Dumb As An Interview: Idiot America Author Charles Pierce
Charles P. Pierce is sportswriter, columnist and author who has written for the New York Times Magazine, Esquire, GQ, Sports Illustrated and other publications. He is a regular panelist on National Public Radio's "Wait Wait... Don't Tell Me!" and his new book is Idiot America.
We asked him a few questions about idiots, Americans and how they both tie into the premise of his book.
In your book, you seem to have great disdain for people who are idiots, yet an odd admiration for people who seem off their rockers. What’s the difference?
I differentiate between what I call authentic American cranks like Ignatius Donnelly, whose pseudo-science is responsible for all we think we know about Atlantis, and the people who today [enjoy] mainstream craziness without the ameliorating effects of a pushback. As I point out, a charlatan is a crank with a big book deal. A charlatan is a crank who's sold out.
Does anything give you hope that America might be getting smarter?
We're more informed than we ever were. We're overwhelmed by more information from more directions at the same time. The problem is a) that our internal editing function is overwhelmed and b) that we are so fairminded that we believe that because there are two sides to every question, they both must be right. In combination, we believe that which sells best, not that which is true. I don't see that getting better any time soon.
You write that Idiot America is a collective act of will by our entire culture, that allows nonsense to have consequences beyond simple ridicule. So then, can a smarter and better America be achieved through mockery? Seems a bit cruel.
Mockery has been an important part of informed citizenry ever since the concept of citizenry was invented. Satire is a weapon of the disenfranchised and the un-empowered. One of the most distressing developments of recent times is that people like Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter are regularly referred to as "satirists," when, in fact, they are mere bullies on behalf of the established powers. I don't argue that mockery makes us smarter, but it can make us better citizens. I hope Sarah Palin comes to realize this.
In your opinion, who is the stupidest person in America?
Besides the guy who was in my rear-view mirror texting at 70 mph on Rte. 93 this morning? It's a tough call, but I'd pick the person whose fame and success best conforms to what I call the Three Great Premises of Idiot America: 1) Any theory is valid if it moves units 2) Anything can be true if someone says it loudly enough 3) Fact is what enough people believe and truth is how fervently they believe it.
That would be Palin, Queen of the Northwoods.
You seem to point the finger at former President Bush, saying that a symptom of Idiot America involves people thinking with their guts instead of their brains. But isn’t instinct valuable on some level? The late David Halberstam’s book The Best and the Brightest is about how the smartest people of a generation led us into the disaster of Vietnam. Can brains and instinct co-exist? How do we draw that line?
Best question I've been asked on this tour.
I would argue that, in the strictest sense, while the people in Halberstam's book were undoubtedly brilliant, they were inexpert in counterinsurgency warfare, Asian history and politics and the dynamics of post-colonial developing nations. Hubris is not intelligence any more than instinct is. Idiot America is the result of a celebration, not of stupidity, but of in-expertise.These guys qualified.
Are there countries stupider than America?
Probably. But very few that celebrate it in their politics quite as goofily as we do.
Any particularly dumb things happen in America since you finished the book--things that you wish you could have included?
Well, as I said, Sarah's an ongoing joy. I think there are elements of the health-care debates that qualify, and Michael Steele this week talked about the sanctity of someone's relationship with their health-insurance company. That was pretty funny.
You have said in other interviews that one of the best ways to pull this country out of the notion that perception is reality is to learn to distinguish between entertainment and information. With that in mind, would you call your book entertaining or informative?
Somebody called it a "political beach-read," which I rather liked. I think the section called "Consequences" is the most serious part of the book. There are consequences for believing and acting upon nonsense, and for abdicating our responsibilities as self-governing citizens. We can walk away from those responsibilities, but not from the consequences of walking away.
