Be afraid, be very afraid, part two

Updated There was a demonstration in San Francisco a few days ago where a few thousand protestors "decried the re-election of George W. Bush and the continuing war in Iraq," according to the San Francisco Chronicle. The article ended this way:

About a dozen Bush supporters, wielding signs that read "The silent majority has spoken" also showed up and marched behind the crowd.

"I'm in this to promote the fact that we won," said Victor Tracey, 20, a San Francisco State University student.

Not to defend Bush's policies, not to defend the war in Iraq, not even to say "we're right and you're wrong." No, it was to "promote the fact that we won." That's what was important. The winning. The power. The surge of victory. And that seems to be true of so many Shrub people - or, more exactly, the loud-mouthed yahoos who think that they speak for everyone who voted GOP, think that they represent the "real America."

"We won." That's what counts for them.

This actually isn't new. In June of 1995, I wrote this to a friend in the UK about the GOP victory in the 1994 Congressional elections. I was actually referring to GOPpers in Congress, but it still fits.

The difference in the outcome was the Perot voters, those I call the "a'ginners" - i.e., whatever it is, they're a'gin' it. ... Although not a large segment of voters, they went 2-1 for Republicans, enough to change enough elections to change Congress - putting the Senate in the Dole-drums and subjecting us to the spectacle of a bunch of Newt-wits stomping around Washington, verbally wiggling their asses in a touchdown taunt, conceitedly smug in their condescension, who seem less excited about what they can do with their new-found power than they are by the simple fact that they have it. It's the power itself that's getting them off, far more than any notions of some good (even for themselves) they might accomplish by wielding it.

Supposedly, Henry Kissinger called power "the ultimate aphrodisiac." It's clear that for some, that is true. Listen to them. Read their posts, attend to their comments. Note how often they boil down to "We won! So shut up!" It's not "we won so now we can do such-and-such" (except for when "such-and-such" is some form of humiliation of the "losers"), it's just "we won." It was important - vital - to them to be on the winning side.

And not just the winning side - but the winning side with attitude. Or, more accurately, "at'tude." The posed, adopted, in-your-face style. These people responded to Bush not in spite of his arrogant, conceited, immature, stupid, counter-productive rejection of not only world opinion but of any contrary opinion, not in spite of the fact that he despises fact, nuance, complexity, and contemplation, but because of it. To be blunt, the more reasonable John Kerry appeared, the more contempt they had for him.

This obviously does not describe all or even, I'd easily venture, a majority of Shrub's supporters. But it does describe a certain subset of them, a vocal subset eager to wrap themselves in the mantle of power and prepared to swallow any fantasy that holds off their sense of powerlessness in the face of reality.

And that, in fact, is what I think drives many of them: a sense that they are not in control of events, a certain sense of desperation about the world around them and their place in it, and a resulting willingness to glom onto anything that will give them a sense of control, of power, even something that will in the longer run destroy the very security they seek.

Because of that, it is a waste of time talking to them or arguing with them. They are lost causes until (and if) they mature (noting here that maturity is not necessarily a matter of age). So don't waste your time. Instead, argue to those around them. Point out their absurdities, but not to them, to those that associate with them. Choose your targets wisely and don't waste your ammunition on targets that have, in matters of logic, already been destroyed.

Do I sound cruel, unforgiving, rigid, dismissive of some? Then so be it. This is a battle for justice, it has been for decades, not a battle of violence or arms, but a battle of rhetoric (I don't say ideas because we're the only ones who have any) and commitment - and I'm tired of being expected to play nice with the bullies and bigots.

Updated with a Footnote: "The silent majority has spoken." Gore Vidal used to delight in pointing out when Nixon popularized the term that it came from classical Greece and meant the dead. "At last," he'd say, "we have a president who truly understands his constituency." Plus ca change....