The Jobs of the Future: Field Tracker Edition

I’m of the decidedly conventional view that as government’s role in shaping market outcomes increases, more resources will be devoted to winning elections, whether channeled through tightly regulated campaign contributions (a dimishing slice of the money) or through a constellation of notionally non-profit groups and for-profit media.* And so I found Michael Shear’s story on a group called American Bridge 21st Century interesting, and somewhat dispiriting:

Aaron Fielding quietly stalks his prey — Republicans — with his video camera, patiently waiting for a political moment worthy of YouTube. 


At 27, he is a full-time “tracker” for American Bridge 21st Century, a new Democratic organization that aims to record every handshake, every utterance by Republican candidates in 2011 and 2012, looking for gotcha moments that could derail political ambitions or provide fodder for television advertisements by liberal groups next year.

The organization has hired a dozen professional trackers like Mr. Fielding, outfitted them with the latest high-tech cameras and computers and positioned them in key states where Republican candidates are busy chattering away to voters. If all works as planned, incriminating moments captured by American Bridge will quickly become part of the political bloodstream.

Republican groups are catching up. 

My immediate reaction to this is: what a tragic waste of human talent. Opening up peanut butter jars for elderly gentlemen and ladies would be a more productive endeavor. 

My second reaction is that I look favorably on “countersurveillance” of police officers, as in the case of CopRecorder, as I think it helps keep public officials honest, so perhaps I’m contradicting myself in a telling way? That is, perhaps I identify more with candidates and public officials, and thus believe that this level of scrutiny is a bad thing only because of this shared sense of identification. I don’t believe that this is true, and of course the potential for abuse in the two cases is very different.

Basically, and this relates to the Marc Dunkelman thesis, I believe that politicians have to use different kinds of language to effectively communicate with different constituencies in a diverse democracy. Yet as a culture we prize authenticity and consistency. Constructive politics under conditions of normative diversity require heavy reliance on incompletely theorized agreements — we agree to agree, in part because we don’t closely examine why we’ve reached a shared conclusion. Tools that “keep us honest,” or rather than keep us consistent, make it harder for public figures to connect with constituencies beyond core constituencies, i.e., constituencies that are strategically central. 

If I had to guess, I’d suggest that the American Bridge 21st Century thesis goes something like this: Republicans are dominant in regions of the country where the folk culture is defined by sensibilities and practices that are antithetical to politically engaged and relatively affluent citizens in other (geographic or psychographic) regions of the country. What a Republican candidate might interpret as an innocent if off-color joke along the lines of a “Take my wife, please!” will, if all goes well for American Bridge 21st Century, inflame some left-of-center constituency on grounds of injury to identity. Suffice it to say, we see a version of this kind of citizen journalism on the right, Shirley Sherrod, the NPR hidden camera footage, etc. When Barack Obama made his remark about “bitter clingers,” one could interpret it as a candidate who has actually spent time with cultural conservatives in rural Pennsylvania trying to “translate” their sensibilities to an audience of wealthy San Francisco liberals who were inclined to dismiss conservatives as nothing more than irrational or indeed subrational bigots. That doesn’t make the remarks any less condescending, but it does provide useful context. 

So what is the downside of all of this? It further shrinks the pool of people who would ever imagine running for office to masochists, megalomaniacs, and the otherwise incurably self-regarding and insane. We’re fairly far along that road now, I realize, and social technologies of this kind of directional: yes, there might be a backlash here and there, but my guess is that there is no turning back. 

* By notionally non-profit, I’m referring to the idea, lucidly expressed by Vance Fried, that non-profits often generate large “profits”:

How can a nonprofit have profits? Simply put, it happens when the revenue the nonprofit derives from providing a service exceeds the cost of providing that service. This might seem obvious, but it is often assumed that putatively “nonprofit” schools, by virtue of their designation, never make a profit from providing a particular service. In addition, such schools never report that they have realized profits, even when the profits happen to be large. Why? Because profits are reported as expenses.

Moreover, non-profits tend to provide employees with higher levels of psychic income. The young women and men working for American Bridge 21st Century believe that they are playing an essential role in a noble and important cause, an understanding that can serve as a substitute for more traditional forms of compensation but that — crucially — can’t be taxed. 

Randall Parker has written some entertaining posts on this phenomenon. (I don’t endorse Parker’s conclusions, but his analysis is certainly provocative.)

Reihan Salam — Reihan Salam is executive editor of National Review and a National Review Institute policy fellow.

Most Popular

Law & the Courts

Obstruction Confusions

In his Lawfare critique of one of my several columns about the purported obstruction case against President Trump, Gabriel Schoenfeld loses me — as I suspect he will lose others — when he says of himself, “I do not think I am Trump-deranged.” Gabe graciously expresses fondness for me, and the feeling is ... Read More
Politics & Policy

Students’ Anti-Gun Views

Are children innocents or are they leaders? Are teenagers fully autonomous decision-makers, or are they lumps of mental clay, still being molded by unfolding brain development? The Left seems to have a particularly hard time deciding these days. Take, for example, the high-school students from Parkland, ... Read More
PC Culture

Kill Chic

We live in a society in which gratuitous violence is the trademark of video games, movies, and popular music. Kill this, shoot that in repugnant detail becomes a race to the visual and spoken bottom. We have gone from Sam Peckinpah’s realistic portrayal of violent death to a gory ritual of metal ripping ... Read More

Romney Is a Misfit for America

Mitt’s back. The former governor of Massachusetts and occasional native son of Michigan has a new persona: Mr. Utah. He’s going to bring Utah conservatism to the whole Republican party and to the country at large. Wholesome, efficient, industrious, faithful. “Utah has a lot to teach the politicians in ... Read More
Law & the Courts

What the Second Amendment Means Today

The horrifying school massacre in Parkland, Fla., has prompted another national debate about guns. Unfortunately, it seems that these conversations are never terribly constructive — they are too often dominated by screeching extremists on both sides of the aisle and armchair pundits who offer sweeping opinions ... Read More

Fire the FBI Chief

American government is supposed to look and sound like George Washington. What it actually looks and sounds like is Henry Hill from Goodfellas: bad suit, hand out, intoning the eternal mantra: “F*** you, pay me.” American government mostly works by interposition, standing between us, the free people at ... Read More
Film & TV

Black Panther’s Circle of Hype

The Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) first infantilizes its audience, then banalizes it, and, finally, controls it through marketing. This commercial strategy, geared toward adolescents of all ages, resembles the Democratic party’s political manipulation of black Americans, targeting that audience through its ... Read More