Oct. 1, 2006
COMMENTARY: GOP Wonderful at Words of Mass Distraction
By Robert Whitcomb
The Providence Journal
Geoffrey Nunberg's book "Talking Right: How Conservatives Turned Liberalism
into a Tax-Raising, Latte-Drinking, Sushi-Eating, Volvo-Driving, New York
Times-Reading, Body-Piercing, Hollywood-Loving, Left-Wing Freak Show"
(PublicAffairs, $26) -- whew! -- is delightful.
The dubious art of creating straw men to suit one's political and economic
needs is an old one, but has reached impressive levels with the rise of the
modern political consultant. As you'd guess, Nunberg is a liberal Democrat,
but he performs an intellectually rigorous analysis of how the Republicans
have done a far better job than the Democrats of mastering the use of buzz
phrases to mislead and distract. In doing so, his book has garnered praise
even from such right-wing wordsmiths as William Safire. As Nunberg notes,
the Republicans have been much more disciplined than the Democrats in
staying on message with their rhetoric, and hence much more successful.
One of Nunberg's ideas is that the interests supporting big business and
rich people get citizens to vote against their own economic self-interest by
distracting them with social targets and expressions (e.g., the menacing
"death tax," for the estate tax) that are often bogus -- a kind of
rhetorical bread and circus. They also associate with Democrats such
elements of luxury living as Volvo driving, Brie eating and white-wine
drinking, when it's the rich Republicans who most scarf up this stuff. Not
that there's anything wrong with that ...
The terminology has been successful in cutting taxes for the wealthy and
reducing programs that particularly assist the middle and lower classes.
More generally, it makes Americans forget that the socio-economic walls are
getting higher. Meanwhile, although traditional GOP views have included (to
me admirably) balancing the budget, the budget deficits swell and areas of
government grow like Topsy (in part, of course, because of 9/11), but the
"conservative, small-government" Republicans don't seem particularly
self-conscious about that. They can change the subject to, say, gay
marriage.
Nunberg's book reminds me of one of the strange paradoxes of American life:
While the "liberal states," in the North, Upper Midwest and Northwest, are
said to harbor dangerously degenerate, "elitist" phonies, the data of social
dysfunction -- illegitimacy, poverty, divorce, crime and so on -- tend to be
heavily concentrated in the states that call themselves "conservative" and
rhetorically adhere to ballyhooed "traditional values." That the
Republicans' campaign chieftains have been so successful in obscuring this
paradox, hypocrisy, or whatever testifies to their brilliant use of language
and marketing.
And in assigning the monicker "elitist" to East and West Coast intellectuals
and, well, Democrats, some media people, and others, the Republicans have
diverted attention from the much greater political and social power of the
business elite and the rich, who tend to be Republicans and who certainly
richly, so to speak, benefit from their policies.
Nunberg, who teaches linguistics at Berkeley (that leftist stronghold),
manages to discuss all this with great verve, and more drollery than anger.
And he doesn't fail to note that the left, as well as the right, can grossly
pervert language. But the latter has been more successful at this game
during the past generation.
The Democrats, as Nunberg notes, need to do a lot of language "reframing."
I'd also suggest that they remember that people are not entirely economic
animals -- that to many, religious and other moral values might be far more
important than their standard of living.
"Talking Right is a useful addition to the stack of books that should
include George Orwell's Politics and the English Language, and a handy --
and funny -- guide to navigate through today's campaign verbiage.
Robert Whitcomb is The Providence Journal's editorial-page editor.
Distributed by Scripps Howard News Service, www.scrippsnews.com.