Palin for fear of hitting her too hard. Why can't they say what you just said so eloquently. I hope they are reading this blog! Fantastically written.
To Leslie Ford I say that if you couldn't see the rage and hate on the face of Palin the other night and if you couldn't see the demonic glee on the faces of those to whom she spoke then I'm not sure there's any hope but for us all to become Catholics and Protestants, Sunnis and Shiites, Hatfields and McCoys.
McCain will continue to be a big compromise for the Republicans. I think the election will come right down to the wire regardless of the tactics because that is how the country is divided. Despite the debacle of Bush's presidency we will probably see a 50/50 split. But I do have hope.
Great Post -- I am with you 100%. Hate and fascism are closely related as are hate speech and propaganda. Rove has been at it, again, you can see and hear it everywhere.
Those inclined to separate and conquer, rather than include and unify have been in control for too long. When the economy is set up properly, there is a slice of the pie for everyone. The 1% certainly don't need all that they have. Let's hope the voters wake up the "slower" among us so that they vote for something different this year!
"And I wonder if we're really any better. Are we able to include those we disagree with in our plans? Are we willing to listen to their concerns and ideas? Or are we just the flip side of the same coin?"
I strongly, strongly disagree. We keep losing because the Republicans play to emotions and we spend way too much time (time we do not have) obsessing about whether or not it is right to play to emotions.
We really need to develop a laser like focus on the ball, and the ball in this case is winning. Honestly, I think many people on the Left (and I include myself) have very little to lose when our candidate is not elected. It didn't really make much difference to me or to my family when Bush senior won or when Bush junior stole the election with help from his cronies on the Supreme Court. I am protected by my education, income, savings, social capital and the fact that I have no relatives in the military. Indeed, most of the tax benefits that W pushed through were beneficial to me. We have the luxury (and it is surely a luxury) to sit around contemplating whether or not we are still playing by the rules that the Republicans abandoned long ago.
We need to win this election, not for ourselves, but for those who are far less fortunate.
I do not doubt for one minute that if the Swiftboat garbage had been addressed vigorously, Kerry could have won, and if Kerry had won, there would never have been horrors like dead bodies floating in the waters of a flooded New Orleans, or mothers begging TV reporters for formula for their babies, or people still living in trailers.
There's a lot at stake here, and our moral purity is the least of it.
"Those inclined to separate and conquer, rather than include and unify have been in control for too long. "
Absolutely!
While your post makes me sad, the discussion gives me hope. I am finally starting to see the strategy. And it looks an awful lot like the truth.
OBAMA-man (as my son calls him) walks the high road: "They didn't talk about you. They didn't talk about health care, the economy, the issues that concern me. They spent a lot of time talking about me."
BABOOM - then the surrogates (as the RNC has labelled the rest of the team, ignoring the irony of that term in this debate)
PICK UP THE REST OF THE NARRATIVE.
INSTEAD of talking about the things you care about, they gave us...
Secrets, lies, and empty calls to WMD (ok, not really, but you get the connection to Bush)
TRUST US.
Cindy McCain had the gall to talk about Openness and accountability in government last night.
Four more years of smoke and mirrors and back-room decision making, with a call to just trust us. We don't need to have a strategy or if we do, we certainly don't need to tell you what it is.
Bush/Cheney - McCain/Palin. Same old politics. Same old spin. and we still haven't found the WMD.
The Republican campaign is like entering a parallel universe. Night is day and day is night. Up is down and down is up. There is no regard for the truth, none whatsoever. It's all, and only, about winning and maintaining political power, no matter how it harms our country.
"My hope in McCain and Palin is that they might be the right ones to shake up Washington and expose the corruption and waste of time and my tax dollars and cut silly budgets for silly and irrelevant American issues"
Have you failed to notice that the Republicans are the party of corruption and waste? Have you failed to notice that in the last 8 years the Republicans held the presidency, the vice presidency, the Supreme Court, the Senate (for most of that time), the House (for most of that time), all the Cabinet positions, the highest military positions, just about EVERY position in Washington you can think of? Have you missed the fact that John McCain has been in Washington for DECADES?
Yet during that time corruption has reached new heights, government incompetence resulted in dead bodies floating in the waters of a flooded New Orleans, a bogus war was started that has wasted thousands of American lives and trillions of American dollars with no end in sight, the Federal deficit has reappeared and ballooned, the economy has tanked. Why, precisely, do you think that ANY Republicans would try to clean up waste and corruption beyond the fact that they lied that they would?
I say: "Kathleen Blanco, a Democrat and commander in chief of the state's National Guard was in office during Katrina - she failed first and foremost as did the rest of the system."
You can say it, but that doesn't make it true. It only makes it another excuse for Bush's gross incompetence.
Washington has been in the grip of Republican misrule for the past 8 years. Republicans have controlled everything, and they have screwed up everything.
"Well, surely we have to at least agree that Blanco, , a Democrat, was indeed the Commander in Chief of the state's national gaurd"
And surely we have to agree that Bush, a Republican was the President and Commander in Chief and he presided over the spectre of American bodies floating in American street, and then had the nerve to tell his incompetent appointee that he was doing a "helluva job."
I think you have a clear channel on your mindset and I appreciate the feedback. I need another sound mind to keep mine on straight. I, too, hate extremes on both sides and because I get so mad, it gets in the way of my thinking.
I think too Amy, you also have a wonderful perception. Let's go back to your original post -
How does an innocent child turn from sweet and loving to a person standing before millions joyously delivering a speech dividing America into “us” and “them”?
I hope when the time comes we all stand as one front.
"Because someone has gotten under your skin in a personal way, that does not give us a right to qualify that person to be what you have made her out to be."
No, the only thing that make it permissible is the fact that it is true. I've claimed that she is a grossly incompetent, lying hypocrite who is encouraging people to believe that American is divided into "us" vs. "them." If you have any data that information that isn't true, please share it. Personal opinion, though, does not count as information.
"That is my opinion...and it's as worthy as yours."
I know you'd prefer to talk about opinions, because all opinions are worthy of respect. I'd prefer to talk about facts, and the fact is that Sarah Palin used the KNOWN tactics of inciting hate. If you'd like to disagree, you need to provide some facts that she didn't say what I claimed, or that the tactics I described are not known tactics of inciting hate, or some other factual analysis.
"according to your bio, your field of medicine lies between a women's legs, and not their head."
According to your bio, you don't have a field of expertise; so what's your point?
"do you always answer a question with a question?"
You keep trying to change the subject in order to divert attention from the fact that you have no evidence to back up your claims. I'm still waiting "some facts that she didn't say what I claimed, or that the tactics I described are not known tactics of inciting hate, or some other factual analysis." You have not been able to come up with anything but insults thus far.