Now that the mud of the 2024 presidential election is settling, I’d prefer to take a second to debate what I discovered to be one in all its most distasteful features — one which, when intently analyzed, means that the “democracy” we’re all speculated to be making an attempt to “protect” has apparently already gone the way in which of the dodo.
I’m referring to so-called “superstar endorsements.” We’ve all seen and heard of this phenomenon: this political analyst or that information host gushing about how this or that actor is endorsing this or that presidential nominee (with the bulk, after all — definitely essentially the most annoying — popping out for Kamala Harris).
Movie star endorsements signify three severe issues regarding the state of democracy in America.
The Authentic Hypocrites
The primary ought to be apparent sufficient: Why ought to any American base his or her vote on the endorsement of a mere “superstar,” whose declare to fame revolves round their performing expertise? Put bluntly, who cares what Robert de Niro or some other actor thinks?
By the way, right here’s somewhat recognized however very related “enjoyable truth”: As with many trendy English phrases, our phrase hypocrite comes from Greek: hypokritēs (ὑποκριτής). Care to take a guess what that phrase — which immediately means “two-faced deceiver” — meant to the Greeks? In keeping with Liddell and Scott’s authoritative Greek-English Lexicon, a hypokritēs is “one who performs a component on the stage; a participant, actor.” In different phrases, the unique — and rather more acceptable — phrase for “actor” is hypocrite; to be an actor is to be, fairly actually, a hypocrite. Is smart, no?
Give it some thought: All actors who’re well-known, in contrast to you or me, excel at pretending to be what they aren’t. Certainly, they’re so good at their fraud that almost all of them have grow to be multimillionaires. They don’t seem to be notably clever or clever, ethical or moral; they don’t essentially know the very first thing about politics or economics — they usually most definitely can not discover Ukraine on a map.
But, as a result of they’re so good at getting you to imagine they’re one thing that they’re not and since they’re the literal and quintessential definition of the phrase hypocrite — as once they preach concerning the setting whereas polluting the air with their personal jets — they now wield huge affect on politics and elections.
We the Sheeple
The second downside posed by “superstar endorsements” is that individuals really are that silly. One needn’t know the all too telling origins of the phrase hypocrite to instinctively perceive that actors are the final folks to whom voters ought to search for steerage. But right here we’re. What extra may be mentioned of the abysmal intelligence degree of an individual who decides to vote for this or that candidate “as a result of an actor I like instructed me to”?
The third and most delicate downside is that nobody appears to have an issue with any of this — neither the undue affect of actors on politics and elections, nor the vacuity of the sheeple. Moderately, they freely and eagerly speak about how greatest to harness the facility of superstar to proceed manipulating the plenty.
A few weeks earlier than the election, for instance, well-known pollster Frank Luntz, breathlessly mentioned on CNN:
So what I’m ready to see is whether or not Taylor Swift comes out and does a live performance [to endorse Kamala Harris]. I feel that may be a large deal. She is as common immediately as Oprah Winfrey was when she endorsed Barack Obama. And Oprah’s help, lively help, made a distinction in his race…. Tayler Swift may make a distinction on this race.
To summarize: 1) folks with zero credentials however who’ve a expertise to deceive wield a lot undue affect on politics and elections; and that’s as a result of 2) all too many citizens are simply plain dumb. In the meantime, 3) nobody on both facet of the political spectrum appears to have an issue with any of this. It’s only a regular and accepted a part of the political panorama.
This latter level is particularly value reflecting on. We’re all the time being preached to about the necessity to “protect democracy,” but when the three aforementioned factors about superstar endorsements are true (and they’re) hasn’t “democracy” already been totally compromised?
Movie star endorsements might not have gained the election for Kamala Harris, however there isn’t any doubt that they garnered her extra votes than she in any other case would have gotten, and will have been decisive — simply as they could be decisive in future elections.
At that time, democracy can have given method to mob rule manipulated by the few — an ochlocracy managed by an oligarchy — which is much, removed from what the Founders envisioned. Little doubt that they’re perpetually rolling of their graves.
Raymond Ibrahim, creator of Defenders of the West and Sword and Scimitar, is the Distinguished Senior Shillman Fellow on the Gatestone Institute and the Judith Rosen Friedman Fellow on the Center East Discussion board.