Saturday, November 21, 2015

Truthtellers as Traitors

Is Jeremy Corbin today's AntiChrist, replacing Vladimir Putin, who is merely Satan?  Big Media will tell you yes. Want truth?  Try the Onion.

We will get to Corbyn in a moment.  But first: context.
Is the Press a weapon? If so, who dies?
The Western media has only two tools.
One is the outrageous lie. This overused tool no longer works, except on dumbshit Americans.
The pinpoint accuracy of the Russian cruise missiles and air attacks has the Pentagon shaking in its boots. But according to the Western presstitutes the Russian missiles fell out of the sky over Iran and never made it to their ISIS targets.
According to the presstitute reports, the Russia air attacks have only killed civilians and blew up a hospital.
The presstitutes fool only themselves and dumbshit Americans.
The other tool used by presstitutes is to discuss a problem with no reference to its causes. Yesterday I heard a long discussion on NPR, a corporate and Israeli owned propaganda organ, about the migrant problem in Europe. Yes, migrants, not refugees.
These migrants have appeared out of nowhere. They have decided to seek a better life in Europe, where capitalism, which provides jobs, freedom, democracy, and women’s rights guarantee a fulfilling life. Only the West provides a fulfilling life, because it doesn’t yet bomb itself.
The hordes overrunning Europe just suddenly decided to go there. It has nothing to do with Washington’s 14 years of destruction of seven countries, enabled by the dumbshit Europeans themselves, who provided cover for the war crimes under such monikers as the “coalition of the willing,” a “NATO operation,” “bringing freedom and democracy.”
Paul Craig Roberts

OK, maybe I simplified things just a teeny bit when I said the Media hate you last time.  Sorry....!   It' s not personal.  Kinda like antisemitism. 

The corporate "Information" industry does lie -- and  distort.  And even their attacks look personal -- as with Corbyn and Putin -- they are not -- they are really directed at ideas and groups of people.
Read between the lines much?

If the Media can be said to hate "you" it those of you who think about things rationally and independently -- that's about half of the population, following the "normal curve" from Sorta Rational in the middle towards Really Rational in the 99th percentile to the Left.  (Of course, the Left, you idiot!).   So they hate your ideas -- and the threat you represent as a group.
If you are in the Middle, you're screwed

I have said before that the Media draw their ideas from the Popular Mind -- as, in fact, do their owners.  The Media 'R Us.  The Owners and the Media  don't want to admit their debt to all that to the Right of zero on the chart -- the territory of  maximized fear and hatred.  They  assume a higher status, as People Who Know -- but they cannot escape culture - and their thing is power, not creativity.  In the end, media lies convenient excuses for perpetuating an unequal, unjust -- but -- for some people -- convenient system.
Social myth generates lies
The fault, Dear Brutus, is us.
A majority of Americans live in a fake world created by propaganda. They are disconnected from reality. I have in front of me a local North Georgia newspaper dated October that reports that “a Patriot Day Memorial Service was held at the Dawson County Fire Headquarters on September 11 to remember the terrorist attacks that shook America 14 years ago.” Various local dignitaries called on the attendees to remember “all of those who have died not only on that day, but since that day in the fight to keep America free.”
The dignitaries did not say how murdering and dislocating millions of Muslims in seven countries keeps us free. No doubt, the question has never occurred to them. America runs on rote platitudes.
Paul Craig Roberts

The "liberal" media never really existed.  The media defend the status quo against progressive change from the left and against obvious extreme regressionism from the right that might provoke a backlash and social instability.

That's how it works in  pyramidal mega civilizations which are:  :
  •  too big and complex, beyond efficient management
  •  de facto federations of many tribes, based on a artificial consensus of values, that is always unstable
  •  unequal and therefore inherently unjust   
Oligarchy is the default of large scale societies

We all belong to the same species.  And in modern nation states we are all taught a set of values aimed at achieving "consensus".  The fact is, however, that we are still just chimpanzees with large brains -- at our best bonobos with large brains.  Cooperative but highly territorial predators.
Evolution: shirt, tie and gun

We do not recognize people beyond the 200 or so we actually know and who constitute our "tribe" speaking as real people --  but  as a different category of people,  a sub species --  not "us"; rather, 'them".    We are Aryans -- they are Jews.  Or, if you like, we are Zionists, they are Everybody Else. 

Where there is competition, they is always a possible threat generating fear and hate, often subtle, pervasive and unconscious. .   

Do you trust Authority?

Consider Big Media's various hate campaigns.

The campaign against Vladimir Putin is obvious enough.  He's a Russian.  Clearly outside the pale. The Russians were OK when they were a vassal state under Yeltsin.  But Putin re-invented Russia -- releasing it from slavery to American and European corporate interests-- as well as local oligarchs.  An independent Russia?   Like freed slaves -- a threat.

Then there is the UK Media's hate campaign targeting Jeremy Corbyn, the 66 year leader of Labour, a principle and very moderate liberal who is the voice of previously disenfranchised liberals in Britain -- those who don't believe in austerity, who want decent and affordable housing, good education for their kids, good healthcare and the like.
                Me!  (Right here, now!)

Which brings (finally)  to Corbyn.

According to the  UK Media, Corbyn is variously the New Stalin -- or just a bumbling incompetent who can't match his socks and his jacket.  The Telegraph thinks he is the AntiChrist.

Corbyn-- the AntiChrist

Why is this?  Is the media  afraid that that this modest 66 year old man would do something disturb afternoon cocktails for the rich guys who own the media companies and the not-quite as rich guys who manage them and save the cocktails for after 5?   

The attacks are not really on Corbyn -- they are on you, if you are a progressive, if you are one of those who believes a just, equal, and peaceful world might be a better place.

Corbyn  is  just a spokesperson for a large chunk of public sentiment -- at this point in history, our societal alter ego -- from the point of view of the Few, the Owner class, a dangerous mob. Sans culottes. 

There is no way to rationally argue with this alter ego -- so we he must be attacked irrationally and emotionally in the same way that Hitler attacked liberal Jewry for its progressivism in Mein Kampf -- as polluting the national state.  

Corbyn is a traitor, the Media imply. As are people like Snowden and AssangeSo too their millions of supporters.  What do they have in common -- the truth.  And the Status Quo relies on lies.

Thursday, November 12, 2015

The Media Hate You

 The Media went to the Dark Side long ago
Yes, they -- or at least the tiny cabal that owns them -- really do hate you.    They need you --you are their "market".  But they fear you because you are unpredictable, especially when times are tough.  And what people fear -- they also hate and seek to control.   The Media are the agents of the Status Quo. You are the agents of change.  In fact -- you are change itself.
Fear = Hate

So the media lie.  

Advertising, "public relations", "public diplomacy" -- and news -- it's all about deception.  What if people thought for themselves?  Would they notice that they are owned?  How awful!

Who owns YOU?

The truth will always "out" -- but usually too late   He who controls information, controls the world.

When we look back at history -- say World War One --we are always saying -- "if only people had known".  

Think way back... to the 17th Century -- when people relied for "news" on word of mouth.  Were they really any more ignorant than today -- when we just think we know?
The newspaper formalized disinformation

Then, the literati -- that relatively small group of people who could actually read -- wanted an alternative to gossip, rumour and all that fed the passions of what they disdained as the "mob".  That led to the invention of newspapers, which mostly relied on, yes, rumour and gossip.  Just black and white letters, it looked somehow official, as if it were true.  But they didn't care much about facts-- just confirmation of their prejudices.

Gee...nothing much has changed. 

We like stuff that looks "official", as in "Today, an unidentified government source said...." 

Makes one wonder:  does society evolve -- or revolve?

The Industrial Revolution needed general literacy -- so we got public education -- a new invention -- schools.  Lots of little kids learning to sit obediently in rows and measure time in 50 minute segments. Learning to listen and obey.   To become cogs.  In the age of machines, people had to become machine components. 

Outside of school, the Media told people what to think -- more than that - what to want and need and feel.


Today, of course, we have the Internet -- which pretty much does away with schools as a source of information of knowledge and like Topsy -- just grew.  Suddenly, things are changing.  Once again--as before the advent of public education with its narrow regimentation--people are learning individually, interactively and experimentally.  

Higher education?   It merely serves to certify social class: it teaches conformity and disdain for those for the nominally 'uneducated'.  You and I are just pig's heads.

The Media doesn't like change.  But never mind: big media companies are doing their best to control the Internet too. 

As I said, the media fear you and hate you -- the Crowd -- the successor to the 17th Century "mob".

Media companies hire professionals like me to keep you in line.  But -- it's like herding cats.  You keep on doing your own thing. 

No matter what lies we tell you -- you somehow figure out the truth.  Takes time sometimes.  But people have this thing they do -- they talk.  Now they talk digitally.  This is change you can believe in.  And the corporate Media  hate it. 

Thursday, November 5, 2015

Agent of Change? Or Agent of the Status Quo?

Change isn't always progress

Agents of change?  Too often agents of the status quo, struggling to prevent change, which happens naturally driven by social needs and dissatisfaction..

Still, we use this term, "agents of change" as though it meant something. We all hope for "change you can believe in". 

Think about it;  who  are these "agents"?  Change forward?  Or change backwards?    In whose interest?   Liberals associate "change" with progress-- but is it?    In that case, what exactly IS "progress"?  Is it good for us? Questions, questions.  
The agent of Climate Change?  YOU!

I can't answer these all questions. Nor can you.  But we all most try. So here goes....

The concept of 'change" and, more particularly, its agency is defined by social context

The most common such context is neoliberalism-- which is not just an economic theory-- but a social system today derived from capitalistic oligarchism,  itself evolved  from feudalism – which evolved classical agrarianism.  

We must keep in mind also that the dominant social system for most of mankind's history as been hunting and gathering -- and such these societies are egalitarian: their members own little -- share almost everything. 

Neoliberalism, sadly, the default worldview of our time, is something of an aberration -- it divides the world into a hierarchy of humanity, with those at the top superior to all other.  Since "change" destabilizes the delicate balance of such vertical social structures, real change - "change you can believe in"  is discouraged.  

Leadership, in the neoliberal world, is not about making things different so much as it is about  power and maintaining the status quo. 
Man ...and Superman
Inequality -something not permitted among paleolithic cultures,  is seen as natural in hierarchical "civilizations". 

Aristos and hoi polloi.  Patricians and plebians.  Gentry and the Commons. Free people and slaves.  Citizens and foreigners.  Men and women.  Adults and children….   Since the invention of agriculture, some people have had to be better than others, to have more rights than others – in fact to be more human than others. 

Modern neoliberalism is no different:  it all about the owners and the owned.
Are you an owner -- or owned?
The meme goes back a long way in history, reiterating itself in each failed civilization, and our imaginations.
Ownership is not always deserved

From this point of view, most people are followers -- just sheep munching grass – content not to think or question or ask why-- happy to be used. Resources to be exploited like any other.

Sheeple need to be herded by their owners – politicians, the CEOs of companies, and rich people – who do think – and eat flesh, rather than GMOs.  The owners’ farm hands and sheep dogs are "authorities" -- the military, the police, the media, 'educators'…..who aren't exactly self-aware– but are presumed to be smarter than sheep. 
They too are meat-eaters, predators manqué. 

So the world is automatically divided between the Few and the Many. Predators and farmed prey. The Guys at the top -- and you and me at the bottom, consuming not grass perhaps but iPhones and Nikes and sitcoms and Hollywood retreads of Marvel. Our Owners will look after us, after all.  Happy, happy sheep

Descartes said :  “I think therefore I am”.  Neoliberals extrapolate this to mean that your level of relative humanity, which is also your right to life,  is determined by self awareness and individuality – even if awareness of self and individuality means blindness to one’s greater being and others.

Descartes was not Ayn Rand, of course -- but the logical error is the same -- generating solipsism -- which is necessary narcissistic.  It  makes most of us --in our imaginations at least -- cannibalistic lambs.We would be wolves, but TV and texting distract. Baaaaa....

There can only be a few owners.  This, the owners say is the result of individual competition -- usually economic – but also political and social.  The survival of the fittest?  But the playing field is never level, the players cheat.  It is survival of the meanest -- win/ lose – war --with the rules made up retrospectively by the winners.
The sheep provide wool – and they are slaughtered for food.  The steeple work and die.  In fact, we feed off each other.  As I said, cannibalistic lambs.
Are you a cannibal? 


Obviously, you and I cannot be “agents” of change -- not in a society  where individual agency implies not just ability but predatory capability, opportunity (often a matter of chance) and will.   Sheep do not have teeth.  They are bucolic creatures.   

Our owners, however, are wolf packs -- and they network, forming alliances of convenience. 

Agents of change, in the neoliberal world, are those with the power to change things to their advantage -- to exploit -- by this definition, a predatoriat.  
Getting by with help from friends

Tony Blair, Obama, the Clintons, the Koch Brothers, Rupert Murdoch, as such, changed little for the better and much for the worse.But note: while motivated mostly by self interest, they worked with others similarly empowered. It's called personal imperialism.
When "change" means regress -- 
politics as personal imperialism
So, agents of change in our society mostly change things for themselves, offering only the illusion of progress. A lot of people died under Clinton's rule.  And monopolies took control of the economy.  But Clinton is now a very, very rich man, with the Hillary set to inherit his mantle and get richer still, while American society decays. Oh, happy, happy Clintons. 
 Postmodern thinkers may question scientific progress, but it is undoubtedly real. The illusion is the belief that it can affect any fundamental alteration to the human condition...History is not an ascending spiral of human advance, or even and inch by inch crawl to a better world. It is an unending cycle in which changing knowledge interacts with unchanging human need. John Gray: Heresies, Introduction p.3

God was the first capitalist