"Everything's changed" . . . or has it?
This phrase seems to be entering colloquial usage and the general psyche in much the same way as such politically charged phrases as "soft on crime", "communist sympathizer", "stay the course" and the like.
"Everything's changed!" squeals the President, or the AG, Perle, Wolfowitz, Rice, and not a few others, dems included. It becomes meta-language, a surrogate for explaining oneself, a code word for numerous sub-discussions and arguments that remain inchoate. Most perniciously, of course, as with much political meta-language, there are a raft of emotions that are stoked, not just thoughts and ideas, when uttered. Pretty soon, neighbor says it to neighbor.
This political season has either become or become recognized as the fruition of George Orwell's nightmare, when media of all sorts virtually becomes propaganda, and everyone seems to understand the allusion to newspeak and doublethink, though few have probably read "1984", or "Animal Farm". Of course, most like to apply this reasoning to the ideas, organizations and people they disagree with.
The consolidation of the media,from hometown newpapers -- where few get their news anyway -- to tv and radio stations limits diversity of view. The proliferation of other media, cable channels for instance, would seem to provide for proliferation of views but, in reality, make it possible for us to select a narrow segment of opinion that corresponds to our own. Hence, we again limit our exposure to diversity. I have recently been hearing and reading more about the defacto clustering of like-minded people into like-minded areas, communities and even states; sort of voluntary segregation. Whether this either describes a phenomena empirically observed or an actual intentional process, I would guess the concept will lead more and more to the actuality.
In this brave new world of unapologetic manipulation, the idea that everything has changed fits right in, particularly as regards the struggle for meaning of 911, and the war we are said to be in with islamofascists, terrorism, or is it an ideology? I sense a divide between those who are willing to accept some variation of this notion wholesale and those who want a bit more understanding about what lies behind the shibboleth (a fine old word). But. . . "Everything's changed" . . . And those who would seek discussion and debate are cast into the outer darkness of unpatriotic, un-American wimps.
I wish some high profile types would take the time and energy to do something other than the bobble head routine and inject a bit of intelligence into the mix rather than accepting the simple route of mass hypnosis that, in the end, means nothing. Orwell would be grateful.
"Everything's changed!" squeals the President, or the AG, Perle, Wolfowitz, Rice, and not a few others, dems included. It becomes meta-language, a surrogate for explaining oneself, a code word for numerous sub-discussions and arguments that remain inchoate. Most perniciously, of course, as with much political meta-language, there are a raft of emotions that are stoked, not just thoughts and ideas, when uttered. Pretty soon, neighbor says it to neighbor.
This political season has either become or become recognized as the fruition of George Orwell's nightmare, when media of all sorts virtually becomes propaganda, and everyone seems to understand the allusion to newspeak and doublethink, though few have probably read "1984", or "Animal Farm". Of course, most like to apply this reasoning to the ideas, organizations and people they disagree with.
The consolidation of the media,from hometown newpapers -- where few get their news anyway -- to tv and radio stations limits diversity of view. The proliferation of other media, cable channels for instance, would seem to provide for proliferation of views but, in reality, make it possible for us to select a narrow segment of opinion that corresponds to our own. Hence, we again limit our exposure to diversity. I have recently been hearing and reading more about the defacto clustering of like-minded people into like-minded areas, communities and even states; sort of voluntary segregation. Whether this either describes a phenomena empirically observed or an actual intentional process, I would guess the concept will lead more and more to the actuality.
In this brave new world of unapologetic manipulation, the idea that everything has changed fits right in, particularly as regards the struggle for meaning of 911, and the war we are said to be in with islamofascists, terrorism, or is it an ideology? I sense a divide between those who are willing to accept some variation of this notion wholesale and those who want a bit more understanding about what lies behind the shibboleth (a fine old word). But. . . "Everything's changed" . . . And those who would seek discussion and debate are cast into the outer darkness of unpatriotic, un-American wimps.
I wish some high profile types would take the time and energy to do something other than the bobble head routine and inject a bit of intelligence into the mix rather than accepting the simple route of mass hypnosis that, in the end, means nothing. Orwell would be grateful.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home