[lbo-talk] fast food politics, a final reflection before the election

Wojtek Sokolowski sokol at jhu.edu
Mon Nov 1 13:35:24 PST 2004


Politics is, for the most part, like food - one either likes it or one does not. Just like appeals to reason, sanity, common sense, or utility will not persuade most people to stop eating food they enjoy or to start eating food they detest, similar appeals will have little effect on changing their attitudes toward political figures they disdain or revere. Both culinary and political preferences originate not in rational choice, as economists and political scientists understand it, but in one's taste, gut reactions and emotions - that is to say, in what one is accustomed to through regular exposure and how one's brain processes sensory perceptions and kindred information.

The fact that most of the American politics is a fast-food-for-thought court results not from politicians' unwillingness or inability to prepare gourmet cuisine, but from the fact that burgers and fries are all what most of the public wants. Mr. Kerry is like an international chef working at a burger joint in a suburban shopping mall. The fact that his current political menu consists mainly of burgers and fries that taste like those sold at the MacBush & Cheney chain outlet on the opposite side of the aisle is a testimony not to his poor culinary skills but to the fact that burgers is what sells in that market. If he stops flipping burgers he can as well close his shop altogether and move elsewhere. Quiche and curry do not have many buyers in the vast wasteland of suburban America.

The tofu nader-burgers vended by a few left-over hippies in an obscure corner of the political fast-food-for-thought court are a non-starter, a flop. Those who like burgers will prefer the real thing to an inferior substitute that tastes like a shoe sole. Those who do not are likely to skip the fast food court altogether and dine at gourmet European or Asian restaurants.

American politics has been dominated by fast-food-like grub while gourmet political cuisine is relegated mainly to the North-Eastern and the Pacific coasts and a few urban and college centers in the middle. The prevalence of these rather crude political tastes is, of course, a result of the rather barren political landscape dominated by two parties, both dominated in turn by business interests. In the same vein, one cannot blame an Eastern European peasant for preferring buckwheat and lard to truffles, mussels, asparagus, or sushi.

What is truly amazing is how much those tastes have changed during the last fifty years. Until the 1950s burgers and fries had a solid majority. Things started changing in the 1960s, and in the 2000 election, Gore-met cuisine attracted more popular votes than Bush-gers and fries. The latter could win only by rigging the contest.

It is hard to tell what will happen tomorrow. The Mac Bush & Cheney chain launched a formidable campaign to promote their political menu of pork and freedom fries, and the Kerry shop has little choice but to flip-flop more burgers in response. But let's not be deceived. If Kerry wins, the burgers will still be dished out, but we may also hope for an occasional quiche, pasta, lo-mein and curry on the menu. If Mac Bush & Cheney chain wins, however, pork and freedom fries are all that we will have on the menu for years to come. In the latter case, European gourmet restaurants may be the only viable option for folks with more refined palates, including the undersigned.

Or we might get an alternative menu - a long litigation without a clear winner - which will be interesting to watch.

Wojtek



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list