His iron thighs and wandering hands leave me cold. So, for that matter, do his films. But it's time to come clean. I'm a closet Arnista. Mr Schwarzenegger's passage from Terminator to Governator is not the nadir of the democratic process as we know it. It is a good thing for California, good for America, and good for politics in general.
This is not a universally held view among commentators, who belong to that cosy little clique that forms the political classes. Journalists, party hacks, and policy wonks prefer to preserve their elite mystique. They dislike gatecrashers.
The lofty William Rees-Mogg said this week that a Schwarzenegger win would be a victory for fascism, because the movie star's popular following was based on emotion, not reason. Rees-Mogg, a conservative and a natural Republican, preferred the incumbent Democrat, Gray Davis.
Arguments against celebrity politics are easy to advance. I may well have aired them myself in the past, and they run along these lines: the Hello! magazine approach demeans democracy and promotes a cult of personality. It elevates fame over ideology.
Schwarzenegger's critics point out his inexperience. How, they ask, can this man run the largest state in the union? He has served no political apprenticeship on a city council or state legislature. What does he stand for? His promise to govern for ''all of the people'' is dishonest, because hard decisions must be made and these will inevitably hurt someone. Democrats dismiss him as a grinning slice of beefcake, ready to promise anything in order to deliver California back to the Bush camp ahead of next year's presidential poll.
But the American political circus is vacuous, with or without the tinsel of celebrity. It is no longer the case that politics is show business for ugly
people. Ugly people don't win elections in the television age. The media theorist Marshall McLuhan pre-
dicted this back in the 1970s when
he said: ''Politics will eventually be replaced by imagery. The politician will be only too happy to abdicate in favour of his image, because the image will be more powerful than he could every be.''
Professional politicians are already actors. They accuse Schwarzenegger of peddling platitudes, but are themselves pretty adept at promising
all of the people everything, all
of the time. Besides, we already know where the new governor stands on quite a number of issues. He is a
fiscal conservative who believes in balancing the books - quite a challenge in debt-crippled California. He supports gay rights, is pro-choice
on abortion, and wants to protect the environment from polluters. He
successfully campaigned for after- school care for children. I can think of worse Republicans.
He has his defects. Groping young actresses is an unpleasant character flaw. However, he shares it with quite a few men, and a disproportionate number of them are politicians. The allegation that he once expressed admiration for Hitler is much more serious - but false. Schwarzenegger, while a very young man, commented that the Nazi leader was a good orator - a historical fact. His socially
liberal views further diminish the Nazi insinuations, as do the thousands of dollars he has donated to
the Simon Wiesenthal institute and other Jewish charities
Bodybuilders transform themselves through sheer willpower, and Schwarzenegger's approach to life reflects that determination. He was born without privilege and spoke
no English when he arrived in America. He invested his winnings from Mr Universe in property, and built up a business selling gym equipment. With his wife, Maria Shriver, he has helped run the Special Olympics, an admirable event for athletes with learning difficulties. He has more real-life experience than many a political time server.
Of course, it helps that Schwar-zenegger is a square-jawed squillionaire married into the Kennedy clan, America's oldest political dynasty. I'm not saying he would be my first choice of representative. We need more grassroots activitists speaking truth to power (and he's certainly not that). What I object to, however, is the assertion that Schwarzenegger is somehow less worthy of public office than a career politician who has served his time. It is the career politicians who are turning
voters off democracy.
The United States may pride itself on being the beacon of freedom, but it has its own version of the nomenclature, the old Soviet union's governing oligarchy. The same trend is well-established in the European Union and New Labour's Britain. We see the emergence of a permanent, parasitic class of legislators, lobbyists, lawyers, consultants, special advisers, spin doctors, and journalists.
Often they change places with each other. They are self-referential, conducting their own, circular arguments about the euro, or the Blair/Brown divide, or who will replace Duncan Smith. They are cautious, dry, and dull. Desperate to retain their salaries, they seldom risk a radical thought
that might offend some interest
group or generate a negative headline. It's a turn-off that affects turn-
out. How refreshing then, that Californians turned their backs on apathy this week. More of them came out to vote in this election than any since 1992. If it takes a movie star to galvanise them, so be it.
The public also recognised that Schwarzenegger's wealth and glamour gave him a unique advantage. He put $10m of his own money into the campaign, which makes him less beholden to outside paymasters. Most legislators are in the pockets of whoever holds the purse - big business in the case of President Bush. The Democrats are a little less dependent on corporate finance than the Republicans, but both parties take donations from interests groups as diverse as the National Rifle Association and Teamsters Union. Britain has gone the same way - think Bernie Ecclestone. We have payola politics, where interest groups create new bureaucracies, which, in turn, serve the interest groups.
Schwarzenegger's financial independence, his distance from the party machine and the power of his per-
sonal charisma appealed to an electorate that has grown cynical of conventional politics. Let us hope he repays that trust.
Could a similar white knight eventually ride into the White House? Schwarzenegger's fellow Republicans fervently hope his win will benefit the current administration. But perhaps that is not the precedent set by his success. The golden state has chosen a dashing, independent-minded outsider over a dullard incumbent.
If the whole of America followed that example, General Wesley Clark would be selected by the Democrats and snatch the presidency. Hasta La Vista, George W?
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article