a bit of rough

The aspect of the Palin phenomenon I find most baffling, and most frustrating, is the refusal of some intelligent, well-informed commentators on the right to acknowledge her utter vacuity. This was almost forgivable during the heat of the election campaign when she seemed, briefly, to offer a shred of hope to the Republican campaign (though she turned to represent an unprecedented disaster for the ticket). If you really, really want your side to win you can convince yourself of some things you'd regard as fairly absurd under normal circumstances. But I mean, that's not really an excuse. And it certainly doesn't apply now.

Of course, following Friday's car crash of a resignation speech, many of her already-dwindling band of supporters in the media have retreated, aghast. But how could they be surprised? Did they really think this woman was Margaret Thatcher? Did they still dream that she might disappear to Alaska, have a Robert Johnson-style meeting at the crossroads, and return as a compound of Hillary Clinton and Henry Kissinger? Hadn't they been listening to her?

Some, unbelievably, hold on to the dream even now - whether out of pride or mischief, I don't know. William Kristol thinks it's all a cunning plan (if so it's of the Baldrick variety). Others - and here we must single out Ross Douthat - wave goodbye to the Sarah they had such hopes for with a yearning, regretful tone, as if penning a letter to a lover they must leave behind:

And now, seemingly, it’s over. Oh, maybe not forever: she’s only 45, young enough (and, yes, talented enough) to have a second act. But last Friday’s bizarre, rambling resignation speech should take her off the political map for the duration of the Obama era.

Douthat goes on to draw a moral that Palin would approve of: it's the elites what done it. The demise of Palin, hounded by a media that hasn''t been as tough on anyone, ever (he doesn't mention Hillary Clinton, but then, the contrast wouldn't flatter the Alaskan) just shows what happens when a working-class woman of doughty good sense tries to break into the cosy and well-guarded world of America's elites. I'm elaborating slightly, but that's the gist of it. Myself, I suspect this is enormously unfair to working-class Americans. Admittedly, I don't know many, but the ones I've met had at least a basic grasp of reality, something Palin clearly lacks.

How to explain this mush from one so clever? As ever, the French have a handy phrase that captures what I think may be going on here: nostalgie de la boue. It means, literally, hunger for the mud, and it's used to describe the way the way that some middle-class people idealise the lower classes, longing to be at one with what they suppose to be a more primitive and more truthful way of being. Douthat has a big brain, is well-educated, terribly middle-class and rather donnish - and he's irresistibly drawn, even now, to the idea of Palin as a kind of noble savage. It used to be the province of the left, this sentiment, but it's been adopted by the American right. It explains a lot about the Palin Delusion.

Comments

[ejoch]

David Frum makes some very good points here
http://newmajority.com/ShowScroll.aspx?ID=8ca3bc1e-e75a-42a9-92e4-bdfa9f8e8937
The parallel with Goldwater is important. As I understand it, there was such a head of steam behind Goldwater-thinking in the GOP in 64, that the intelligent side of the party realised the best thing to do was let him run and be crushed, then sense could reassert itself. Frum seems to be arguing for something similar. Some problems with that though- for one thing, arguably anyone would have lost to LBJ, so using Goldwater as a sacrificial lamb was a no-brainer. The same is not true of 2012, at the moment- too many unknowns especially with the economy. Secondly, Goldwater was a reasonably intelligent man, however much he misdirected it. The potential humiliation for the party of having someone so patently unintelligent as Palin as a figurehead is surely far higher.

[Hal]

Ross Douthat lost me when he tried to argue for a distinction between the meritorcratic ideal, exemplified by Barack Obama, and the democratic ideal, represented by Sarah Palin. Palin stood for the notion that one could rise to the top without having attended Columbia, Harvard Law School, etc. Douthat sidesteps a central problem, though, which is that Palin lacks more than fancy degrees. As you say, it's her vacuity that really sets her apart. To which I would add her willingness to lie, her habitual resort to an us-versus-them stance, and her overdeveloped sense of personal grievance. She is a demagogue, and not a particularly clever one, though quite photogenic. You are onto something with the idea of nostalgie de la boue.

[peter]

I doubt that we would have seen even one-tenth of the praise the right-wing chatterers showered on Palin if she had been a man, or if she had been a less attractive-looking woman. There is an episode of Seinfeld, where Jerry gets into serious disagreement with his own penis, who has been doing all the thinking for him. THAT is what has been happening here with Kristol, Douthat, et al. It certanly does them no credit.

[Marbury]

Agreed.

[Tom]

Trenchant analysis, Marbury.

The most ludicrous bit in Douhat's lament for his imaginary playmate is the notion that Palin's role as McCain's pitbull was 'assigned' to her by McCain's venal professional handlers. As if Sarah Palin wasn't born to vent class resentment, and would really have been happier to simply peddle wholesome All-American Values of thrift and family or whatever condescending claptrap the likes of Douhat think that working Americans ought to represent.