Stupidity and the Peanut Butter and Jelly Sandwich

Thomas Jefferson once stated that democracy and a republican form of government will not survive without an informed and thinking citizenry to support it. The United States has thrived and approached this ideal when education and critical thinking among Americans is high, and as suffered when these qualities wane. A very good example of the correlation can be found in Esquire columnist Charles P. Pierce's book Idiot America: How Stupidity Became a Virtue in the Land of the Free. On the other side are the cranks exemplified by Ignatius Donnelly, who spent a lifetime trying to prove Atlantis once existed, and the con artists like P.T. Barnum, whose career of spectacle had the goal of simply separating fools from their money. Pierce then described the phenomenon of Rush Limbaugh, who lies somewhere in between but also dangerously apart from these two examples and is described by Pierce as simply a charlatan. Donnelly had fantastically silly ideas but they existed as a harmless curiosity. Barnum sold his audience a spectacle and profited handsomely from it but was not trying to build a movement out of it. Limbaugh and his countless clones on radio, in print, and on TV however, have harmful ideas that they sell to their gullible audiences for profit and to change society in ways that destroy freedom and impoverish the masses.

What does this have to do with PB & J? This story has popped up in many people's social media news feeds, claiming with little evidence that a school principle in Oregon deemed the sandwich racist. This automatically activates frames in the minds of gullible readers. Before the internet and social media these things traveled more slowly and usually started "I heard that..." followed by some outrageous claim. It took effort to repeat, and the audience was right there to roll their eyes or challenge the claim. But in today's world of "going viral" a stupid story about what may or may not have happened far away can be presented without context and manipulated by con artists and demagogues at will; then it can be repeated nearly infinitely and almost without effort to the feeds and inboxes of idiot america. This urban legend about racist sandwiches provides an interesting insight to Twain's adage:

The invention of the telegraph in Twain's day sped up the exchange of information in a way second only to the internet. Even if access to this revolutionary medium was limited to actual journalists, one need only shout "Remember The Maine" to know how the hare of lies can do incredible damage while the tortoise of truth tries in vain to put out the fires of sensationalism and yellow journalism. Although the US is unlikely to declare war on Spain over a Peanut Butter and Jelly sandwich, claims such as the ones made in this story play into an established narrative drummed up by unscrupulous conservative culture warriors going back at least to William F. Buckley's God and Man at Yale. This is the contest of tradition stubbornly resisting change that picked up a great deal of speed and followers during the Great Backlash against desegregation, social justice, and other values of the 1960s.

The only link provided in the conservative post article is to another, exact replica of the story on Mr. Conservative.com. This one provides no links or source material whatsoever, but it does feature a gawdy proliferation of ads. So, while a google search for "peanut butter and jelly banned" produced a plethora of hits from right wing sources including fox news and the daily caller that are slightly more informative that the two wannabes first cited, they proceed from the same mistaken assumption that political correctness and racial tolerance has gone too far and an out-of-touch bureaucrat took arbitrary and unnecessary action that will slippery slope it's way into and across the entire nation. The actual story is from 2012, but seems to have flared up again in the wake of actual outrage over the official presence of the confederate flag on statehouse property in Charleston after Dylan Roof shot 9 people in a church there. "What next?" is the usual refrain, what next will you out of control liberals that have so much power to disrupt tradition do to wreck schools and things?

Politifact first debunked the story in 2012 because right wingers were clutching their pearls over that other great sin of liberals, spending tax money on frivolous projects. It was rated "pants on fire" then, it is still a ridiculous lie, but that does not matter. Two of the first comments on the undated mr conservative story debunk the misrepresentation but are ignored by the other commenters. Snopes rates the story completely false and fabricated out of deliberate manipulation of the principal's comments.

I wish it were as easy to say "use common sense" when exposed to the propaganda of charlatans but even the idea of "common" sense is gone when a significant number of the gullible simply make up their own facts and reject anything that does not conform to their existing prejudices. The worst part is that on line, the gullible idiots who fall for it every time just do not suffer the shame that once afflicted people in public. On the internet you can be insulated from any point of view you don't like, and experience no consequences for being fooled. On that note, it is perhaps best to quote Twain again; for he was the Great American Jester, telling the foolish uncomfortable truths during our last "Gilded Age." 

*Fingers comfortably but firmly inserted in ears* Nah, nah, can't hear you.

Is Soledad O'Brien part of a trend?

There seems to be some evidence that the media, mainstream objective outlets, are turning away from simply conveying information and talking points presented to them by politicians. Instead of uncritical reporting of both sides under a "false equivalence" fallacy, there are small budding instances where fact checking is making a comeback. In a false equivalence scenario, each side (supposedly) has the opportunity to present it's case and criticise the other side's case. The immediate problem with this method of journalism is that it provides no accountability for blatant lying and treats conservative propaganda as somehow rooted in reality. Then leaves all the responsibility for calling out that lying on Democrats, who at best are treated as simply partisans smearing their opposition, and usually just left speechless at each upping of the ante on deception and manipulation.

James Fallows at the Atlantic wrote that "the realities of modern 'post-truth' politics will sooner or later force the press out of its preferred, comfortable pose of "balance," if it is to come close to doing its fundamental job of describing reality. When some people in public life are willing to lie, and to keep on lying even when the bald falseness is exposed, the press should take on an affirmative responsibility to remind readers what the 'truth' is."

Fallows cites a few instances that, along with Soledad's continuing smackdown of liars, has the potential to reshape what Americans think about mainstream media. Of course, the "Liberal Media" assertion will be shouted even louder but how likely is it that more people than now will believe it? There is little hope of reclaiming the ignorant fishbowl-dwelling conservatives who believe what they believe no matter what and only seek to have their closed-minded non-thinking reinforced by their side. But this still leaves perhaps 75% of Americans who have no interest in being lied to by anyone.

What happens when any republican going on CNN is not granted plutocratic deference and actually has to account for discrepancies between their talking points and that annoying thing called "reality?" Will my new sweetheart keep the fact-checking up? This would be an unprecedented turn of events if the public perception of republicans finally switches from bullies to whining little babies.

The circuit could close with plutocratic liars and the prostitutes who service them really talking only to themselves. A clear delineation of objective media willing to fact check claims made by either side from partisan media, like this example of the all-too-common game of "bash the poor," is essential. Too much of the authoritarian bullying in our society has come from the fact that there is no referee, no one or institution capable of saying "Enough!"