Pixelated Semantics

A schizotypical inventory

The Power of Nightmares

As many sane individuals have argued for several years now, the perceived terrorist threat is "a politically driven fantasy" - a proposition examined in depth by a new documentary to be screened in the UK. Cryptome reproduces a Guardian story on the documentary that goes straight to the dark heart of the matter:

"The sheer number of incidents and warnings connected or attributed to the war has left little room, it seems, for heretical thoughts. In this context, the central theme of The Power of Nightmares is riskily counter-intuitive and provocative. Much of the currently perceived threat from international terrorism, the series argues, "is a fantasy that has been exaggerated and distorted by politicians. It is a dark illusion that has spread unquestioned through governments around the world, the security services, and the international media." The series' explanation for this is even bolder: "In an age when all the grand ideas have lost credibility, fear of a phantom enemy is all the politicians have left to maintain their power."

and

"States and their rulers expect to monopolise violence, and that is why they react so virulently to terrorism."

This is absolutely essential reading and/or viewing, whatever your political perspective.

Recently, 9/11, al Qaeda, Osama Bin Laden and Patriot Act were added to the second edition of the Encarta Webster's Dictionary of the English Language - which is curious as these are largely proper names, and while they are talked about in great depth, there are very, very few people who pepper their conversations with "Patriot Act". These entries seem to be more about creating a context for political nightmares than defining current language usage, and thereby underline the concerns over the use of fear versus substance.

And in the aftermath of the 9/11 Commission Report^* two more essential items have been syndicated from Unanswered Questions. One deals with the omissions of the Report in depth, the other examines the more literary aspects of the publication, including the obvious obfuscations, and trite recommendations like "routinizing, even bureaucratizing, the exercise of imagination". Both have substantial information for those with ears to listen and eyes to see.

And there are in those stories important tangential references, like

"...media critic Robert McChesney suggests right-leaning news outlets like Fox News are worse than the Stalinist-era propaganda. At least in Soviet Russia, he says, people knew they were getting the official party line"

This is a point that this site has regularly attempted to underline - that the major news media's behaviour, especially in relation to "terror" and "security", can increasingly be regarded as insidious and deceptive, in that the subversive (even repressive) intent of such reportage is almost completely covert.

The implications of the conduct of governments, media, and corporations since 9/11 is pivotal to the future of the entire fabric of our societies, and yet the majority of the population is actively prevented and discouraged from seeking either true rationales for the behaviour or the opportunity to engage in a truly democratic response - indeed, the ability to engage democratically has been, and is being, severely diminished as part of the dark new world we face. Most people seem not to care, save for how it may affect them, and you can bet that Bush, Howard, Murdoch, and all the other little Hitlers in drag rely on that fact to stay in business.

* Noun: An investigation conducted to marginalise the truth. See whitewash. Perjorative.

Item posted by AutoEditor at 1:52 pm ::