Politics Through Intimidation: The Picture of Dorian Gray Is Alive and Well-Unfortunately
American Eclectic
July 15, 2022
Every four years I brought students to Iowa to see the first in the nation caucus. One trip one year might be to a Democratic caucus, another year to a Republican one. In 2016, the trip was to a Republican caucus. The various candidates not all but some of them, had speakers who came to the front of the room to say why they supported Ted Cruz, Ben Carson, Carly Fiorina, Donald Trump—interestingly no one spoke for Jeb Bush, although at the time he seemed to have a lot of wind behind his sails.
Each of the speakers was interesting and quite coherent, well, except for one. There was no saber rattling, no culture war to win, no fear of the death of civilization as we know it. A physician spoke for Ben Carson, about meeting him, about why he supported him—nothing that would go over well on Fox News, jut an excellent thoughtful speech. Next, a disabled Naval commander spoke, with his granddaughter holding the microphone, about his support for Carly Fiorina, a great three-minute speech, clear, coherent, sincere—another never-to-be-seen on Fox News as a moment to arouse anger. Then came the Donald Trump speaker. He got up quickly from his chair, the chair being hit by the back of his legs and stomped to the podium. He was the last to speak and when he reached the podium, he grabbed it and slammed it down simply yelling “Enough,” as he looked to his right. Then he did the same thing looking to his left and finally straight ahead. He was done, three words, well one, just repeated.
What stood out was that there was no thunderous rousting support for this performance, there was simply silence. I saw state troopers standing against the walls slowly move toward him.
Many of the people, perhaps a thousand or more, seemed either put off or were embarrassed by this display. I heard mumblings of “what was that!” The people I met were courteous, nice, friendly, open, and made my visit enjoyable.
Politics as practiced by unfortunately too many, particularly those that do not necessarily have well-developed opinions, or maybe think they know things but know next to little about anything, tend consist of outrage or resentment—and what they are really aiming for is intimidation.
Several years back I moderated a debate between the incumbent mayor and the challenger at a town meeting in a midsize Midwest city. After each candidate spoke, members of the audience asked questions. Most of the questions seemed thoughtful—none were about issues playing out at a national issue, but sewers, annexation, property taxes, access to local government sites online. Well, there was one man who felt the need to make a pronouncement, with anger in his voice, about the importance of guns and to pressure each candidate then and there to take a pledge they would each support the unfettered access to guns because as he put it, “This is America.” I guess none of us knew that.
What stood out about this display was that it had something in common with the podium slamming monosyllabic speaker in Iowa—a passion that verged on rage with the intention of intimidation. I looked around the room as this pledge pusher spoke and after he was done, there was no thunderous support for him either, there was only silence—and more embarrassment at what they had just witnessed. The two candidates really did not respond directly about a pledge for something but simply voiced support for whatever the laws were regarding guns: They quickly moved on. He quickly stomped out of the meeting. He had said his piece and whatever anger and resentment he had was, no doubt, carried with him to somewhere else.
James Madison in Federalist Paper #10 wrote:
It is in vain to say, that enlightened statesmen will be able to adjust these clashing interests, and render them all subservient to the public good. Enlightened statesmen will not always be at the helm: Nor, in many cases, can such an adjustment be made at all, without taking into view indirect and remote considerations, which will rarely prevail over the immediate interest which one party may find in disregarding the rights of another, or the good of the whole.
That politicians have difficulties rising above the immediacy of rage, resentment, frustration seems the normal for many—particularly in the Republican Party, because the aim is to fire up voters for the next election. Look at Representative Adam Kinzinger (R, IL) who is on the January 6th committee, examining the riots that day and the invasion of the U.S. Capitol and that he has received death threats, along with his wife and son of less than one-year old. A letter addressed to his wife stated in part, “[A]lthough it might take time, he will be executed. But don’t worry! You and Christian will be joining Adam in hell too!” I did not notice any of his Republican colleagues, even those that support all the false claims Donald Trump makes, step forward to display concern at least publicly for what Representative Kinzinger and his wife must still be going through. Going along with other Republicans would have been so easy for Kinzinger to do—and avoid this type of death threat.
That Kinzinger’s colleagues can be expected to suddenly sound reasonable, calm, balanced might be too much to ask. Death threats against members of Congress seem to be the normal these days. Representative Andrew Garbarino (R, NY) was one of thirteen Republicans in the House of Representatives to vote with Democrats on an infrastructure bill and he received death threats. As Garbarino expressed it, “It’s amazing people want to kill me over paving roads and clean water.”
The death threats against Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, since the draft version of the Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Organization opinion was released, have been played up by conservatives and Republicans. Senator Marco Rubio (R, FL), expressed concern about the threats against Justice Kavanaugh saying he had a “terrible feeling.” I am sure Senator Rubio wanted to express the same concern regarding Congressmen Kinzinger and Garbarino but why show a broad concern when the purpose is to turn something as serious as a death threat into a politically useful moment. Considering the seriousness of these threats, why protestors can be allowed in front of his house, or, for the matter the homes of elected officials, does not seem like a necessary place to hold a protest. Representative Pramilla Jayapal (D, WA), was threatened with a man arrested outside of her home. I wonder if Senator Rubio wants to add his concern regarding Dr. Caitlin Bernard, the OB/GYN who performed the abortion on the 10-year-old girl who was raped, since it has been revealed she received a threat that her daughter would be kidnapped (this before this particular abortion). Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D, NY) has received more than several death threats. One individual (Brendan Hunt) was sentenced to 19 months in prison, which seems like an unusually short sentence for threatening Ocasio-Cortez, as well as Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D, CA) and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D, NY).
Newsweek reported a 93.5 percent increase in death threats against members of Congress between 2017 and 2021. A January informal poll by Roll Call pointed out that of the 147 members of Congress who responded, 110 had received death threats, approximately 75 percent overall, with 74 percent of Democrats and 77 percent of Republicans. A siege mentality among members of Congress was reflected in a tweet by Representative Ocasio-Cortez (D, NY), “Many of us have spent weeks in armored vehicles & traveling through backs of buildings [because] of right-wing threats.” Several reports point to the increase in threats associated with Donald Trump elected President. Those underlying feelings were there before the Trump Presidency, but his election seemed to have contributed to taking political sentiment in a new, and more dangerous, direction. A New York Times report from February stated:
A plurality of the cases reviewed by The Times, more than a third, involved Republican or pro-Trump individuals threatening Democrats or Republicans they found insufficiently loyal to the former president.
I wonder how many of these people making threats are registered to vote and actually vote, or if threats are their sole means of how they think they are participating in politics. Since death threats seem to be aimed at members of either political party then part of Donald Trump’s legacy is that his supporters, or rather some portion of them, are willing to attack anything and everyone that annoys them in anyway: Intimidation as the new normal. I suspect that many of these people, because they are so easily worked up into some level of outrage, might as easily stop voting-assuming they vote at all. In other words, their level of outrage is needed to get some portion of them to the polls—particularly if Republicans see them as needed to win this year’s Congressional elections and the 2024 Presidential election.
The short-term beckons and the long-term implications are rationalized away. Representative Elise Stefanik (R, NY), the third-ranking Republican in the House of Representatives who serves as chair of the House Republican Conference, tweeted, “Democrats desperately want wide open borders and mass amnesty for illegals allowing them vote.” I’m sure later she thought to herself that nothing she said was true. How exactly would illegals get the vote? What political and legal process, would approve it? Wouldn’t it be suddenly noticed that there was a tremendous increase in voter rolls of illegal aliens registered to vote? Representative Stefanik knew none of that needed to be addressed. Her tweet was about feeding raw meat to those that acted like the Trump single-word speaker in Iowa or the gun-pledger. She had a tweet using the term “pedo grifters” a reference to pedophilia (adults sexually attracted to children). Part of the tweet stated, “The White House, House Dems, & usual pedo grifters are so out of touch with the American people.” It does not matter how this tweet was walked back later, wondering about how that was received by probably the people making death threats is the issue: First impressions matter. Was this tweet really necessary as a way to get reasonable and normal Republicans and independent voters to the polls so the Republicans can hope to become the majority party in Congress in the upcoming November elections?
Representative Stefanik has not been the only one to use pedophilia as a way to attack Democrats. Dinesh D’Souza, an individual who seems to carry a great deal of hate in his political opinions, tweeted a picture of former President Bill Clinton walking his daughter, Chelsea, down the aisle and there is Ghislaine Maxwell, sentenced to 20 years in prison for aiding Jeffrey Epstein, the convicted sex offender, sitting in one of the church’s pews. D’Souza’s quote reads, “If you’re wondering why the pedophiles in Ghislane Maxwell’s sex ring have never been named, here’s a potential clue.” Of course, there are pictures of Epstein with Donald Trump but why make a bipartisan statement on pedophilia when D’Souza’s hatred is so focused and blind.
Get them riled up enough, perhaps with irresponsible references to pedophilia, and they will vote, so seems the way to win an election. Unfortunately, getting them riled up may include more than voting but death threats too. I wonder if Representative Stefanik sees herself in a mirror after she shoots out a whole bundle of questionable tweets like the illegals voting one or the one on pedophilia and wonders what she has become. D’Souza comes across as a lost cause who has been consumed by his hate.
Oscar Wilde’s The Picture of Dorian Gray provides an interesting perspective. In Wilde’s story, the picture becomes ugly, distorted, monstrous while Gray stays young and handsome. Gray was willing to sell his soul to stay young and handsome, and the offer was accepted. He then goes on to lead an amoral life. By looking at the picture, Gray saw who he really was. An apt quote from the novel goes, “The harmony of soul and body-how much that is! We in our madness have separated the two, and have invented a realism that is vulgar, an ideality that is void.” A lecturer at Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government who was assigned Stefanik as a student fellow more than fifteen years ago, described her at the time as “extreme bright” and “public-service oriented.” His opinion of her now, which echoes the “harmony of soul” quote is, “No power, no position is worth the complete loss of your integrity.” Bill McKibben, a well-known environmentalist addressed Stefanik’s congressional district in upstate New York as moderate stating, “…her district is by no means a right-wing stronghold, or at least it wasn’t before Trump emerged: it voted for Barack Obama twice.” Wondering about a public persona of Stefanik versus a contrasting behind-the-scenes rational person is something to ponder. Hopefully, a rational person is there to make important decisions when the need arises.
An April 2021 Reuters/Ipsos poll tried to understand what Republicans believed about the last Presidential election and about what happened on January 6th at the U.S, Capitol. The poll came to conclusions that were not surprising. This poll, it probably doesn’t matter which one is examined since other polls also show support for the same belief. This poll, in particular, noted that six in ten Republicans believed Trump’s claim the election was stolen. It’s that four in ten I find interesting. How do Republicans show that they want to reach the reasonable and normal Republicans, as well as independent voters and not simply play to the unhinged? Six in ten sounds like the majority, but I have my doubts. Within those six there are people who can be reached to find their way back to normalcy. But tweets like those that Representative Stefanik throws around will not help, all she is doing is encouraging more conspiracy thinking and death threats.
Some years back a local politician, Republican, who was running for re-election was in my office at the university I taught at, and I joked that his posters spread all over the place loudly proclaimed him THE Conservative. As we spoke, he said that yes, he was conservative but, at times, was maybe conservative-ish—shades of gray, not absolutes. He even referred to government programs he supported and Federal government money he was hoping would come to his jurisdiction. The conservative-ish comment was intelligent, thoughtful, and accurate. We joked that in public he could never speak like that—the audience demanded the absolute—he was THE Conservative.
One has to wonder whether Representative Stefanik has been lost to her Dorian Gray circumstance or if there is something there where she knows the persona she is putting on is simply that and the conversations she has behind closed doors are more complex and thoughtful then the stuff she is throwing at her constituents or when she does TV cable news appearances that are closer to what WWF wrestlers spit out as they are about to enter the ring to destroy, mangle or humiliate their opponent. Her tweets help to feed an environment for intimidation.
Notes
Laura Bassett, “By Calling Democrats ‘Pedos,’ Rep. Elise Stefanik Meant ‘Children,’ Her Staff Says,” Jezebel (May 14, 2022): https://jezebel.com/by-calling-all-democrats-pedos-rep-elise-stefanik-mea-1848927023
Tom Boggioni, “’The politics of ugliness’: Elise Stefanik buried by Bill McKibben for choosing the path of Trump,” Rawstory (June 3, 2022): https://www.rawstory.com/elise-stefanik-2657454158/
Catie Edmondson and Mark Walker, “One Menacing Call After Another: Threats Against Lawmakers Surge, New York Times (February 9, 2022): https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/09/us/politics/politician-death-threats.html
Dinesh D’Souza, Tweet: https://twitter.com/DineshDSouza/status/1477027122761932808
Kadia Goba, “A Man Was Arrested For Threatening A Republican Who Voted For Democrats’ Infrastructure Plan,” BuzzFeed News (November 12, 2021): https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/kadiagoba/garbarino-house-republicans-biden-infrastructure-plan
Rebecca Klapper, “Death Threats to Members of Congress Have Doubled This Year, Capitol Police say,” Newsweek (May 18, 2021): https://www.newsweek/com/death-threarts-members-congress-have doubled-this-year-capitol-police-say-1592587
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Tweet: https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1545861825929117702
Jim Saska, “‘Rise in violent rhetoric’: Lawmakers in both parties report spike in death threats,” Roll Call (January 20, 2022): https://rollcall.com/2022/01/20/rise-in-violent-rhetoric-lawmakers-in-both-parties-report-spike-in-death-threats/
Andrew Stanton, “Harvard Lecturer ‘Shattered’ by Elise Stefanik Embracing Trump’s ‘Big Lie’,” Newsweek (May 22, 2022): https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/harvard-lecturer-shattered-by-elise-stefanik-embracing-trump-s-big-lie/ar-AAXB8rb
Lucian K. Truscott IV, “Let’s remember that along with everything else, Donald Trump’s a total pig,” AlterNet (August 8, 2020): https://www.alternet.org/2020/08/lets-remember-that-along-with-everything-else-donald-trumps-a-total-pig/
John Wood. Jr., “Dinesh D’Souza serves misinformation about 2020 election to gullible conservatives,” USA Today (July 9, 2022): https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/dinesh-d-souza-serves-misinformation-about-2020-election-to-gullible-conservatives/ar-AAZooMk?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=2b2d6e4058bc4032ad42cb2f02452dcd. D’Souza made a film, 2000 Mules. The film attempted to prove Donald Trump was right, that the 2020 election was stolen from him. In this article former Attorney General Bill Barr stated, “The (Georgia Bureau of Investigation) was unimpressed with it. I was similarly unimpressed with it." Wood refers to D’Souza’s film as “flimsy.”