« I don't mean to overwhelm you with posts, but... | Main | Derivatives contracts are exempt from normal bankruptcy law »
The Gorgon in the room
The empirics on beautiful women imply that, in a great many cases, a) they have their own agendas, b) they stick to those agendas, no matter what they may say in public, or no matter what "more experienced" men tell them to do, c) they are very good at fooling the men they associate with and they are used to thinking they can get away with it, and d) agendas are often more local and less global than you think. If you don't believe me, read the final act of Henry V.
Andrew Sullivan is calling Sarah Palin "Rovian." Maybe, but her first order of business has been to fool the Republican establishment, not the American people. (Read this silly AEI guy.) Her few genuine words on foreign policy indicate her positions are hardly the modern Republican norm. She is "unusual" on pot smoking and benefits for gays and juror nullification. The Republicans are underestimating her role as a Hegelian agent of world-historical change, just as the Democrats did at first.
Which narrative do you find more plausible?:
"Lovely Sarah, she's saying and doing everything we want her to. What a quick learner. How pliable she is. Remember Descartes on tabula rasa?"
"Once John and I are elected, they'll need me more than I need them."
The people who are right now the happiest may end up the most concerned. For better or worse, they're about to lose control of their movement.
Posted by Tyler Cowen on September 15, 2008 at 03:08 AM in Political Science | Permalink
Comments
Sarah Palin is good looking (a 7), "beautiful" is a stretch. On foreign policy she appears to have no strongly held convictions or thoughts, so in all likelihood she'll go along with whatever faction she thinks is most likely to support her and her real agenda, whatever that might be.
Posted by: vanya at Sep 15, 2008 6:14:56 AM
So, she's going to get McCain elected and will turn out to be less socially conservative than advertised. Sounds good to me!
Posted by: Hei Lun Chan at Sep 15, 2008 6:40:42 AM
Reality check. Vice-presidents aren't agents of world-historical change, or much of anything else, not unless and until fate and circumstance conspire to promote them. This post is like one of those pre-written obituaries kept on file in a newspaper office: best not to see the light of day before it's relevant.
Posted by: at Sep 15, 2008 6:53:10 AM
I'd go further and say that Sarah Palin has already transformed the conservative movement, by forcing them to openly embrace ambitious young women, working-class husbands who give up work for their career wives, declared pot smokers/inhalers, premarital sex and pregnancy, and children with special needs. The only way that this might change is if she proves to be less qualified than she seems to be.
Also, the fact that she is a beautiful woman is irrelevant (I don't care if it's sexist or not). What is important is that she seems to be a pragmatic conservative who has put low priority on "social" issues.
Posted by: Snorri Godhi at Sep 15, 2008 7:51:48 AM
I don't get it. Everything Tyler said about Palin goes double for Obama. And he's running for President.
Funny to think of Palin as too smart for the job.
Posted by: Jason at Sep 15, 2008 7:52:49 AM
The fact that she knows what jury nullification is, assuming she does, and doesn't think it means changing the system to using military tribunals, says a lot for a politician. A lot more than not knowing what the paradoxical Bush Doctrine is.
It may even mean that the right people could talk some sense into on foreign policy.
Posted by: Andrew at Sep 15, 2008 8:49:34 AM
Addendum:
The critics are making the mistake of projection. I use my Dad as the quintessential moderate model. In a recent discussion with him, he didn't even know what a neocon was. For the record, to me, that's to his credit. I literally have not seen or heard the term "Bush Doctrine" in years, even though I rail against it any time it is insinuated and read a lot about this crap. I bet it isn't even really a thing, maybe started out as a Krauthammerism but became more of a pejorative. We haven't heard axis of evil in a while either. Do I think someone like my Dad is going to care if someone else doesn't know what Charlie Gibson rhinks he means by the "Bush Doctrine?" Nope.
The media will catch up:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24345216-20261,00.html
Posted by: Andrew at Sep 15, 2008 9:02:41 AM
So what you're saying is, electing Sarah Palin to be a heartbeat away from the Presidency is a HUGE roll of the dice?
I will agree with this: She's definitely become a major player in the Republican party on the national scene in an awful hurry. If nothing else, it looks like McCain has really launched Palin's career in national politics with this pick.
Posted by: mraver at Sep 15, 2008 9:10:38 AM
I cannot stop laughing at Tyler's post. In the first paragraph he pretends to play social scientist--tell us, is beauty a sufficient or a necessary condition for the five great ideas that you learnt by reading Henry V? (I ask a question so I cannot be compared to GWBush). In the second paragraph, his reference is Andrew Sullivan--a prominent social scientist, well known because of his contribution to the practice of claiming victimhood. Finally, he tells Republicans that Sarah can be good or bad depending on what type of Republican you are--but don't worry because she may not know what kind of Republican she is and you cannot control her.
Posted by: E. Barandiaran at Sep 15, 2008 9:13:10 AM
The media will catch up:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au
The Australian media will catch up? Do Australians vote in US elections?
Posted by: at Sep 15, 2008 9:18:20 AM
Reality check. Vice-presidents aren't agents of world-historical change
She won't change the world directly. However, she is opening up the GOP in some needed ways. I'm strongly pro-life, but recognize that in our country with representative government many people of good will do not agree with me. (But don't ask, or compel, me to pay for abortions.)
So, she's going to get McCain elected and will turn out to be less socially conservative than advertised. Sounds good to me!
Sounds good to me, too (even though I'm a social conservative).
I'd go further and say that Sarah Palin has already transformed the conservative movement, by forcing them to openly embrace ambitious young women, working-class husbands who give up work for their career wives, declared pot smokers/inhalers, premarital sex and pregnancy, and children with special needs.
Bingo.
How many fathers of daughters, especially "socially conservative fathers of daughters", want less for their daughters than for their sons? None that I know, and I know plenty.
If you think soccer moms are the only parents who are ambitious for their kids, you haven't met a "socially conservative" soccer dad, especially if he has a soccer playing daughter.
Posted by: at Sep 15, 2008 9:36:57 AM
"Tabula rasa" is usually associated with Locke.
Posted by: David Gordon at Sep 15, 2008 9:59:04 AM
"Tabula rasa" is usually associated with Locke.
Posted by: David Gordon at Sep 15, 2008 10:00:05 AM
A couple of addenda to my previous comment:
First: if Sarah Palin is really a pragmatic conservative, as I believe, then she is more similar to John McCain than many people think.
Second: Sarah Palin is almost certain to serve as a role model for a new generation of conservative women politicians, and this new generation could permanently change the voting pattern of American women. Keep in mind that, contrary to the US, women in the UK and France tend to vote for conservative parties (NB: in the UK, this goes back to when women won the right to vote).
Posted by: Snorri Godhi at Sep 15, 2008 10:02:59 AM
Re: Australians.
I'm learning there are basically two types of people. There are those who first thing look for something critical. These are the people who always make some remark about me writing e-mails at 5 a.m. Then there are those who look at possibilities and don't care what the time stamp is on e-mails. But, that's beside the point. Anyways...
Of course Australians don't vote here, but they do pay attention, and I assume that our news sources pay attention to foreign news sites, who often have a better perspective on us than we do on ourselves.
Posted by: Andrew at Sep 15, 2008 10:24:45 AM
Well, speaking as one who could very well be described as socially-conservative, strongly Christian, and "neo-conservative" (that is, in favor of a forward-leaning foreign and security policy that involves maintaining and spreading liberal democracy throughout the world), I see Governor Palin as "one of us."
I'm mystified as to what it is about her that Tyler Cowen sees as so profoundly transformative. I mean, sure, she's part of the new generation of post-Reagan conservatism, like Bobby Jindal and some others. But, er, you seem to be saying that like I should think it's a bad thing.
Professor, can you perhaps unpack your thought here?
Posted by: David Hecht at Sep 15, 2008 10:31:10 AM
She is decidedly average looking.
Posted by: s. weynard miller at Sep 15, 2008 10:45:04 AM
This post seems to perpetuate the ongoing pattern of treating Sarah Palin as some sort of exotic dangerous alien creature who has suddenly parachuted into our midst and must be carefully sequestered under quarantine before being allowed anywhere near our political system. Quick, get Charlie Gibson to administer a Voight-Kampff test.
However, there are many women who find that viewpoint utterly bizarre. They see themselves in her, believe that they could be her, see themselves as runner-up contestants in a metaphorical pageant in which she has just been crowned queen. They think to themselves, I could be treated that way (or all too likely, I have been treated that way). Glass ceilings and double standards and a lifetime of accumulated small resentments and bingo... poll numbers show white women swinging sharply to the Palin ticket (oops, I mean McCain-Palin).
One might well ask, why is Obama being treated far more deferentially? His background is no less atypical than hers, within the world of politics at the highest level. It's true that we've had far more time to get used to him, to get to know him (or think that we've come to know him). Yet even when he was a newcomer he was never subjected to this kind of insect-under-glass scrutiny.
Posted by: at Sep 15, 2008 11:47:56 AM
There is a fourth possibility. That she is proof that the feminist and social liberals have won the cultural war, even in red states, and we did not notice because we were listening to old men rantings about family values. Only the old men and the WSJ will be unhappy, the vast majority of red state voters know who she is. I doubt anyone that has spent their life in a state where the people expect the government to send them a check every year can really be an economic conservative. If you listen to the complaints of "culturally" conservative voters, what comes across is, not that there should no be government programs to help people, but they are not getting their share of the goodies, and in Alaska everyone gets a share.
Posted by: joan at Sep 15, 2008 12:06:43 PM
So S. Palin is an agent of change. How? Do you expect President McCain to drop dead within three years of his term? Or are you expecting her agency to take effect when she runs and wins in '12?
Posted by: Dennis Tuchler at Sep 15, 2008 12:09:54 PM
So S. Palin is an agent of change. How?
Cathy Young suggested one way:
"Mrs. Palin's marriage actually makes her a terrific role model. One of the best choices a woman can make if she wants a career and a family is to pick a partner who will be able to take on equal or primary responsibility for child-rearing. Our culture still harbors a lingering perception that such men are less than manly -- and who better to smash that stereotype than "First Dude" Todd Palin?"http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122143727571134335.html
Feminists have been banging on for years about men not willing to take their share of the domestic duties. What would it be like to have such a couple in the White House (or, at least, Number One Observatory Circle)? And what would it mean if such a prominent example were conservative rather than liberal? What if an egalitarian marriage came to be seen as a solution that rendered government sponsored gender-equality measures (e.g. government-funded daycare centers) superfluous? It could well be that Palin would be an agent of change more because of who she is than how she would govern.
Posted by: Slocum at Sep 15, 2008 12:36:51 PM
The remarkable thing is that heartland white woman populism has taken this long to emerge. Given that having a vagina is about as majoritarian as being white, worshipping jesus, or speaking english.
The only thing unrepresentative about Palin is how many kids she has (I think it's a bit deviant from the norm to have 5 kids). Also she may have a bit more education than the typical American, and Alaska is a little unusual to be from. Imagine if she had 3 kids and was from the Southwest. It occurs to me on those two points Obama IS more representative (2 kids and from the Midwest). But in overall bundle of traits, Palin is the most pandering/populist I think we've seen since women became a voting majority.
Posted by: Hopefully Anonymous at Sep 15, 2008 1:01:33 PM
If anyone actually read that Australian article it seems to be a round-up of what American political commentators said about Palin and the Bush Doctrine, not just an Aussie opinion piece.
Great blog, by the way, I only just found it through Daniel Finkelstein at the Times' site. Keep up the good work.
Posted by: michael at Sep 15, 2008 1:48:26 PM
Regarding the possible role of a VP, the current series by Barton Gelman in WaPo,
drawn from a book due out tomorrow about Cheney, documents that the whole domestic
surveillance operation was something cooked up in the VP's office, with his attorney,
David Addington, going around ordering people like attorneys general around, claiming
to speak for the president, with a major rebellion in the Justice Department and FBI
brewing, and the VP keeping it from the never well-informed President Bush.
Posted by: Barkley Rosser at Sep 15, 2008 1:52:43 PM
Jason,
You're right--you don't get it. Sarah Palin too smart for the job? Based on her interview with Gibson, I definitely wouldn't say she's smart, but she certainly is uninformed: Bush Doctrine, anyone?
Posted by: CG at Sep 15, 2008 2:01:21 PM
