 |
| Attorney General Jeff Sessions |
Now, I might use the term "lunatic fringe" to describe people who think the moon landings were faked or that the government is spraying chemicals in the air out of airplane exhausts. To be a "lunatic" implies that one is mentally ill or demonically possessed; to be a member of a "fringe" means that one is part of a very small, unpopular, and unrepresentative minority.
Instead, Jeff Sessions implied that the majority of the nation is a "lunatic fringe." But let's look at how he did that. The rhetorical tricks behind Sessions' name-calling extravaganza are quite interesting – twisted, but interesting.
The "zero-tolerance" policy that Sessions announced a few weeks ago has led to in the separation of many immigrant children from their parents, leading to confusion and controversy. Allegations are made that the parents don't even know where their children are, and that in some cases the government doesn't even know where they are. Time's cover featured a composite image of Donald Trump staring at a crying child. Two opinion polls last week found that most of the public rejects the administration's policy. A Quinnipiac University poll found that 66% of the voters, including more than 90% of Democrats and nearly 70% of independent voters, opposed the administration's policy. However, a large majority of Republican respondents supported the policy. An Ipsos poll published in the liberal Daily Beast found about the same thing, with 55% disagreeing or strongly disagreeing with the policy. In the Ipsos poll, almost half of Republicans supported the policy. The differences may have been due to slight variations in the way that two polls asked their questions. In any case, this policy is extremely controversial, there is a sharp partisan divide, and most Americans are against it.
So, let's start with the obvious. A fringe is, by definition, a very small group. That is what the word "fringe" means. Something that the great majority of Americans believe is not on the "fringe." We all know that. Attorney General Sessions knows that. So what is going on here?
First, Sessions identified immigration control with law and order, a message that he expected to go over well with his conservative, pro-law enforcement audience in Los Angeles:
"On behalf of President Donald Trump, I especially want to thank you all for your strong voice in speaking out for the enforcement of our immigration laws."
Flattering the audience is often an effective tactic.
Second, Sessions implied, without saying so, that the news media have created the entire controversy. Conservatives have for some time called mainstream news liberal propaganda. This attitude has, I'm sorry to say, come down to an assault on truth. If the mainstream press reports something, conservatives too often respond that is just liberal propaganda – even if it's true. Social media users didn't help when they carelessly mislabeled a photograph of a crying child in a cage. So, Sessions said this:
"The rhetoric we hear from the other side on this issue—as on so many others—has become radicalized. We hear views on television today that are on the lunatic fringe. And what is perhaps more galling is the hypocrisy. These same people live in gated communities and are featured at events where you have to have an ID even to hear them speak."
Classic misdirection. He criticized the news media, not for inaccuracy – he had no reason to call them inaccurate – but because he felt there were hypocrites. He called them a "lunatic fringe." He attacked the messenger, not the message. Since he knew that the message was true, what choice did he have? Since he wasn't going to admit he was wrong.
He continued to make ad hominem attacks when he went after the conservatives' bête noire, Hillary Clinton:
"In 2013, Hillary Clinton reportedly said in one secret speech, 'My dream is a hemispheric common market, with open trade and open borders.' This is the presidential nominee of a major political party."
This poorly documented, five-year old quotation obviously had nothing to do with the current controversy, and, if Clinton did, in fact, say this, the obvious context is that she may have been advocating something like the European Union, which is a successful free-trade zone. In any case, this kind of fear appeal sorts the opposing sides into extreme views: on the one hand, separating children from their parents, or, on the other hand, unlimited immigration. Most Americans probably would like to see something in the middle, which Sessions' hyperbolic accusation made no room for.
People often accuse conservatives of joining a Trump-inspired "lunatic fringe." I'm sure they get tired of hearing that, and Sessions may simply have been dishing out name-calling in return.
To recap: Sessions said that the view held by the majority of Americans belong to the "lunatic fringe." He attacked the messenger instead of the message. Instead of admitting that his policy had faults, he accused the other side of supporting an equally extreme, but opposite policy. He made ad hominem arguments to avoid talking about the real issues.
So – (1) Does opposing a controversial policy make you a lunatic? And, (2) how can the majority be a fringe? You can't solve problems by calling people names.
Read my earlier post about Sessions' (mis)use of the Bible to support his immigration policies.
Image: Department of Justice photo
No comments:
Post a Comment