Reader Posts
« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
The "Fight" Meme - with a nod to Ira Levin
So ingrained in our electoral lexicon is this word that Genghis mentioned it first in his recent post. Pundits too have picked up on the many conjugations & permutations that have been utilized by one of the campaigns for the Democratic Presidential Nomination. The word has become synonymous with passion and righteousness, as if those who invoke the mantle of "fighter" are somehow more passionate in their support of a just cause than those who do not.
It was pointed out to me by a pundit on Washington Week with Gwen Eiffel that the aforementioned campaign has used every conjugation and permutation of "fight," and I mention this again in passing because it was this observation that reminded me of a great suspense (and sci-fi) book written by Ira Levin, This Perfect Day.
For a good overview of the book, check out Wikipedia's entry. Some background for the story: humanity has been united in a utopian, communist society under the leadership of a supercomputer named UniComp (or Uni). Like every good Ira Levin book, the seemingly paradisical setting has clear cracks that grow as the novel proceeds; people are constantly monitored & directed by the computer, drugged to prevent them reaching their full potential, encouraged to tell on one another, and they all mysteriously die at age 62. Children sing this nursery rhyme:
"Christ, Marx, Wood and Wei,
Led us to this perfect day.
Marx, Wood, Wei and Christ,
All but Wei were sacrificed.
Wood, Wei, Christ and Marx,
Gave us lovely schools and parks.
Wei, Christ, Marx and Wood,
Made us humble, made us good."
But I really encourage you to read the Wiki summary, as I'd like to get on with my points. In this world, along with many other odd social developments, the word "Fight" is a cuss word as bad as the F-bomb. In a peaceful, sanitized utopia, this word is distasteful to the extreme.
People say things like, "Can you believe people were so fighting stupid? War is hell, I'm glad there hasn't been a war in..."
And "Fight her, she's terrible at her job."
And "Fight Uni."
I hadn't thought about this book in years, but the overuse of "fight" recently has definitely crossed the threshold into the meme category. As I mentioned, it seems to be a way to emphasize one's passionate advocacy of a just cause. Invariably, the cause a candidate will "fight" for is something good (favorable to the audience at least), so fighting for it must be good.
Naturally, the reason I was reminded of Ira Levin's book is because of the negatively-connotated "fight" meme in this book. The reason we recoil in confusion or perhaps amusement at the naivete of using the word "fight" as a swear word is because we know "fight" does not have a negative connotation.
Furthermore, "fight" doesn't have a positive connotation.
I always thought that the word "fight" is value neutral. I would suggest that constantly using this word next to just causes or causes that will generate hearty applause conflates a positive connotation onto this word. The word has been worked into the narrative again and again, as though it were a positive characteristic or habit of one of the candidates. As if it were not value neutral. Fighting for the right causes is great; but if you happen to pick the wrong cause, being a fighter makes it harder to concede early, harder to steer us all collectively onto the right path.
"Fight" appeals to a certain type of voter. No warmongering is necessary to use this militant word. One can say one will fight for healthcare or tax cuts or whatever, or describe oneself as a lifelong fighter. It makes one appear tough, steel-spined. You might even argue that this word is a little hawkish, and appeals to hawkish voters.
So. My intent is not to offend anyone, or to name names - I was careful not to. I'm just making some observations and hypotheses here about (what I've always thought was) a value neutral word whose connotation has, from what I've seen, been distorted in a definite direction over the past few months.
Of course, I also wanted to contrast this use with the silly, F-bomb-like connotation of "fight" in This Perfect Day, which is a highly recommended read.










Comments (22)
I recommend b/c your post is interesting, the book you recommend sounds interesting, and you reference my post in the first sentence. The last would have been sufficient for my recommendation. The first two are just icing on the cake. ;)
April 27, 2008 2:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
Except that I detest the word "meme".
April 27, 2008 2:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
Duly noted. Thanks for stopping by, I'm glad you found it interesting.
April 27, 2008 2:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
Is it just me, or has the meme meme been spreading like wildfire lately?
April 27, 2008 5:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
Not just you. The word "metric" is getting a workout, too.
April 27, 2008 7:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
But then you have "metrication", still as far away as it ever was.
April 27, 2008 8:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
I was introduced to the word "meme" in 1996 or 1997, by way of some silly Abraham Lincoln anecdote about conversational lulls. I've seen it in passing here and there ever since. I'd say it reached a peak in the 2004 election cycle, and is at another peak currently.
Environmental/public health & policy wonks have referred to memes as "psychological agents," on the list of environmental agents that affect humans, which also includes "biological agents" and "chemical agents." The dubious appropriation of these memes as so-called environmental agents by the environmental and public health/policy fields is not an entirely new development, but it's also relatively recent, and the praciticioners in these fields aren't commonly thought of as confronting, studying, or crafting policy about/around memes - whoops, I should call them psychological agents for Ghengis' sake.
Psychological agents might be effects as simple as the changing connotation of a word such as "Fight," or a phrase like "Cut and run," or they might encompass a subject as broad, complex, and subdivided as "Video games," or "basketball." Such agents are persistent in the environment, they propagate as their messages or implements travel with their hosts, and some of them can do considerable harm and represent a public health threat.
A national zeitgeist of laziness and unconscientious wastefulness is about the most harmful psychological agent I can imagine. It's too bad that, of all the nations in the world, America is the one whose zeitgeist most resembles that description. Some argue that we've been there for decades and are just waking up now, and I'd give them my qualified agreement.
[The only reason "meme" is more palatable to me is because the alternative is "psychological agent."]
April 27, 2008 10:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think that the problem with "meme," as a word, is that people have started applying it across the board, without thinking about what it means and whether another expression might be more appropriate. Which is to say that I credit the "national zeitgeist of laziness and unconscious wastefulness" with the spead of "meme." Other alternatives, depending on context, could include: "theme", "motif", "prepoderent idea/expression/phrase" or even "fad". "Psychological agent" is a great phrase, and to my ear, the subtle difference between that and "meme" is that the former emphasizes action and agency to distribute the idea, while the latter emphasizes cultural acceptance and and distribution.
April 27, 2008 12:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wow, thanks. That's a great distinction. You were so persuasive that now i'm going to have to enunciate 7 syllables every time I want to mention an idea that we can encapsulate in a monosyllabic code word :-)
April 27, 2008 12:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
I actually can't tell whether you're being serious or sarcastic or -- maybe more plausibly -- both.
April 27, 2008 12:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
neither, or both. the word i had in mind was 'playful.'
April 27, 2008 1:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Aha! (FWIW, I laughed first and asked questions second.)
April 27, 2008 2:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Very well said. Also, I don't think we should be shy about using the word "lie." For example, instead of saying:
1) "And as for the whole "Obama-is-a-Muslim meme..."
instead, replace it with
2) "Obama is not a Muslim-- that's a lie."
April 28, 2008 1:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
The problem with fighters is that eventually someone younger, stronger, and faster comes along and beats them into the history books.
The other problem is that a fighter is 50% bull hockey. It's there job to maintain this perception that they are unbeatable.
It's like a frog puffing up to scare off the predators. It may look big and mean, but if a real gutsy predator comes along it will be having frog legs for dinner.
April 27, 2008 3:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
Heheh...is this a direct reference to Genghis' new avatar?
I think it's something ingrained in the culture, that it's all a zero sum game - just look at all the reality shows where you "fight" to the last even if you're a food connoiseur top chef or an effete lace-strewn fashion designer!
It strikes me that maybe this is why Hillary is so popular - she's one of those contestants from hell you can't wait to tune in to next week just to see what she's dreamt up to throw at the judge's favorite, driving ratings to the stratosphere.
Americans seem to like their meat RED.
April 27, 2008 11:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
tut tut. we're not naming names here. read the last paragraph of the post again.
well. never mind, you can name names if you want to, it's your first amendment too. but I won't.
April 27, 2008 12:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
So. No Ira Levin fans out there?
C'mon.
Sliver. The Stepford Wives. Rosemary's Baby.
and my favorite 3-act play of all time
Deathtrap
April 27, 2008 11:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
I liked "A kiss before dying."
April 27, 2008 1:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
didn't read that one, what's it about?
April 27, 2008 1:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
A sociopath
http://books.google.com/books?id=Bihue3zEwx0C&printsec=frontcover&dq=inauthor:Ira+inauthor:Levin&sig=FNAHBv-eXGPMsA5JAUALGwH_PQw#PPA34,M1
April 27, 2008 2:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
The big problem with "fighters" or "tough-talkers" when they become Commander-in-Chief is that they never have any skin in the game. We've had seven and a half years of the world's greatest example of this.
It's like someone who plays poker and bluffs on every single hand. Sooner or later, someone calls their bluff. But, in this case, they're playing with somebody else's money, so it's no big deal if they lose.
Bush is addicted to the bluff. He gets giddy over the idea that he can win with a lousy hand just by lying his ass off. And Hillary appears to have learned another bad lesson from him.
April 27, 2008 2:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
If fighters have a big problem, it is balanced by an equally big advantage. I wasn't trying to say "fight" = "bad." I was trying to say that one of the candidates would have us believe that "fight" = "good." Why?
And I suggest that the term is a value neutral term; there are advantages and disadvantages to being a "fighter," but by itself the term shouldn't automatically connote positive or negative feelings in people.
April 27, 2008 3:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment