Not Hating Sarah Palin

Mary Fairchild has a post today titled Sarah Palin: Why Some Love Her and Others Hate Her.

Along with some other discussion, she writes:

…Personally, I think it might have something to do with her allegiance to another kingdom, her ‘higher calling.’ As a follower of Jesus Christ, could it be that Sarah Palin knows her mission? If she recognizes her membership in God’s heavenly kingdom, that charge would come before any duties of this earthly realm. If she is committed to the call of God on her life, a sense of divine purpose would give her boldness and uncompromising courage to do the Lord’s will, no matter what this world expects—just like John the Baptist.

Now let me be clear. I think a complete commitment to Jesus Christ, in fact, even a complete commitment to being an ethical person, will bring one into conflict with the culture. One may be despised or hated for doing what is right.

Further, the gospel does offend our selfish human nature. It offends our sense of fairness. Grace, after all, is not fair. It’s wonderful to receive, but doesn’t follow our rules concerning what one deserves.

But it is dangerous to reverse those propositions. Just because a follower of Jesus Christ will offend doesn’t mean that everyone who offends is a follower of Jesus Christ. Nor does it mean that when a follower of Jesus Christ does offend, it is the gospel, or their discipleship that is offending.

I have seen this repeatedly in evangelism. I hear it regularly from people who report on evangelism. Someone talks about Jesus and then reports that people were offended. Yet very often, if one listens to the details, there are many things that are offensive that are not part of the gospel. It might be pride, a desire to be acknowledged as “right,” an unwillingness to listen, or hurtful remarks. We must be careful to make sure that if anything in our lives and work offends, it is the gospel that is doing the offending, and not our own offensiveness.

But all of this might not be relevant to the discussion of Sarah Palin. Is her commitment to Jesus Christ what distinguishes her from all other politicians? Is she the “greater” disciple who draws more hate?

I do not want to judge her discipleship, but I certainly see many other politicians who also make the claim that they are followers of Jesus. There are other Republicans who share her political philosophy and profess to be disciples, yet they do not draw the same reaction. There are others all across the spectrum who make the same claim and again, they do not draw the same reaction.

There are many things on which I would disagree with Sarah Palin. I don’t find her or her political philosophy all that attractive. At the same time, I was amazed at the strength of the antagonism that she drummed up. So while I don’t think it is her discipleship that is her distinguishing problem, I do think there is a phenomenon here that needs some explanation.

I’m going to suggest the word “frustration.” There are several other factors that contribute to the result, but I think the thing that brings people’s blood to a boil about Palin is that it is so hard to explain her attraction to someone who doesn’t agree or see it.

This frustration would be fairly ordinary, but there are some factors that feed into it. First, the media gets fascinated by fascinating figures. Palin was a surprise nomination, and there was some bungling in how she was handled. That’s like blood in the water to the media sharks. So, second, they attack.

The attacks fuel responses and help set these feelings in concrete. If the left had really wanted to see Palin diminish as an issue, they should have stayed away from exaggerated attacks and rumors. But the right should have done the same thing with Barack Obama. Despite huge differences in personalities, stories, and political views, I think very similar frustration has fueled hysterical anti-Obama rhetoric on the right. Those on the right simply could not and cannot understand Obama’s personal popularity.

But frustration alone doesn’t explain it. The frustration and fascination fueled frenzy has turned Sarah Palin into a symbol. She is now, like it or not, something beyond herself. To argue details of her intelligence or character will generally miss the point. She is a symbol of the Republican right, and the right and the left along with the media share the credit–and the blame–for putting her in that position.

If I might illustrate with the story of Joe the Plumber, who is really a rather ordinary man. He asked a fortuitous question and was rocketed to fame–as a symbol. Again, those who want to argue that Joe the Plumber is not all that bright (or that he is), or who looked for deficiencies in his tax returns and licensing during the campaign completely missed the point.

Knowing that his business isn’t going to make a particular amount of money or that he didn’t have a plumbing license was again quite irrelevant and only served to harden and brighten the symbol. Liberals could laugh about “Name the profession“, but there were thousands of people who identified with the symbol.

Those who don’t get the symbol, whether it’s Sarah Palin, Barack Obama, or Joe the Plumber will find the whole situation frustrating, because they see any character or policy flaws as disqualifying. But they do so because they don’t identify with that particular symbol.

I don’t think we can explain hatred of Sarah Palin based on any single characteristic. I think it is dangerous to suggest that what distinguishes her is her commitment to the gospel. That tends to make the gospel an inextricable part of her political philosophy.

Like it or not, Sarah Palin has become a symbol. Whether or not she can use that fact to carry her to national office remains to be seen. But people should not make the assumption that she can’t.

Symbols are dangerous things, often much more powerful than he realities on whom they rest.