This morning’s Wall Street Journal opinion section contains a lot of what one expects to see. There’s an opinion piece making a big fuss over the fake scandal at the EPA. There’s an editorial claiming that the latest job figures prove the failure of Obama’s economic plan — something I dealt with in the Times. All of this follows on yesterday’s editorial asserting that the Minnesota senatorial election was stolen.
All of this is par for the course; the WSJ editorial page has been like this for 35 years. Nonetheless, it got me wondering: what do these people really believe?
I mean, they’re not stupid — life would be a lot easier if they were. So they know they’re not telling the truth. But they obviously believe that their dishonesty serves a higher truth — one that is, in effect, told only to Inner Party members, while the Outer Party makes do with prolefeed.
The question is, what is that higher truth? What do these people really believe in?
Paul Krugman ponders an age-old question:
I sometimes rely on the Religion Explanation, i.e., They believe in God and all other sorts of unreal stuff in the spiritual realm which leads them to be comfortable believing all sorts of unreal stuff in the physical realm.
Sometimes I just go with the Malevolent Sociopath Explanation, i.e., people capable of constantly peddling fantastical fabrications in the service of some higher agenda are just out-and-out sociopaths, incapable of recognizing the emotional wickedness of their ways.
These theories can feel comforting at times but never seem to contain the whole answer. Is it one or the other? Is it something else? What say you?
Update: John Cole weighs in:
I’m gonna roll with tax cuts, invisible jeebus, and “shut up, that’s why!” But even that isn’t accurate, because we know that most of the right-wing elites don’t even believe in the invisible jeebus stuff (remember when all the folks at the NRO and other right-wing joints were asked about whether they believed in evolution, and they all did- I can’t find the link), they just pretend to be godbotherers and flat-earthers to keep the rubes busy. So what do they actually believe in?
Leave a Reply
Fast Food
Unhinged vagina-shackler on Komen’s volte face:Cancer is Cancer! Aboration is Aboration!
(0 comments)Since it’s Mitt Romney week everywhere, I figured I’d post this op-ed by an ex-Mormon, which is a pretty interesting take at the institutional culture of the LDS church. Not much to say about it, but it’s definitely worth 5 or so minutes of your time. (0 comments)Why Bipartisanship Is Impossible, In One Sentence
When one party climbs back to power by promising action on the economy, does nothing on it, and instead spends literally all its time trying to hurt the other party. (0 comments)New From The Gingrich-Cain Front
Newt rants about cable movies he doesn’t like, and flips out when Herman tries to seize control. Catch all the fun here. And the main site is here, as always. (0 comments)Headline of the Week: Making Rapeanade
Leave it to TBogg:
(0 comments)Rick Santorum Suggests That When Life Gives You Rape, You Should Make Rapeanade Back when I was in junior high and the Clinton Impeachment was going on, I could hardly have imagined that Clinton would be used as an excuse for wrongdoing by Republican leaders. But that’s where we are. Interesting, isn’t it? (0 comments)Catch up with the official Gingrich-Cain “Great Statesmen” series over at @GingrichCain12. (0 comments)Only 65% of White Americans Have a Favorable Opinion of MLK Jr
…with a whimper. Drum is worth reading on this. I think he’s just got to be the most overhyped and overcovered guy who never managed better than third place since…Joe Lieberman? (0 comments)Mitt Romney's Overwhelming Inauthenticity
It’s amazing to me that Mitt Romney brings up France as a scary comparison point to himself so often when he spent years there and speaks the language. It’s such a minor point, but telling. Of all the people running for president, Mitt Romney has to be the most aware that the rightwing caricature of ... (0 comments)Mother Teresa Doesn't Deserve Sainthood
Case in point. It’s amazing how all the famous/respected Catholic figures from the 1990s have turned out to be incredibly corrupt, isn’t it? I’m sure they’re somehow connected. Of course, as I’m a Protestant I know little about such things. (1 comments)I Fixed It! Ban Sitting Politicians From Running For Another Office
Wonkette reminded me of one of the provisions that I want to write into my fantasy Constitution:No person who holds any elected office shall be permitted to seek election to any other office until he shall have permanently vacated his current post.
(2 comments)The Kardashians want their own magazine?
Unintentionally hilarious: “Bachmann, 55, told a small group of supporters Tuesday night that she was staying in the presidential race…”What other kind of group of Bachmann supporters could there be?(0 comments)Santorum Finishes #2, Sliding Down In The Final Minutes To Lose To Romney
I was really hoping that Santorum would win the Iowa caucuses. The disgustingly puerile humor would have lasted for WEEKS! (0 comments)Good stuff: The National Labor Relations Board announced on Wednesday that it had adopted new rules that would speed up unionization elections, its last major policy decision before it drops to two members and can no longer make new decisions. It approved the rules in a 2-to-1 vote. The labor board said the new rules, which have ... (0 comments)A Dinosaur Infringed On A Patent For Rocks...
Reading this lead-in to an article today made me think of cavemen and dinosaurs:“The long-running antitrust suit Novell filed regarding Microsoft’s alleged tactics to prevent WordPerfect from running properly in Windows 95 seemed to be on the verge of conclusion…”
... (0 comments)
(DOWN THE VINE
Syndication
I think there's a significant. genetic component that influences the beliefs, behaviors and world views of people, including this sort of thing. Brains/biochemistry actually work differently. Not solely genetic, of course, but more significant than is commonly recognized. Not just environment, good/bad childhood experiences, parents, community etc. I read some good research addressing this question, but can't remember the source. Just like there is a genetic component to the tendency to be a happy-pants Tigger type, or worried Eeyore type. I think we all appear quite similar in looks, like all dogs look like dogs, but they vary widely in small but significant ways in genetics, personality, intelligence, tendencies: think poodle vs pitbull vs….
They believe in…
Profits — cynical deception and sensationalist coverage sells (think FOX News--WSJ opinion is the niche's print counterpart, just more intellectual)
Political power — cultural populism and lying about your opposition works to win elections
National security — the party of Nixon
Some--not most--have a genuine appreciation for classical liberalism: freer markets and more limited government…
Those are the ones I have something in common with. But I'm not willing to lie or abuse cultural populism to further the cause, so I'm reasonably certain I'd make a terrible partisan pundit or politician. (maybe those with the Nixonian national security obsession are more willing.)
If they are using the religious angle, as you suggested, they are doing a bad job of it. The Lord created the earth for us to use and safe guard, not to use and abuse, as we have been.
I think you may be onto something with the religious angle. Childhood training in religion establishes an intellectual precedent for being able to believe in something, to the point where it is one of the foundation stones of your very being, that will not stand up to intelligent scrutiny, and yet be able to use intelligence and logic in other areas. I think the basis of this is a core belief that you need for this to be true, so it must be. Once this is established in people's psyches, how hard can it be for them to extend it to political views, which like religion involve our relationships with the world around us?
quite right. this has always been the most appealing line of inquiry for me. there is something about having blind, unquestioning faith in something that seems to muddle people's rational faculties
My problem with the “Religious Rights” views on Christianity is in their warped concepts of the Bible. I am a Christian but I cannot agree with their views that we are here to dam others to hell or decide who goes to heaven and who does not. That is the Lords job. And while I am all for forgiving those who abuse their power through sinning, I am not going to put them back in power. We are put here to be stewards of the earth, not exploiters’ of the earth. We are to live our lives as examples of Christ not as judges of others.