January 14, 2004

Why Do So Many Believe a Lie?

Darren Kaplan has posted the second part of his excellent exploration of the false claim that the United States "created" Saddam Hussein. Today, he examines why, despite the claim being provably false, many on the Left continue to believe it. If you missed part one, it's here. Here's a bit of part two, though you really should read the whole thing, right down to Kaplan's, uh, killer ending:

It seems that in certain intellectual quarters, the charge of “hypocrisy” is the most serious charge that can be leveled at an opponent. Though I’ve not observed it myself, apparently at some point in what passes for debate in these circles, one side will charge the other with “hypocrisy” and immediately be declared the winner by technical knockout. Accordingly, if you can accuse the U.S. of hypocrisy in embarking on a chosen course of conduct you’ve immediately prevailed on the issue and all of your similarly-inclined friends acknowledge your mastery of the subject and the self-evident correctness of your position.

Thus, it is posited that the U.S. is being “hypocritical” in first lending some small quantity of support to Saddam and then actively working to bring about the destruction of his regime. Yet you have to admit that the charge lacks a certain bite, even to those for whom distrust of the U.S. is second nature. For the charge to really stick, you need to exaggerate something. And so long as hypocrisy is defined as a change of position or policy that contradicts a prior position or policy, you end up exaggerating the magnitude of the change. And since everybody knows the current position or policy, you exaggerate the starting point or the original position or policy. Voila, we did not just provide Saddam with aid, “we helped to create him.” Game, set, match. “Well done professor, come we’re late for my lecture on structuralist, post-structuralist, feminist, hermeneutical, critical, and deconstructive protocols in 1970’s-era deep pile shag carpets.”