The following is from prominent liberal blogger Hilzoy, and was approvingly quoted by Andrew Sullivan:
Something about this election is bringing out all the right’s fantasies about the left, no matter how implausible or inconsistent with one another. Obama is a scary foreigner /and/ the sneering guy at the country club; a doctrinaire Marxist /and/ an unprincipled flip-flopper; a Muslim with a hatemongering pastor; naive yet corrupt; reckless but wimpy. But even I hadn’t expected the charge that he plans to install government-controlled FM receivers in our air conditioners.
Minor point: just because a lousy argument is directed at a dumb idea doesn’t make the argument any good. Major point: mashing the claims of several of your opponents together and then shouting “inconsistency!” is an idiotic way to argue.
The clearest case of this problem is the allegation that Obama is “a Muslim with a hatemongering pastor.” Well, as a matter of fact, Obama’s former pastor was a nutcase. Even Obama realized this, that’s why the guy is Obama’s former pastor. The fact that there are some idiots out there who think Obama is Muslim doesn’t change this.
I have vague memories–and would always appreciate anyone who could provide a citation in the comments–that this gets used on atheists. “Scientists disagree about how this particular feature evolved, so the Earth is 6,000 years old!” Or, “Historians disagree about how Christianity came into being, therefore Jesus did real miracles!” This is complete rubbish, it doesn’t follow. And that’s all I have to say about that.
I don’t think Hilzoy arguing that any particular point is wrong, just pointing out the doublethink involved when some Obama opponents look for anything that will make him look bad. The point is not about Obama; it’s about conservative propaganda.
But “doublethink” is when an individual holds two conflicting ideas at the same time. Not when two people in the same broad ideological camp hold conflicting ideas about something.
I’ve seen this often, though I can’t think of a specific example right now. I just remember often thinking: “But it wasn’t the same people who said these different things, even if they are all on the same side of the issue!”
“The point is not about Obama; it’s about conservative propaganda.”
All partisan political propaganda tends to be like that, it’s just that you tend to notice it more when it comes from “the other side”.
You’re right, Michael, “doublethink” really isn’t appropriate here. But I still don’t think it’s irrelevant that a lot of the most common attacks on Obama are inconsistent with each other, and that at least half of them are way off base. This point may not dismiss any particular criticism, but it does illustrate how out of touch a lot of Obama’s critics are.
And I certainly didn’t mean to imply that the left doesn’t propagandize. I’d be interested to see if this happens with critics of McCain or, more probably, Bush.
“But I still don’t think it’s irrelevant that a lot of the most common attacks on Obama are inconsistent with each other, and that at least half of them are way off base.”
I think that’s because he’s a lot less known than McCain, so there’s a bigger gap to fill, either with positive things, or negative ones. To those who don’t know him too much, a lot more rumors have a chance to sound plausible.
It’s also interesting that it makes a big difference wether you are attractive, intelligent, charismatic, etc.
Obama is those things, so his fans – who might not know that much about him – will tend to give him the benefit of the doubt and fill the gaps with bunnies and rainbows.
If you had put Obama’s brain in Richard Nixon’s body, I bet that people would fill the gaps in their knowledge of him differently.
Yes, just because there are contradictory smears going around against Obama doesn’t mean that any individual is contradicting themselves.
However, there’s a different conclusion to be drawn: Obama’s right-wing opponents are spectacularly failing to unite around a consistent set of smears against him, and so it’s going to be harder for any particular smear to stick when its anti-smear is still receiving lots of air time. This makes me optimistic about November.