The Gut: Tribalism’s Home and Not Always a Bad Thing

Thanks, Shannon for your blogging, which has provided a smorgasbord. 

 

In the comments to his “Identity-Politics Insanity” post, Helen’s observation reminds us of a truth about American politics but more importantly about human nature.  For instance, a balanced ticket is attractive, because we assume more ideas are in play and more people feel an identity with their leaders.  On the other hand, Shannon is right:   identity politics encourages a tribalism whose restraint has been the great triumph of western civilization and a prerequisite for a diverse nation ruled by predictable, equitable laws.  We rightly fear identities that trump law & duty, but we also fear ideologies which encourage children to betray their parents and wives their husbands.  We ignore such passions – natural to our species – at our own peril: unacknowledged they threaten chaos; diminished, we lack a glue that holds communities and even identities together.

 

Read more

Identity-Politics Insanity

Much as I am grateful for any phenomenon that might keep the U.S. Presidency out of the hands of extreme leftists, I can’t help but think that these women have gone completely identity-politics insane. 

A presidential election should turn on issues of character and policy. These women know next to nothing about Palin except her sex. One cannot imagine substantial policy overlap between her and Clinton. Yet, it looks like potentially significant numbers of Clinton supporters might jump ship just so they can support a woman! 

Read more

Sarah Palin in 2012

McCain is 70 72. He’ll be 74 76 by the time the next elections rolls around. If he wins this time around he most likely will not run in 2012. That makes Palin the Republican presumptive nominee for 2012. 

Course, if McCain wins that means Obama loses and then we might have Hillary versus Palin. 

I’d pay to see that. 

The “Staring Down” Meme

So, Sarah Palin has was only selected by McCain to run as VP a few hours ago. In reading just a few web pages I saw several repetitions of variations of “Can you/I can’t imagine her staring down Putin.” A quick google search showed dozens of instances, many of them in comments. Either this represents some coordinated message or the internet spreads things even quicker than I thought. 

I find the choice of the phrase “staring down” very interesting. “Staring down” describes an unsubtle test of will. You don’t have to be smart, sophisticated and cunning to stare someone down. You just need emotional strength and determination. You can be dumb as a fence post and stare someone down as long as you don’t loss your nerve. If they thought her to be unintelligent or unsophisticated they would have used a phrase such as “can you imagine her outmaneuvering Putin?” By choosing to use the phrase “stare down”, Palin critics reveal that they believe her emotionally weak and easily dominated. 

What is it about her being a governor, a mayor and a hunter that makes these assumedly-spontaneous critics think Palin possess no emotional strength? It’s doubly strange given that the Left never stereotypes Republicans as lacking resolve in foreign affairs. Indeed, they usually make the opposite criticism that Republicans hold their ground when they could relent and compromise. So why do so many leftists look at Palin and see someone who will crumble under pressure? 

I think it can only be because she is a mother. Leftists associate mothers with doormats. They believe a woman who rejects the narcissistic, me, me, me vision of capital “F” feminism must be a wimp and a chump. For the leftist, the fact that Palin chose to have a large family automatically means she doesn’t have the willpower to stand up for herself. Since she cannot stand up for herself, she cannot therefore stand up to Putin. 

It’s bigoted and silly and like a lot things leftists say, this tells us more about the Left than it does about Palin. 

(Addendum: Of course, it almost goes without saying, that a lot of people cannot imagine Obama staring anyone down. Given that his in his five-sentence statement on the Russian invasion of Georgia he couldn’t stop himself from making a dig at unrelated American policy. I think Obama’s response to Putin will be to grovel and beg for forgiveness.)

Do We Want a President Who Makes Ayers happy?

In the summer of 1995, a group of influential leftists gathered in the home of unrepentant Maoist-terrorists William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn in order to hear Illinois State Senator Alice Palmer introduce her hand-picked successor Barack Obama. Imagine that scene. Palmer looks at Ayers, then looks at Obama and in her mind perceives no politically significant contradiction or conflict between the two people. Neither did anyone else at the gathering. No one looked around and thought, “man, those two don’t belong in the same room,” or “there’s no way that the people who accept and respect Ayers will accept and respect Obama.” 

This meeting tells us something important about Obama. It tells us what kind of president these leftists think Obama will be. 

Read more