Funmurphys: the Blog

What's Wrong With This Picture?

Snopes (AKA Urban Legends Reference Pages) debunks a picture showing John Kerry and Jane Fonda at the same podium at an anti-war rally. OK, there are a couple of things wrong with this picture. First, it's a fake. I'm not one of those who believe that lying in the service of Truth is possible, let alone desirable. (For the record, I'm OK with lying in the service of humor).

But an even bigger issue is what it says about its target audience. The target happens to be on the right of the political spectrum, but I think the left and the center suffer from the same problems, so I think it speaks to political discourse in this country (probably others, but I think I've generalized enough from one lousy photo as it is). OK, here's my problem. We know that John Kerry was against the Vietnam war: he joined the Vietnam Veterans Against the War, he spoke at anti-war rallies, he testified before Congress against the war, and he heaved medals onto the Capitol grounds as a gesture of protest against the war. These are all well documented facts. Agree or disagree with his then views, they were what they were. So how does being behind the same podium as Jane Fonda change anything? Well, she's a symbol. Jane bad. Therefore, John bad because next to Jane. Can such simple symbolism truly be effective? No one's gone broke underestimating the public, or so I'm told.

While I can't believe in such simplicity of thought, I'm faced with it's reality. The doctored picture made the internet rounds, so somebody thought it truly meant something. I've read posts and comments at partisan political sites that were equally sophisticated and seen how often there is no discussion but simple shouting of slogans past one another. I remember a blogger when faced with the utter collapse of his claim against a particular politician responded that it didn't matter, the person could have done exactly what was claimed and therefore was just as guilty. Don't confuse me with the facts, my mind is already made up. I suppose it's much easier that way - no need to think, simply reiterate the same tired symbology.

And I'm also confronted with my own shortcomings - am I just of guilty of twisting the facts to suit my own prejudices, am I swayed by such symbolism? Am I not human?

This is why it takes a jolt to change people's thinking. 9-11 was just such a jolt for some people, although not enough of a jolt for many others - which makes you wonder just exactly does it take to convince people they are wrong. I know that my thinking has changed on many a subject - I was filled with theory as a young man, and many did not survive first contact with reality. I'm convinced that had I stayed in the bubble of Academia, many of those theories would be blissfully intact.