[Julie Steiner]

Apropos of nothing, does anyone have anything to say about recent shifts (and lack thereof) in the tolerance level for liars in politics, by those who have knowingly enabled those liars' rise to, and subsequent efforts to cling to, power?

Schadenfreude? Concerns? Snark?

I'll just throw these two items out there to get the conversation started:
https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1545048168844312577
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2022...georgia-senate

[John Isbell]

As for tolerance levels, Herschel Walker seems to be running ahead of Raphael Warnock, who by all indications is a fairly decent human being. But then, Walker is running as a GOP candidate. I think the GOP's tolerance level for liars is through the roof these days, and that is the result of years of assiduous work by pathological liars. It may be what bugs me the most about the party.

Cheers,
John

[Julie Steiner]

The GOP certainly has no monopoly on liars caught lying. (Cf. Andrew Cuomo, Bill Clinton, etc., etc.) But the Republican Party seems to regard its candidates' ability to get voters and colleagues to accept their outrageous and obvious lying—yes, even when those same people actually know that they are being lied to—as a basic criterion for the party's endorsement. It's as if getting away with lies is regarded as a superpower that the GOP wants its candidates to demonstrate that they have. Proof of their charisma or something.

I'm hoping that the compelling testimony of the Jan. 6 hearings will change that, but testimony can only compel those who actually care to hear it.

[John Isbell]

Trump began his presidency by telling two outrageous and patent lies about the inauguration. This to my mind was no coincidence, but a watershed moment, in which he announced to his tens of millions that they were to believe him and not their lying eyes. The GOP electorate has been fed a daily diet of such lies for seven years now and they are well conditioned and tenderized. They are ready for Jonestown IMO.
God bless America.

Cheers,
John

[W T Clark]

The late twentieth century — but most importantly the twenty-first — has ushered in a debasement of language in politics, and more defusedly in culture, that has served our "leaders", whether they be politicians or corporate plutocrats, well. I think language is suffering a debasement — truth simplified of all complexity that in fact made it truthful in the first place by sloganeering; falsity instated as an acceptable norm; dialogue, debate, and propaganda systematised into a program — that is approaching a crisis. "Debasement party" is an excellent term (and pun) for it. To bring this all back to poetry (and this is a poetry forum, after all): poets, I think, now especially, have a duty to avoid simplicity, cliché, and sentimentality (which is by its own simplified debasement: falsity); there is such an amount of language-junk that our decadent Western culture is drowning; poets MUST make poems that are resistant to those pressures, must make structures out of language that endure and embrace the true complexity of our lives, especially when politics has failed us so completely. When our language is debased, most other things soon follow.

IMO.

[Sarah-Jane Crowson]

poets MUST make poems that are resistant to those pressures, must make structures out of language that endure and embrace the true complexity of our lives, especially when politics has failed us so completely. When our language is debased, most other things soon follow.

I agree. I also think that this is the space for satire and social commentary, which has its own well-written tradition & narrative that can make resistance stronger (not that it shouldn't be broken either - in fact it calls to be broken).

On a personal level, I write to process things, and although this does NOT play to my strengths, I fell back on that narrative to process my thoughts today -

Bluster and perfidy!
BJ was perfectly
Lined up to set up
This post-Brexit mess.
Cheerfully (dirtily)
Tirelessly (sordidly)
Grinning his head off
And lying as well.
But if you’re well financed
You’ll never lack triumphs
(or tea trolleys worth more
than most monthly salaries)
Play to the gallery.
We’ll be just fine!
The UK’s divided,
Food prices are rising –
Borrowing frantically
Won’t buy us time.
Let’s write a letter
Addressed to…whoever?
(most of the cabinet’s
now seeking therapy).
Luckily (cordially)
Caretaking (dubiously)
BJ’s reportedly
Got a last plan.
Let’s have a leaving bash!
Champers and canapés!
Chequers looks great today
(nothing’s in disarray)
He’ll be just fine.

And although I'm not a Hugh Grant superfan, this also made me laugh -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TEYdP_OJKNw

Sarah-Jane
(the things that don't make me laugh are current global turf wars around food-producing areas. That just scares me).

[James Brancheau]

So I should, or shouldn't throw a brick at a Republican? I admit I just skimmed the previous comments, and may have lost track. I'm going to go with throw the brick.

Added: You know we're in this because some couldn't bring themselves to vote for Hillary.

[Julie Steiner]

Then again, I'm queasy when Republican politicians get away with lying, but I'm even queasier when Republican politicians keep their horrible promises. There's no pleasing me, I guess.

[RCL]

https://alphahistory.com/nazigermany...opaganda-1924/

[John Isbell]

Trump publicly remarked that reading Mein Kampf made a big impression on him. I believe echoes of Nazi propaganda and marketing methods are no coincidence.

Cheers,
John

Update: the same might possibly be said for Vladimir Putin. He entered Ukraine as a response to "Ukrainian aggression," we might recall.