The Media, the "New Right", and Democracy

The rise of the Tea Party has come about via the massive mobilization of conservative elements in American society in reaction to perceived "attacks on democracy." What I find most ironic about the candidates themselves is how, well, undemocratic their campaigns have been.

In my mind, the essence of a competitive campaign is the full scrutiny of all aspects of the lives and views of candidates. Yes, the media will typically rip candidates to shreds, some more than others. And yes, they will often make issues where there are none in the interest of ratings. The media certainly has no interest beyond making people watch. However, that interest, just as many other selfish acts, can have positive externalities. Having lived in a repressive government for a while now, I've come to understand how important the media is just for keeping public officials honest. And I've seen far too many candidates in this election foreswear the media so that they might improve their odds of election.

What got me thinking about this subject (and conveniently doubles as an example) was an interview question posed to Sarah Palin about Jewish settlement in Palestine. Palin provided her ardent support (rather blandly) for settlements, arguing that because the Jewish population was expanding they ought to settle. When asked if this support extended onto settlements in Palestinian territory, she responded, "I believe that the Jewish settlements should be allowed to expand." While she is implying that yes, she believes this extends into Palestinian territory, what she fails to do is say as much. It reflects a fundamental unwillingness to deal with the consequences, good or bad, of her desired actions. It is reflective of her broader attacks on the "lamestream media" who have skewered her time and time again. If the media were ripping her to shreds unjustly, as happened to Shirley Sherrod, I would be nothing but sympathetic to her cause. But faulting the media for your inability to name a newspaper is just stupid.

This extends to much of the rest of the "new right." Sharron Angle, Christine O'Donnell, and now Joe Miller refuse to show up on any national media. Angle is now known for bragging about her ability to fundraise by appearing on friendly media. And I can't sit here and claim she's wrong for that. She's running a campaign, and she must do what she needs to do to win. But to pretend that she's a vanguard of some democratic revolution, as the Tea Party is wont to do, is absurd. Limiting her exposure criticism will help her poll numbers, but it is remarkably autocratic for a "champion of liberty."

This sort of behavior is indicative of the ideological demagoguery that terrifies me about the Tea Party. We sit here and buy into the absurd slogans they use to typify their campaigns and don't even stop to ask if what they are calling for is feasible or even healthy for our nation. It makes me increasingly buy into Niebuhr's thesis in Moral Man and Immoral Society: human collectives are brutal, and only via individual morality can social immorality be overcome.