Russian emigre Maria (Masha) Gessen reviews last week's Kabuki Theater performance that was the Senate confirmation hearing on Judge Amy C. Barrett's appointment to serve on the US Supreme Court. Gessen's verdict was that the proceedings were pointless and meaningless and used a barnyard term to describe the entire spectacle. If this is the (fair & balanced) equivalent of stool analysis, so be it.
[x YouTube]
"The Liar Tweets Tonight" (Parody of "The Lion Sleeps Tonight")
By Roy Zimmerman and The ReZisters, featuring Sandy Riccardi
[x The New Yorker]
The Ultimate “Bullshit Job”
By Maria (Masha) Gessen
TagCrowd Cloud provides a visual summary of the blog post below
There are several ways to describe the recent Senate Judiciary Committee hearings on Judge Amy Coney Barrett’s nomination to the Supreme Court. Jane Chong, writing in The Atlantic, called the hearings a “pointless farce,” not least because they did not shine a spotlight on the potential role of the Court—and Barrett—in deciding the Presidential election. Slate’s Dahlia Lithwick called them “empty theater.” Ilyse Hogue, the president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, repeatedly used the term “gaslighting” to characterize the hearings [Podcast]. My colleague Amy Davidson Sorkin has written that Barrett’s many evasions—even on the question of whether a President should commit to a peaceful transition of power—are a measure of her political extremism, and her ability to get away with them is “a measure of how thoroughly President Trump has moved the margins of our political culture.”
All of these observations are accurate. Four days of hearings contained not a single substantive exchange. When the nominee was questioned by Democratic senators, she obfuscated. When it was a Republican’s turn, Barrett joined the senator in performing a pointedly empty ritual, whether it was Senator John Kennedy, of Louisiana, asking the judge who does the laundry in her house (she evaded the question) or Senator Ted Cruz, of Texas, using his time to make a twenty-three-minute speech about Democrats, abortion, and democracy before segueing to ask Barrett whether she plays any musical instruments (a bit of piano) and how her family has managed distance learning for seven children. (It was challenging, but the Barrett family succeeded, of course.)
To an outside observer—someone who was not aware of America’s current polarized predicament—the hearings would have seemed as inscrutable as a politburo meeting: all code and no content, culminating in a vote whose results are preordained. But why does one of the most consequential political decisions of a decade take such a bizarre and hollow form? One answer is “the rule of ‘because we can,’ ” as Sheldon Whitehouse, Democrat of Rhode Island, said on the final day of the hearings: Senate Republicans have the votes to do whatever they want, so they do.
With the game fixed from the start, Republicans could have used the time to lay out an agenda. They didn’t have to obfuscate; they could have boasted instead. They could have indulged their fantasies and envisioned the details of a near future in which an ultraconservative Court further dismantles voting rights, repeals the Affordable Care Act, places a federal ban on abortion, abolishes marriage equality, and systematically reverses civil-rights progress. Their reticence wasn’t a matter of decorum—shame has no purchase on senators who refused to consider Barack Obama’s Supreme Court nomination during his last year in office but took up Donald Trump’s nomination of Judge Barrett. The reason Senate Republicans and their candidate said virtually nothing of substance during her confirmation hearings is that they think the hearings amount to virtually nothing.
The Republican Party is the Party opposed to government as such. It is the Party whose ethos is summed up in President Reagan’s famous quip from a news conference in 1986 [PDF]: “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are ‘I’m from the government, and I’m here to help.’ ” What gave this joke its frisson was that, at the moment he made it, Reagan was pledging help from the government—in this case, aid to struggling farmers. (According to the PBS documentary “The Farm Crisis,” “Reagan’s farm programs cost more than the combined farm expenditures of every President from Franklin Roosevelt to Jimmy Carter.”) In the Trump era, Reagan’s phrase has become a full-fledged ideology, and government inaction is weaponized. (Americans will not see a second pandemic-relief bill before the election because, in large part, Republican lawmakers oppose what they call a “blue-state bailout.”)
Hannah Arendt defined ideology as a single premise taken to its logical extreme and then used to explain the past and determine the future. For the Republican Party, the Reaganite idea that government is a necessary evil has turned into the idea that government is evil, period. Arendt believed that the two-party system was well protected against this kind of ideological thinking, because real political power is always within reach for either party. (Multiparty systems were more vulnerable, she thought.) She did not foresee our present system, where one political party is still awed by the responsibilities and norms of governing while the other is bent on destruction.
We have gone from the strange spectacle of Reagan, the leader of the free world, stating that his government’s actions are fundamentally suspect, to the even stranger spectacle of Trump, who openly dislikes his job, avoids doing it, and refuses to accept its responsibilities. Yet he desperately desires to keep his job and so, it seems, do most Republican elected officials. These are people who continually attack “government,” in which they work, and “Washington,” where they live, but they will apparently do most anything to keep their places in both. Imagine having to wage a long and gruelling campaign in order to land a job you believe is deserving only of scorn; imagine then spending the bulk of your working hours asking people for money so you can keep this job.
In his book Bullshit Jobs, from 2018, the late anthropologist David Graeber defined the title category as “a form of paid employment that is so completely pointless, unnecessary, or pernicious that even the employee cannot justify its existence even though, as part of the conditions of employment, the employee feels obliged to pretend that this is not the case.” In Graeber’s taxonomy of bullshit jobs, Republican senators would be “box tickers”: people who go through procedures, produce paperwork, and otherwise look important performing tasks that make no difference to any substantive outcome. (As Graeber explained, a job is a bullshit job only if the person performing it feels that it is purposeless, which means that two people can have the same title and the same nominal tasks, but only one of them may be working a bullshit job. For example, one senator may feel that Supreme Court confirmation hearings are an empty ritual with predetermined results, while another considers them a great responsibility.)
Many bullshit jobs, according to Graeber, exist solely to make other people feel important, by giving them underlings and acknowledging their wealth. The Senate offers a twist: its Republican members seem to think that their job is to make one person, Donald Trump, feel maximally important. Some bullshit jobs are links in a bullshit chain—if the entire enterprise disappeared, no one would be the wiser. But a bullshit job can also wedge itself in between or next to meaningful jobs. Imagine a receptionist whose only task is to sit at a desk in the empty front office while other people work. The landline never rings and visitors never arrive, but an office is not an office if it doesn’t have a receptionist.
One of the most interesting insights of Bullshit Jobs concerns the soul-deadening effect of meaningless work, especially in the Anglo-Saxon culture, which assigns value to people based on grit and productivity. Graeber suggested that the long-term effects of working a bullshit job are akin to the effects of imprisonment and even solitary confinement, which kills the soul and damages the brain. He might have been overstating the case, but there is no doubt that people who work bullshit jobs—the engineer who provides support for software that no one uses, a maker of presentations that no one ever watches or hears—are full of loathing, for the job, for the people who put them in the job, and for themselves.
Reading the Barrett hearings as a bullshit box-ticking ritual allows them to make a kind of sense. In the pantheon of bullshit jobs, Republican senators might be most fruitfully compared to the financial analyst who plugs figures into a spreadsheet, massaging the numbers to yield predetermined results; these results will be used to make bad loans, which will prop up a rotten financial infrastructure, ruining some people and making others ever richer. In short, the analyst’s job is consequential yet preposterous. Similarly, installing Barrett on the Supreme Court will have far-reaching, real-life consequences, but the process that puts her there is pure bullshit. It is difficult to find a better word to describe the Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham’s closing statement on the third day of the hearings, which began as follows:
I’m going to tell you about where I grew up. I don’t know why—it just seems to be a good way to end this thing. It’s got nothing to do with anything. But I grew up in a small town called Central, South Carolina. First in my family to go to college. My dad owned a bar, a pool room, and a liquor store. And my mom ran the bar, my dad ran the liquor store, and, when I was old enough, I ran the pool room. This is why I think I’m a good senator—it’s good training for this job. But I remember—speaking about country music, we had a piccolo. You know what a piccolo is, Judge? Well, you are too young. A piccolo is something you put money in to listen to the song. And the one song I’ll remember to my dying day—talk about country-music titles—was “My Wife Ran Off with My Best Friend, and I Miss Him.” So this is a wonderful country.
Senator Kennedy, too, killed time like a bored, trollish office drone. “Are you a racist?” he asked Barrett. “Do you support, in all cases, corporations over working people? . . . Are you against clean air, bright water, and environmental justice? . . . Do you support science? . . . Do you support children and prosperity? . . . Do you hate little warm puppies?” He then congratulated himself and the judge: “See, we did that in about two minutes.” In fact, it was about a minute and a half, but then Barrett volunteered that her family has a pet chinchilla and she doesn’t hate chinchillas, either, and this got her and the senator roughly to the two-minute mark.
Republican senators, in other words, asked bullshit questions. Barrett laughed gamely, indulged their bullshit, and gave uniformly bullshit answers, both to bullshit questions and to substantive ones. She gave bullshit answers even when she appeared to be called upon merely to affirm the existence of a statute or a Constitutional norm. Barrett surely doesn’t think that her future position on the Supreme Court is a bullshit job; Senate Republicans don’t think that packing the courts with conservatives is bullshit work, either. But, like the people who are rushing her onto the bench, Barrett does seem to believe that the nomination and confirmation process is bullshit—she shares the Trump Republican Party’s contempt for the norms and processes of the government in which she has risen so far, so fast. ###
[Maria Alexandrovna (Masha) Gessen is a Russian and US journalist, author, translator, and LBGT activist who has been an outspoken critic of Russian President Vladimir Putin and US President Donald Trump. She won the National Book Award for The Future Is History: How Totalitarianism Reclaimed Russia (2017). See her other books here. Gessen also writes primarily in English but also in her native Russian. She also has been a prolific contributor to such publications as The New York Times, The New York Review of Books, The Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, The New Republic, New Statesman, Granta, Slate, Vanity Fair, Harper's Magazine, and US News & World Report. Gessen also was the Russian translator of the TV show "The Americans." In 2004-2005, she was a Nieman Fellow at Harvard University.]
Copyright © 2020 The New Yorker/Condé Nast Digital
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License..
Copyright © 2020 Sapper's (Fair & Balanced) Rants & Raves
No comments:
Post a Comment
☛ STOP!!! Read the following BEFORE posting a Comment!
Include your e-mail address with your comment or your comment will be deleted by default. Your e-mail address will be DELETED before the comment is posted to this blog. Comments to entries in this blog are moderated by the blogger. Violators of this rule can KMA (Kiss My A-Double-Crooked-Letter) as this blogger's late maternal grandmother would say. No e-mail address (to be verified AND then deleted by the blogger) within the comment, no posting. That is the (fair & balanced) rule for comments to this blog.