From Wikipedia:

Suspension of disbelief or “willing suspension of disbelief” is an aesthetic theory intended to characterize people’s relationships to art. It refers to the willingness of a person to accept as true the premises of a work of fiction, even if they are fantastic or impossible. It also refers to the willingness of the audience to overlook the limitations of a medium, so that these do not interfere with the acceptance of those premises. According to the theory, suspension of disbelief is a quid pro quo: the audience tacitly agrees to provisionally suspend their judgment in exchange for the promise of entertainment.

I first heard this term in a creative writing class, from one of those special teachers that not only loved to teach, but also the subject that they teach (I was lucky to run across many of those in my academic life).

I have noticed, over the years, that there is an application of this concept in the world of Politics.

Political suspension of disbelief or “willing political suspension of disbelief” is an aesthetic theory intended to characterize people’s relationships to political figures. It refers to the willingness of the electorate to accept as true the premises of a campaign, even if they are fantastic, heavily redacted, creatively enhanced, or impossible. It also refers to the willingness of the electorate to overlook the limitations of a candidate, so that these do not interfere with the acceptance of those premises; and to overlook explicitly unfair, immoral, and/or illegal activities by the candidate or his supporters. According to the theory, suspension of disbelief is a quid pro quo: the audience tacitly agrees to suspend their judgment in exchange for the promised political action.

The most extreme examples of this are with candidates/movements with little or no public record. A “maskirova” (cover story/deception/legend) is created to gloss over inconvenient facts or relationships. As the electorate (public) at large has little or no knowledge of the candidate/movement, it is easy to accept the maskirova, and then, applying the political willing suspension of disbelief, not only support said person or group, but to apply their own beliefs and conceptions to “fill in the holes” of the maskirova.

The natural check on this syndrome is the free press. In normal circumstances, the press will attempt to pull back the curtain on the maskirova, to display the truth of the candidates past, or public relationships, or stands on issues. Unfortunately, the press being made up of people, they too are susceptible to the political suspension of disbelief. This is compounded when the candidate/movement perpetuating a maskirova is from the same political framework as the press.

This leads us to a situation such as now besets the United States. One candidate has many historic ties to far left radicals, outright self described communists, socialists, domestic terrorists, and black nationalists. What little record the candidate has on public issues is to the far left (when he bothers to vote at all). Public officials from this candidates party have stated on the record that they will pursue his opponents supporters if they perceive “lies” about their candidate. Some have even banned poll watchers from the parties (traditionally in place to try to assure voting irregularities are reported or stopped from happening). None of this is covered by the press, in more than a passing “nothing to see here” manner.

So, in 2008, we have a situation where the political suspension of disbelief, affecting not only the electorate, but the supposed guardians of truth and light in the press, could very well lead to the election of a man and a movement that few have actually taken the time to examine, and who’s actual stand, and motivations, may not be known until well after he is sworn in to office.

Is there a cure for this syndrome? I don’t know. But what I do know is that we are facing the very real possibility of a single political party - and far left mindset - dominating the Presidency, the Senate Leadership (with a left wing majority), the House of Representatives leadership (with a left wing majority), and the Press.

You can be assured that within the two years from Jan 2008 to Jan 2010 (when the next election cycle could allow for the possible change of the senate or house to the political right) that two new Supreme Court justices will be named (no doubt at all that Ginsburg and Stevens will retire), probably from even further to the left of the judicial spectrum than even Ginsburg.

If on other Justice could be convinced to retire; Souter, let’s say; the new administration could but it’s far left stamp on the Supreme Court for a generation.

You can also be sure that the Fairness Doctrine will be reimposed, leading to a virtual freeze out of any but the most bland and shapeless forms of talk radio.

And, moves to strengthen voter registration laws will be shelved, even as community organizing groups will receive increased federal funding, to expand on their fraudulent voter registration drives.

But maybe none of that will happen. Maybe some of the press will wake up and actually do their job. Maybe the electorate will wake up and do THEIR job, and actually research the candidates and their stands.

But probably not. That requires motivation, and positive motion. Much easier to sit on the couch, and listen to Katie, and Charlie, and Keith tell you to watch the maskirova, but don’t look behind the curtain…

Share This

Tags: Maskirova